291 réponses à ce sujet

[Loghain Mac-Tir]

If someone holds a gun to my head and tells me to worship them or my brains will decorate the walls I might start doing all the things that look like worship but that doesn't mean I actually worsho that person in the spiritual sense. If we substitute gun with "omnipotent power over all existence" we get to the same place.

 

Some Theists already do that, Pascal's Wager is all about that. I am not really a fan of hypotheses and 'what ifs', but it'd be a really kind of illuminating experiment to question some Atheists on whether they'd start "worshipping" a deity if it's existence can objectively be proved, and being made fully aware that refusal to do so will result in an eternity of torture. I'd like to see how many still honestly say no.

 

I personally do not mind the idea of God, though I don't personally care for it much either, though if a being can prove it's divinity and not turn out to be total as*hole, I think it'd be hard for me not to treat him/her/it with reverence.

[In Exile]

That makes sense, but not if the god is omniscient. If they know you're not truly worshipping them, you're screwed either way.

Thank you for bringing this up. Fade-spirits and magic are natural in Thedas, not supernatural.

Yeah, you're right on the first point. But then you run into issues like predetermination (I like the Calvinist solution myself, if only for its honesty).

Mostly I'm all for punching out Cthulu approach.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

 

I even note that in DAO, you could actually BE an atheist (a choice that was since removed for a PC).

 

Actually the Inquisitor can be an atheist, (or an agnostic and/or a devote believer as well) all through the game (for example my dwarven Inquisitor was an atheist to the end) as well as find and lose faith in DA:I. 

[X Equestris]

They shouldn't be afraid of that. It's people's own fault for taking it as a statement about reality, not the devs'. In fictional universes that do contain confirmed deities, people don't seem to take that as any statement. Is it only because the Maker is the omnipotent, world-creating type of god that happens to somewhat resemble some currently-popular religions' gods? If polytheistic religions were still the dominant religions, would people take the fictional universes with deities as a statement about reality? Anyway, they should reveal the Maker one way or another just to mess with people. Okay, not just to mess with people I think it could be a cool story, depending on which way they choose to go with.

Consider also that revealing it destroys roleplaying certain aspects of character. If the Maker is real and undeniably a god, then roleplaying an atheist gets quite difficult. If the Maker isn't real, roleplaying an Andrastian also falls completely flat.

Within the context of the DA universe, the Maker stands for faith. You don't need faith when something is objectively proven. That's why I don't believe his existence will be revealed, nor should it.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Loghain Mac-Tir:  Why do you think a being who created an entire universe would care about proving anything to you? 

Do you often strive to prove your worth to the things you do? Do you try to convince yourr toast how worthy you were to slightly burn bread?

 

Solas even makes a comment about this.  Saying something about a true god would never find need to prove itself. 

 

As for my statement two pages back, yes I was asking you to provide proof to your statement.  There is no empirical evidence to suggest that anything needs to be proven.  If your example about... mind controlling melons I believe it was... is made, I need no proof that another person is experiencing such an event. 

 

Since I have observed no melons doing any such mind control I will likely not pay much mind to the statement.  That does not prove the statement wrong, it simply proves that I cannot verify the statement and because of such I have made the decision to not act upon it.  I might also make the decision to be wary of melons.  Does heroin control you?  Cigarettes?  Alcohol?  Yes - I'm aware you mean mystical magical wobbly waves of power zipping into your mind... but maybe these melons create a hallucinogenic effect.  To be wary of that effect would be prudent.  To ignore it because you think "those who fear melons" are wack jobs would be the ignorant path.

 

I do not require the person to prove what they are experiencing and I especially don't require people to conform to my world view based on my limited experiences of that world (regardless of whether they are shared or not).

[gothicshark]

I'm an agnostic atheist, which means I'll believe in a deity when sufficient evidence is presented. This also applies to the characters I create. I've heard people tell me " Well, spirits and demons exist, so the Maker must too." This doesn't really say anything about the Maker's existence, and it reminds me of the design argument. Would it be logical to disbelieve Maker claims?

As a long term D&D player/Dungeon Master, this is my solution to this line of reasoning. 

