Connor is moot point because Isolde is the true criminal here. No matter the circle's reputation, she would have kept him hidden to avoid the humiliation of having a mage child, all because of the status quo. If not for her, Eamon would have sent Connor to the circle and all the crisis at a Redcliffe would have been avoided.
While I think the precedent of a mage Divine is a potentially worrisome one, it might well have been enough to solve this problem.
The problem is that templars have absolute power. They can do whatever they want with mages. This ranges from Meredith making run away mages tranquil even if they were not blood mages, or in more extreme cases, making Maddox tranquil for sending a love letter. Or Lambert going as far to ignore the Divine wishes and attack the mages of the spire. Not to mention their views on mages are sullied by the Chantry bias, going as far as to make outrageous claims that they have holy power over the mages. No one have have holy power over anyone. Only a crazy zealot would think that. And because of this, we need a new group that is not as biased and that would deliver more fair jugdment to the mages, such as the Inquisition, in the scenario were Leliana is Divine and the mages were conscripted.
If you believe that renaming the Templars and putting them under some other authority would make things better, go for it. I have only one question: which authority, if not Chantry, should supervise a force specified to counter magical incidents?
First, in order to prove "if you touch fire, it will burn you", we need to first have a common definition of what fire is and what burn is and what you(me) is. If we don't have those common definitions, then there's no point to the question.
If we have, then on an ontological level, what fire means and what properties it has and what me and my skin is already include the "if contact, then burn" concept.
The same can't be said for "mages will f*ck things up if free
" because mages are people and a generalising statement about people behavior (unless we reach omniscience, at least as far as the study of the brain goes) isn't something that can be done, no matter how statistically likely a generalisation is.
Of course we can. There are so many sciences on this planet which work to predict people's behavior. Hell, publicity itself does it.
And this is as basic as they come. Every demography has criminals. Exposing greater numbers of people to a greater number of mages while increasing the reaction time of Templars, will inevitably lead to a greater number of casualties caused by magic.
As for the second part, that's pure naivete, expecting random, unknown to you people to conform or not conform to their legal obligations is wishful thinking at best. At least the social system is "supposed" to care for you, I'd never assume the same for any unknown person.
You are the one who started talking about the people-people and people-state relationship and that is what is taught in law class.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
It's not the worst idea I've ever heard. Though weakening it so that it's not an extinction drug would probably be necessary.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
Never played the games, but having checked what it is, yes. Ideally with some sort of middle ground between uncontrollably high birthrates and extinction level collapse, if I were playing a xenos coddler.
Of course we can. There are so many sciences on this planet which work to predict people's behavior. Hell, publicity itself does it.
And this is as basic as they come. Every demography has criminals. Exposing greater numbers of people to a greater number of mages while increasing the reaction time of Templars, will inevitably lead to a greater number of casualties caused by magic.
You don't have enough data. Conclusions of social "sciences" have to at least have large enough samples and repeatedly proven outcomes to be somewhat respectable. The amount of "if we let mages go free, things will go worse enough to necessitate special restrictions on mage freedoms" examples you have in Thedas are low, I think somewhere in the single digits,or a little more at least as far as what is shown in the games go. This isn't enough.
And of course, that's excluding whether what we statistically expect is reason enough to act as if it's a certainty. At best you'll have to support going in favor of definite wrongdoing versus potential wrongdoing.
I do, but I couldn't shot Mordin in the back, it would be betraying him and Wrex, I just couldn't do it. After that I felt guilty because I allowed Mordin to unleash the Krogans in a unprepared galaxy again, I still worry about it.
To be fair, it's not as bad an idea to cure it if Wrex is in charge of the krogans. He's apparently capable of keeping their warlike culture in check and rendering the genophage unnecessary.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
Sterilizing people and having their women give birth to dead fetuses as a side effect definitely isn't comparable to the system the Circles implement, which varies and at the very least isn't literally created to "control" the number of mages that exist. As far as lore's concerned, that isn't possible.
