I generally only reply to what I think is worth a reply. The rest was just too ridiculous for me to merit a reply. It was one of those things, that I thought anybody who reads it could see your obviously flawed thinking for themselves, and I didn't have to point it out.
Some ad hominem, some relativism and then running away that is not cowardly of you or anything. lol
The important part is that I don't think any of them exist.
I can appreciate that. My main problem is with people saying "I'm an atheist, but archdemons aren't "real" gods." I'm saying you can't be an atheist and still have a definition you believe in which makes something a "real" god.
They are real gods. As real as a god can be. They're fictional beings with immense power which people worship. THAT'S WHAT A GOD IS!
Only if you're roleplaying as an Inquisitor who's an atheist, your Inquisitor must have brain damage, because in their world the gods AREN'T fictional. They're real, and you see them. It's like saying "I don't believe that chair is really there, so I won't sit down." Everyone else is sitting in chairs and thinks you're an idiot.
That's quite true. Well, it's true as long as you first redefine a couple of words, like "Christian" and "atheist".
That would be quite the change, so much so that they would have to mean the same thing, and instead of being contradictory they end up being tautological. lol
That would be quite the change, so much so that they would have to mean the same thing, and instead of being contradictory they end up being tautological. lol
Best way to win an argument: Humpty Dumpty it.They are real gods. As real as a god can be. They're fictional beings with immense power which people worship. THAT'S WHAT A GOD IS!
It's interesting to see how many people define what god is by what Christians have taught them, even people who profess to be atheists. In my opinion, you're a lot more Christian than you are atheistic if that's what you define as a god.
You're confusing belief with simple definition of words. The definition as it applies to the Judeo-Christian viewpoint is simply the primary definition, as it's the most relevant. In the end, what does it matter? Some "gods" are simply defunct in that its followers no longer exist, and it's reduced to amusing lore in a library.
Best way to win an argument: Humpty Dumpty it.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.
/eye roll
Not sure why expected intelligence from an internet forum.
I can appreciate that. My main problem is with people saying "I'm an atheist, but archdemons aren't "real" gods." I'm saying you can't be an atheist and still have a definition you believe in which makes something a "real" god.
They are real gods. As real as a god can be. They're fictional beings with immense power which people worship. THAT'S WHAT A GOD IS!
Only if you're roleplaying as an Inquisitor who's an atheist, your Inquisitor must have brain damage, because in their world the gods AREN'T fictional. They're real, and you see them. It's like saying "I don't believe that chair is really there, so I won't sit down." Everyone else is sitting in chairs and thinks you're an idiot.
Read my post you are making a straw man, did I say that “I BELIVE IN GOD”. I did not; it is simply what an all-powerful god is defined as. Saying that does not make one a Christian, or a believer in such a being. Just as saying that the Greek gods are giant people with powers does not mean you are a Greek polytheist. Your line of reasoning is wrong. In addition, the three omnis are not simply Christian, they developed from Semitic and Greek people (for example think of Plato’s philosophy of the Good). I am not saying that the word atheist is appropriate in DA, but the word secular is. And that the elven gods are best suited to the category of powerful beings, just as the Greek and Norse ones are. If you want the context as to why, I have already written it, you need only read what I wrote and not make a straw man out of it.
Best way to win an argument: Humpty Dumpty it.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.
You're confusing belief with simple definition of words. The definition as it applies to the Judeo-Christian viewpoint is simply the primary definition, as it's the most relevant. In the end, what does it matter? Some "gods" are simply defunct in that its followers no longer exist, and it's reduced to amusing lore in a library.
The most relevant definition of god in a fantasy setting, I would argue would be the definitions used in other fantasy settings. Lord of the Rings, Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dragonlance, etc. Using a Judeo-Christian type prerequisite of the god being all-powerful as well as the creator of everything to define renders any discussion of gods in fantasy settings practically impossible, simply because that kind of god is generally only used in low fantasy settings and is absentee in nature(having a being of absolute and undeniable power directly interact with a setting as the ones in D&D settings do would be incredibly boring).
That's OK, I can explain it more simply for you./eye roll
Not sure why expected intelligence from an internet forum.
You're confusing belief with simple definition of words. The definition as it applies to the Judeo-Christian viewpoint is simply the primary definition, as it's the most relevant. In the end, what does it matter? Some "gods" are simply defunct in that its followers no longer exist, and it's reduced to amusing lore in a library.
I would say its the primary definition but only in the predominately Judeo-Christian areas, I doubt such a definition would work in lets say places like the far east where the belief in many gods none of which are remotely like the judo-Christian god are dominate.
Some "gods" are simply defunct in that its followers no longer exist, and it's reduced to amusing lore in a library.
Amaunator (sp) hates you.
Just get the control rod already! 
Also, whiskey tango foxtrot on these "Dwarves think you're an atheist 'cause you're Andrastrian" definitions of atheism ... no, they don't.
They think you're a heretic, at worst (best?). 