 

For starters in our world Atheism is defined as "not believing in any god or supernatural supreme being."  While Agnosticism is defined as "not sure if their is or is not a god or supernatural supreme being." 

 

In a universe with magic and gods and the very real possibility of a supernatural supreme being, atheism would be defined as "believing god and/or gods are former mortals who amassed a lot of power, and not supreme beings. " and agnostics would be "people who believe god and/or gods may or may not be former mortals with lots of amassed power."

[Andraste_Reborn]

If someone holds a gun to my head and tells me to worship them or my brains will decorate the walls I might start doing all the things that look like worship but that doesn't mean I actually worsho that person in the spiritual sense. If we substitute gun with "omnipotent power over all existence" we get to the same place.

 

Yeah, this. I might be able to go through the motions if given proof that a being that could actually damn me to hell for all eternity existed, but I doubt I could manage any genuine reverence. Unless said being was happy with a worshipper that went through the motions while filled with barely suppressed rage and seething resentment, I'd end up in hell anyway. So then what's the point? I might as well just tell it that it can !@#$ right off.

 

And this is why I'm not a fan of Pascal's Wager.

[BansheeOwnage]

Consider also that revealing it destroys roleplaying certain aspects of character. If the Maker is real and undeniably a god, then roleplaying an atheist gets quite difficult. If the Maker isn't real, roleplaying an Andrastian also falls completely flat.

Within the context of the DA universe, the Maker stands for faith. You don't need faith when something is objectively proven. That's why I don't believe his existence will be revealed, nor should it.

To be honest, I'm not expecting them to reveal it, and that's fine. About the roleplaying though: Does it matter? If it's proven one way or the other, why do we need to roleplay about that specific thing anymore? Instead, you can still have opinions about the Maker or lack thereof, just not opinions about whether the Maker exists. Isn't it the same with roleplaying an elf who believes or doesn't believe in the Creators? Now that we know they were real (regardless of their divinity), doesn't that kill roleplaying too? And it will be expanded upon even further soon. Why is the human religion off-limits? Basically, roleplaying is great, but it shouldn't exclude the protagonist from being proven wrong (or correct). That's just my opinion though.

[Loghain Mac-Tir]

@Loghain Mac-Tir:  Why do you think a being who created an entire universe would care about proving anything to you? 

Do you often strive to prove your worth to the things you do? Do you try to convince yourr toast how worthy you were to slightly burn bread?

 

Solas even makes a comment about this.  Saying something about a true god would never find need to prove itself. 

 

As for my statement two pages back, yes I was asking you to provide proof to your statement.  There is no empirical evidence to suggest that anything needs to be proven.  If your example about... mind controlling melons I believe it was... is made, I need no proof that another person is experiencing such an event. 

 

Since I have observed no melons doing any such mind control I will likely not pay much mind to the statement.  That does not prove the statement wrong, it simply proves that I cannot verify the statement and because of such I have made the decision to not act upon it.  I might also make the decision to be wary of melons.  Does heroin control you?  Cigarettes?  Alcohol?  Yes - I'm aware you mean mystical magical wobbly waves of power zipping into your mind... but maybe these melons create a hallucinogenic effect.  To be wary of that effect would be prudent.  To ignore it because you think "those who fear melons" are wack jobs would be the ignorant path.

 

I do not require the person to prove what they are experiencing and I especially don't require people to conform to my world view based on my limited experiences of that world (regardless of whether they are shared or not).

 

 

I never said it would, would you kindly, if you could, quote my post when you are replying to me, so I know what you are exactly referring to.I merely stated I don't care either ways. I am not offended by the idea of God, but neither am I too amused by it. I said in the off chance a being who created everything were to reveal itself to everyone, not just me. Then I'd feel obliged to "worship" it, unless of course, said Creator is a total douchebag. I do NOT want the creator of everything to reveal itself to me, I am happy (relatively) as it is.

 

I would do it, if I cared for the "toast" to acknowledge my existence and sing my praises, which apparently most Gods do.