Just out of curiosity: I imagine a lot of pro-control people would also be advocates of the Krogan genophage? It's exactly the same concept. Just replace mage powers with high Krogan birthrate.
Yes , no way i would be so short-term thinker to let so dangerous race that loves war and conflict multiply like rabbits and go screw me over in the future .
Sterilizing people and having their women give birth to dead fetuses as a side effect definitely isn't comparable to the system the Circles implement, which varies and at the very least isn't literally created to "control" the number of mages that exist. As far as lore's concerned, that isn't possible.
But the justification is exactly alike: Punishing innocent people for crimes they never committed, nor are guaranteed to make again.
You don't have enough data. Conclusions of social "sciences" have to at least have large enough samples and repeatedly proven outcomes to be somewhat respectable. The amount of "if we let mages go free, things will go worse enough to necessitate special restrictions on mage freedoms" examples you have in Thedas are low, I think somewhere in the single digits,or a little more at least as far as what is shown in the games go. This isn't enough.
And of course, that's excluding whether what we statistically expect is reason enough to act as if it's a certainty. At best you'll have to support going in favor of definite wrongdoing versus potential wrongdoing.
It's also important to note that, in the event of gathering statistical data, we must also gather data on the mages who live freely among mundanes that do no harm at all to their community.
Sterilizing people and having their women give birth to dead fetuses as a side effect definitely isn't comparable to the system the Circles implement, which varies and at the very least isn't literally created to "control" the number of mages that exist. As far as lore's concerned, that isn't possible.
It isn't comparable, but the Circle's and the templars DO take away the mages in the Circle's children pretty much immediately at birth, as is what happened with Rhys and Wynne.
Mages in Circle's are not allowed to have families, and in some circle's, aren't even allowed to have relationships.
It can't be compared to the genophage, but the policies on families essentially act the same way. Most Krogan can't have kids, most mages aren't allowed.
But the justification is exactly alike: Punishing innocent people for crimes they never committed, nor are guaranteed to make again.
If you follow the liberal pro-abortion line of thinking, you are not doing that at all. Foetuses aren't people therefore it is impossible to punish them, as for the Korgan adults its hardly punishing them for a crime they didn't commit if the entire issue revolves around them being too warlike to bother with trying to successfully breed. Given that being a rampaging warmongering horde was ostensibly their crime in the first place. The fact they decided to essentially suicide themselves instead of focussing on successful procreation is their own prerogative.
You don't have enough data. Conclusions of social "sciences" have to at least have large enough samples and repeatedly proven outcomes to be somewhat respectable. The amount of "if we let mages go free
And of course, that's excluding whether what we statistically expect is reason enough to act as if it's a certainty. At best you'll have to support going in favor of definite wrongdoing versus potential wrongdoing.
"Necessity" is subjective but that was never what I was arguing.
Only that mage will freedom will, inevitably, lead to a greater number of deaths caused by magic due to the reasons I have repetedly pointed out.
If you follow the liberal pro-abortion line of thinking, you are not doing that at all. Foetuses aren't people therefore it is impossible to punish them, as for the Korgan adults its hardly punishing them for a crime they didn't commit if the entire issue revolves around them being too warlike to bother with trying to successfully breed. Given that being a rampaging warmongering horde was ostensibly their crime in the first place. The fact they decided to essentially suicide themselves instead of focussing on successful procreation is their own prerogative.
It's not just the unborn Krogan (which Salarians think don't deserve to exist) who are being punished. It's their entire species. And after meeting Urdnot Bakara there is no way in HELL anyone is convincing me the Genophage is justified within the present day narrative of Mass Effect.
It's not just the unborn Krogan (which Salarians think don't deserve to exist) who are being punished. It's their entire species. And after meeting Urdnot Bakara there is no way in HELL anyone is convincing me the Genophage is justified within the present day narrative of Mass Effect.
I agree unless both she and Urdnot Wrex are dead in that World State. Then I can see an argument.