You burn the *heretic* in these cultures; you don't take atheists even remotely seriously, 'cause
I'm an atheist, but I find it hard to role play as one in Dragon Age because "gods" and "magic" are the norm; they are known to exist, and appear almost everywhere, unlike our reality. The gods seems to be real entities, maybe not divine, but then how do we define "divine" in a world where mages, demons, spirits, and magics are known to exist?
Being atheistic--or totally naturalistic--in DA just doesn't seem..."logical"? For lack of a better word...
If I lived in the DA universe, I would be exceedingly unlikely to be an atheist. That's because unlike in the real world, the supernatural is overtly in evidence, everywhere, and various supernatural powers likewise concretely exhibit themselves from time to time.
In such an environment, the god-hypothesis would be at the very least plausible. I would, at least, believe in the probable existence of beings so powerful as to warrant the title of gods, or demigods.
I guess one could fairly easily not believe in the existence of the maker, or any other particular god. But given the largely supernatural environment, even claims of a creator god would seem more plausible than in the natural world.
Amaunator (sp) hates you.
Just get the control rod already!
Also, whiskey tango foxtrot on these "Dwarves think you're an atheist 'cause you're Andrastrian" definitions of atheism ... no, they don't.
They think you're a heretic, at worst (best?).
You burn the *heretic* in these cultures; you don't take atheists even remotely seriously, 'cause
Spoiler
I need pixel art of Solas riding on a bicycle now.
I need pixel art of Solas riding on a bicycle now.
Wif my heart.
I do appreciate the
Whats the point of atheism though? I mean, this is DA we're talking about. Spirits, magic, things both dark and light, you know these things exist. - Leliana... not a direct quote I don't think.
The Elven Gods are real, the old gods / archdemons are real, that woman in the Well of Sorrows was weird, there is a sun in the Raw Fade (Golden City?) and the spirit Divine Justinia is just as worthy of god status as any other thing I just mentioned.
Are they?
Elven ''gods'' could simply be very powerful mages or spirits. A theory supported by Solas. Who's you know, actually one of them.
Old ''gods'' aren't any more real. As far as we know, they are very old and powerful dragon-like entities. That doesn't make them gods, no more than the Archdemon having ''Demon'' in its name makes it an actual demon.
If we take the more common definition of god -a being that's way, way above any puny mortal- then no, we haven't seen any yet. The only ''gods'' that we know exists are Fen'Harel and Mythal's spirit/essense/consciousness/etc, neither of which have been shown to be omniscient or omnipotent enough to be certifiably labeled ''gods'' (IMO).
That being said, it does seem more unlikely to be an atheist in Dragon Age than in our world, since the supernatural is far more present (as in, it exists at all ). The game allows you a lot of role-playing flexibility; I played an atheist Qunari who starts to have doubts as the story progresses, and I'm planning to play an Andrastian dwarf (because why not?) who has his faith shattered by the revelation that he was just a chump who happened to pick up an orb.
Yeah, being a materialist in DA would be untenable, especially for our Inquisitor who has seen breaches and rifts, demons, spirits, the Fade...Being atheistic--or totally naturalistic--in DA just doesn't seem..."logical"? For lack of a better word...
Yeah, being a materialist in DA would be untenable, especially for our Inquisitor who has seen breaches and rifts, demons, spirits, the Fade...
Morrigan, did a good job with that, although she DID have a greater understanding of the metaphysics of Thedas, than our protagonists in all three games.
On another note, I was pleased they included the option to be an agnostic, that "I don't know" came up a lot, and I'm sure people confused it for hesitation but I was surprised to hear the Inquisitor actually say things like "I speak for no one but myself, and I have no answers for you." and the such.
The most relevant definition of god in a fantasy setting, I would argue would be the definitions used in other fantasy settings. Lord of the Rings, Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dragonlance, etc. Using a Judeo-Christian type prerequisite of the god being all-powerful as well as the creator of everything to define renders any discussion of gods in fantasy settings practically impossible, simply because that kind of god is generally only used in low fantasy settings and is absentee in nature(having a being of absolute and undeniable power directly interact with a setting as the ones in D&D settings do would be incredibly boring).
Lord of the Rings only has one God, I'm pretty sure. As for the various D&D settings the definition of "god" isn't as simple as "has immense power and is called one," which is Solas's main claim. Godhood in those settings is a function of the magic system, in which being called a god enough times changes you in such a way as allows you to hear prayers that are directed towards you from any distance, and to perform miracles. (Which comes at the cost of your nourishment now coming from prayer instead of food. I think if Solas drew his nourishment this way he would starve.)
As for the greater disagreement... again, it really does come down to semantics. There are beings that had immense power and were worshiped as gods. I believe we've met three so far, conversed with two, and have canonically killed at least one of them. It is entirely up in the air, however, whether people calling you a god and you having immense power qualifies you as such. And I'll note that there are people in this setting who do not believe it does: the Chantry is obvious, but Solas, who qualifies under the definition of most of those who believe this setting has gods, apparently does not claim the title either.