 

I do not know why I have to repeat my self again. I simply stated that every belief requires a justification. Why does one worship a deity, there can be many reasons for that ; Spiritual satisfaction/ "personal" relationship with the deity / comfort / fear of eternal damnation. I say it again, none of these reasons have to validated by anyone, nor can they be validated, nor they need to be validated. But you have to have a reason for your belief. "i dont know just does i guess" is not a reason. 

 

I have to be honest with you, I do not like a person who does not understand or appreciate sarcasm. 

 

P.S If you could also private msg me your response, I'd appreciate it. I'd have to sleep now, and I'll probably won't come back for 2 weeks or so, by that time, this thread would have most likely died. I could try to "follow topic", but I'd rather not have 100 extra mails on my account. Thanks

[The Dank Warden]

The best choice is always:

 

-"are you really the Herald of Andraste?"

"-IDK"

[Medhia_Nox]

Loghain Mac-Tir:  And why does "every belief require justification" you still haven't provided empirical proof of that statement.  "Because Carl Sagan said so." is not actually proof.

[KaiserShep]

Disbelief always has a place when dealing with any being whose existence is undetermined.

[Panda]

The problem is whether they cna actually be called ¨gods¨ though. Some of the codexs seem to hint they are definitely limited in their power, very physicial, and possibly mortal. I nthe elven pantheon case, they seem more akin to a Vengence type scenaroi, than anything divine. Also, Corypheus seems to belive himself to be a kind of god, and he is the closest one apart from Solas to know whether gods are a real thing. And then we murder him

 

Well it depends what people defines as gods, cause if you look IRL religions around the world, their god-definiations are quite different and who is to say one god is more god than another ^^ In Thedas elves also seem to define gods differently from humans, elves have many gods that seem to be elven who rose to the status of god, when Chantry only believes in one god, the Maker. But who is to say if the Maker is more godlike than elven gods.

[BraveVesperia]

Personally, I feel like the existence of spirits and demons might disprove the extistence of gods, since what people might believe to be gods might just be powerful spirits. Afterall -

Spoiler

Mythal joining with Flemeth seems a lot like Anders and Justice. And Solas suggests on a few occasions that maybe the elven gods are just mages or spirits.

[Daerog]

If the Maker is the one in question, it is a little difficult to prove or disprove (without direct intervention and such) a Creator God as that God transcends everything since that God is the author of everything. By everything, that includes space, time, reality, existence, being, etc.

 

(However, this is also assuming that the Maker is the One God and not just one being who made one universe that contained Thedas and the Fade and that there may be other higher beings who do their own stuff...)

If the elven gods or old gods are in question... well... I don't see how they themselves are in question, just how one wishes to define the word "god." A superior being of greater power and influence? Sure, that can describe the elven gods. Still doesn't matter much to Andrastians, though, since these higher beings are not the authors of reality, that honor belongs to the Maker (according to Andrastians), and so the elf gods are inferior to the Maker.

So, I really don't see how the existence of magic and spirits/demons and such has any real impact on all this, other than possibly making the latter example easier to accept or something. As others have pointed out, it's just another part of nature for Thedas.

 

Edit: To answer the topic question: There is Morrigan.

[Dieb]

Yeah, you're right on the first point. But then you run into issues like predetermination (I like the Calvinist solution myself, if only for its honesty).

Mostly I'm all for punching out Cthulu approach.

 

Care to explain what you meant exactly by "Calvinist solution"?  Referring to your previous "gun to the head" analogy?

 

Not calling you out, I really don't understand at this point. And I enjoy learning from people.

 

 

This thread turned into a very interesting read, completely unrelated to the DA connection in a way as well. Good job guys, go sunday BSN!

[nightscrawl]

I'll start this off by saying that I certainly think people should make their PC however they want, including the roleplay elements of faith or lack thereof.

 

That said... I have seen numerous people on these forums expressing that their character is an atheist. Honestly, it doesn't make much sense to me within the lore of the world that there would be enough people in Thedas with this opinion for it to even have a name like "atheist."

 

For the most part, people are indoctrinated into a faith as children and raised within the tenants of that faith. In Thedas this will be either belief in the Maker or in the elven pantheon -- dwarves have their own ancestor worship and don't believe in a deity, and the Qunari follow the Qun and revere Koslun, but also don't appear to believe in a deity.