It's not just the unborn Krogan (which Salarians think don't deserve to exist) who are being punished. It's their entire species. And after meeting Urdnot Bakara there is no way in HELL anyone is convincing me the Genophage is justified within the present day narrative of Mass Effect.
Bakura's a good woman but I don't believe for a moment just she and Wrex can keep an entire nation of Krogan under check.That's like appointing someone King and Queen of Earth and thinking they can keep all 7 billion humans under control.
As for the Mages and Genophage. I do think Mages should have restrictions, not locked in a tower restrictions but restrictions nonetheless. Mages can be a handful but at least they didn't nuke their world into near extinction.
"Necessity" is subjective but that was never what I was arguing.
Only that mage will freedom will, inevitably, lead to a greater number of deaths caused by magic due to the reasons I have repetedly pointed out.
Freedom always carries risk. You could apply that argument to every single crime ever omitted: "We could've imprisoned them in advance, then nothing of this would've happened." Nonetheless, we don't have to undergo yearly psychological examinations to prove we are unlikely to turn into serial killers in future. Where would you draw the line? Would you apply the same standards that underlie your arguments to non-mages? If so, then you're at least honest, though I wouldn't want to live in a world ruled by your principles. I'd rather live with the small risk of death at the hands of out-of-control superpowers.
However, if you would *not* apply the same standards to non-mages, then this is bigotry - you impose restrictions on a minority you would never accept for yourself.
Jb straight up admitted he wouldn't put his son and lover in the circles, thereby making him a hypocrite as apparently everyone except his family has to go to a circleFreedom always carries risk. You could apply that argument to every single crime ever omitted: "We could've imprisoned them in advance, then nothing of this would've happened." Nonetheless, we don't have to undergo yearly psychological examinations to prove we are unlikely to turn into serial killers in future. Where would you draw the line? Would you apply the same standards that underlie your arguments to non-mages? If so, then you're at least honest, though I wouldn't want to live in a world ruled by your principles. I'd rather live with the small risk of death at the hands of out-of-control superpowers.
However, if you would *not* apply the same standards to non-mages, then this is bigotry - you impose restrictions on a minority you would never accept for yourself.
Freedom always carries risk. You could apply that argument to every single crime ever omitted: "We could've imprisoned them in advance, then nothing of this would've happened." Nonetheless, we don't have to undergo yearly psychological examinations to prove we are unlikely to turn into serial killers in future. Where would you draw the line? Would you apply the same standards that underlie your arguments to non-mages? If so, then you're at least honest, though I wouldn't want to live in a world ruled by your principles. I'd rather live with the small risk of death at the hands of out-of-control superpowers.
However, if you would *not* apply the same standards to non-mages, then this is bigotry - you impose restrictions on a minority you would never accept for yourself.
So you agree that the freedom of a tiny few is more important than the lives of everyone else.
Freedom always carries risk.
Yes, and in this case, normal people are being asked to risk absolutely everything just to increase the power of a class of people that are already, in many way, an elite to begin with. As if their lives weren't hard enough to begin with.
Why should they risk it?
However, if you would *not* apply the same standards to non-mages, then this is bigotry - you impose restrictions on a minority you would never accept for yourself.
Applying the same standards implies that normals and mages are equals. They are not, they can never be.
It would be more appropriate to say that we apply the same principle with different methods.
All people have their freedoms restricted from birth due to our potential to cause destruction. This is a fact, it's the whole purpose of the legal system, it's needed so that society can exist.
Since mages have a much greater potential for destruction than normal people, it's only logical for their restrictions to be more thorough.
Jb straight up admitted he wouldn't put his son and lover in the circles, thereby making him a hypocrite as apparently everyone except his family has to go to a circle
Yes, absolutely.
Well, not everyone. Anyone who is a mage.
So you agree that the freedom of a tiny few is more important than the lives of everyone else.
You would think just posting this would be enough to end the debate.
Retour en haut