Morrigan, did a good job with that, although she DID have a greater understanding of the metaphysics of Thedas, than our protagonists in all three games.
On another note, I was pleased they included the option to be an agnostic, that "I don't know" came up a lot, and I'm sure people confused it for hesitation but I was surprised to hear the Inquisitor actually say things like "I speak for no one but myself, and I have no answers for you." and the such.
I enjoy the doubtful hero. I like the follow-up dialogue for these sorts of options, like when Cassandra asks "Do you even believe in the Maker", and when responding with I don't know, she sighs and says that it doesn't matter now, and that she has to believe that the Inquisitor was sent there for a reason.
Lord of the Rings only has one God, I'm pretty sure. As for the various D&D settings the definition of "god" isn't as simple as "has immense power and is called one," which is Solas's main claim. Godhood in those settings is a function of the magic system, in which being called a god enough times changes you in such a way as allows you to hear prayers that are directed towards you from any distance, and to perform miracles. (Which comes at the cost of your nourishment now coming from prayer instead of food. I think if Solas drew his nourishment this way he would starve.)
As for the greater disagreement... again, it really does come down to semantics. There are beings that had immense power and were worshiped as gods. I believe we've met three so far, conversed with two, and have canonically killed at least one of them. It is entirely up in the air, however, whether people calling you a god and you having immense power qualifies you as such. And I'll note that there are people in this setting who do not believe it does: the Chantry is obvious, but Solas, who qualifies under the definition of most of those who believe this setting has gods, apparently does not claim the title either
The word Ainur means holy ones in-setting, but its all around kind of a weird case considering the lack of worship in setting. Their actions of shaping the world I think would qualify them as deities, especially in the context of a setting where moving mountains and the like is abnormal.
The prayer=power system is actually specific to a certain time frame and isn't universal across the settings(afaik). I believe in Forgotten Realms godly powers weren't related to prayer until the Time of Troubles and in Dragon Lance this isn't the case at all still.
Someone like Corypheus would still be a rank 0 deity, immortality, super powers, but no ability to grant spells.
The word Ainur means holy ones in-setting, but its all around kind of a weird case considering the lack of worship in setting. Their actions of shaping the world I think would qualify them as deities, especially in the context of a setting where moving mountains and the like is abnormal.
The prayer=power system is actually specific to a certain time frame and isn't universal across the settings(afaik). I believe in Forgotten Realms godly powers weren't related to prayer until the Time of Troubles and in Dragon Lance this isn't the case at all still.
Someone like Corypheus would still be a rank 0 deity, immortality, super powers, but no ability to grant spells.
Fair enough, but I think Eberron does run off prayer=equals power. And at any rate the point is that the definition varies from setting to setting, and that trying to apply one setting's definition to another setting runs into problems.
The word Ainur means holy ones in-setting, but its all around kind of a weird case considering the lack of worship in setting. Their actions of shaping the world I think would qualify them as deities, especially in the context of a setting where moving mountains and the like is abnormal.
But there was Eru Iluvatar, the "Maker" of LOTR. With him in the picture the Ainur become demi-gods at best.
Fair enough, but I think Eberron does run off prayer=equals power. And at any rate the point is that the definition varies from setting to setting, and that trying to apply one setting's definition to another setting runs into problems.
I would suggest that given the very limited employment of all powerful gods, using omniscience or omnipotence(particular to the dominant segment of religions on Earth) is too restrictive of a metric, simply because they are not generally employed by writers.
We'd too easily fall into a semantic trap of being unable to discuss the gods of most settings by the term gods.
But there was Eru Iluvatar, the "Maker" of LOTR. With him in the picture the Ainur become demi-gods at best.
The existence of a higher ranking or more poewrful deity doesn't mean their Hades/Osiris equivalent, Mandos, less of a god any more than the precursors of Hades, Zeus and their ilk make them less of a god.
If the question is no longer, "do they exist and are they supernatural beings?", but "how powerful relative to other divines are they?" or "are they worthy of reverance", I think we're no longer in the realm of a character being atheist and more in the realm of a character not wishing to revere gods.
Say hypothetically, the Maker did create Thedas and is an omnipotent and omniscient god. Does that mean the elven gods wouldn't be gods if they were divine beings of lesser power? I'd argue no, they're still gods, much like gods in other fantasy settings are still gods despite not being the biggest god on the block.
Although we've yet to establish supernatural abilities and immortality for anything besides Corypheus and Archdemons. Additionally the level of power we've seen from either in game has only been that of rank 0 (demi-gods or quasideities in D&D settings). Though Corypheus's dialogue suggests the Old Gods of yore granted prayers, which in turn implies that they were beings of more significant divine power.
From the in-game discussion of the elven ones, they might well have also been prayer-granting portfolio/theme managing gods as well, up until they lost their powers somehow.
Of course, none of this is available to most characters, let alone most people in Thedas.
Retour en haut