 

During previous discussions on this issue I've seen many mage players say that their character is an atheist. But even for mage children, I'd imagine that they would have had some learning about the Maker and Andraste pre-magic, and then once the magic manifests and they are taken to the Circle there would be further instruction along with the additional lessons on magic (and reading, writing, 'rithmetic).

 

Also, what I find a bit troubling is that many people don't separate belief or faith in a god (or gods) from practicing the rituals associated with that faith, or from the institutions that govern it. There can certainly be individuals who believe in the Maker and His bride Andraste, but don't support the Chantry for whatever reason; perhaps they are a Circle mage; perhaps they are a Trevelyan getting a mole's eye view of Chantry politics. I don't find it contrary at all for my Trevelyan (non-mage) to be a believer but not support the Chantry as an institution due to his experiences with it. Both Dorian and Varric are Andrastian, but neither of them practice.

 

To me, this non-practicing type seems more logical within Thedas than someone who is an atheist.

[CassMandra]

My character doesn't believe in letting his true feelings be known. He either tells you what you want to hear or if he's bored he might say the opposite.

[Antergaton]

I think being atheist is less justified in the Dragon Age world than the real, too many things occur that are beyond basic human comprehension. I would find it hard for any mage not to believe, due to the fact what they can see in the fade.

 

Other humans might have doubt but like some have suggested, many might believe due to things like demons, mages and other phenomenons running around with no explanation how they can occur.

 

I'm not sure on how other races might react, Dwarves worship ancestors and were born from The Stone but do they believe Darkspawn are a creation of a being they don't believe it or that they just exist? Same with Elves (non-Adrastian ones) and Qun.

[nightscrawl]

... Dwarves worship ancestors and were born from The Stone but do they believe Darkspawn are a creation of a being they don't believe it or that they just exist?

Wow, this is a great question. I'm not sure that the dwarves we see in the game(s) ever express their view on where darkspawn come from.

 

In DAO a dwarven PC will have that Ostagar conversation with Wynne about the supposed origin, as well as a conversation with Alistiar about it, but I don't recall whether there are any special dialog options for a dwarven PC, or if the player can just take it as "OK, so this is a thing that people believe." Within both of those conversations both Wynne and Alistair say that they don't know whether it's true or not, and only share the story as part of general information on darkspawn.

[Reznore57]

The most hilarious thing , IMHO , is the humans think the Maker was in the Golden City.Then the magisters went , the Blight , blablabla.

The Dalish believes their Gods are trapped in the Eternal City in the fade.

And NO ONE , NO ONE , in game , ever think "wait a minute , there's just one city in the fade?So..."

I'm not sure what's wrong with the elves but they should be worried the city went black and there's talks of humans going there.

But nope , nothing.

[Xilizhra]

There's no proof of the Maker's existence, so it's totally justified.

[OriginalTibs]

I am sorry, but by what definition is a lack of belief, a belief ? 

I doubt it is definitive, but I'd surmise that a lack of belief may be a belief to the same extent that the individual religiously disbelieves,

[Das Tentakel]

The most hilarious thing , IMHO , is the humans think the Maker was in the Golden City.Then the magisters went , the Blight , blablabla.

The Dalish believes their Gods are trapped in the Eternal City in the fade.

And NO ONE , NO ONE , in game , ever think "wait a minute , there's just one city in the fade?So..."

I'm not sure what's wrong with the elves but they should be worried the city went black and there's talks of humans going there.

But nope , nothing.

 

Well, this is the same universe where Elves have been under human domination for centuries, are considered attractive and where human-elven children always end up as human. Yet there are still plenty of Elves. There's something not quite right with the mathematical implications of this but that's probably just me.

 

Or maybe my faith is just being tested...

[nightscrawl]

... where human-elven children always end up as human. Yet there are still plenty of Elves.

For both city elves and Dalish elves mating with humans is a big no-no. And as we saw with the city elf origin in DAO, they specifically do cross-city marriages to bring in new blood.