410 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

Your lack of historical understanding never ceases to amaze.

[Typhrus]

Your lack of historical understanding never ceases to amaze.

So much truth in that statement.

 

As a historian, I'm not as knowledgeable in the actual fall of the Roman Empire, but I'm reasonably good on Medieval history from 700 AD (I'm a modern historian with an interest in antiquity and the Medieval period). I'd argue that it was the Germanic barbarians moving into Roman lands that created a gap in learning between what the ancient world had, compared to those of the early Medieval period. Sure some barbarians that took Roman towns and cities that remained had the advantage of Roman infrastructure, but because they did not have the knowledge base for the logistics and economic issues surrounding them, they fell into disrepair. Knowledge was thankfully kept alive in the Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantium in some form or another.

 

This isn't to say that the early Medieval period was devoid of technological advancement or scientific advancement, merely curtailed by a lack of knowledge because it had been destroyed in previous decades and centuries. Medieval historians are now quite quick to point out points in time in the Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties in the Frankish kingdom. Going so far as to argue that Carolingians had a 'renaissance' where science, culture and art flourished. This goes against the common misconception that as an incredibly religious society, that it was held back by religious belief in relation to scientific advancement. It can be argued quite convincingly however, that the rise of Islam was indeed more 'advanced' at this point in time compared to their Western Catholic counter-parts. This was primarily because Islam was generally adopted in highly urbanised places and where they expanded through North Africa and the Iberian peninsular they spread this urbanised culture as well. In this case, religion did not hold back philosophical debate or science and mathematics which they adopted from the left overs of the various Hellenic cultures that had moved to the middle east.

 

While religion as a general rule has a lot to answer for, holding back science is not one of them historically. The Catholic Church created the ideas of university and used it as a place of learn of various topics. Although mostly centred around the humanities and theology at the time (naturally) it was they who re-introduced classical thinking to the West. Despite the many centuries of warfare and loss of knowledge, they managed to rebuild what the Greeks and Romans had had. Islamic thought through Arabs brought about the concept of '0', a cornerstone of modern mathematics. As others have pointed out, many famous scientific figures in the last 500 years have been deeply religious. To them, their scientific discoveries were further proof of God's Godliness. Darwin's theory on evolution in some eyes reinforced God's grand plan and magnificence in planning all of life. Sure others treated it with contempt, but like all major scientific discoveries, it brought about heated discussions. To argue that religion is simply a stagnating and oppressive player in history is to be wilfully ignorant of the past and only creates a flawed argument when dealing with the two topics of magic v. science and religion v. science. Religion and science are not anathema to each other and neither is magic and science.

 

Also, I'm noticing that Aren seems to be arguing from a point where all technological and scientific advancement is linear or follows what happened in reality. This is not true, while yes a possibility, it is only that. People that have been arguing quite convincingly against Qis, that all the evidence in Dragon Age and that of relatively relevant European history indicates that fire arms would be nothing like modern day weapons (full auto weapons, coming to mind straight away). Simply put, the argument of technological improvement in fire arms has no bearing on the discussion at all. Counter-factuals for technological advancements that haven't even occurred in the game's universe is a fallacy and only further flaws your argument.

 

The people arguing against Qis and Aren are not arguing for guns, merely that primitive cannons and explosives do exist in Dragon Age. As a long time lurker on these boards, many of those arguing against you are entirely opposed to the idea of 'guns' becoming a key component of Dragon Age. To say that they want 'guns' in Dragon Age is a huge failure in interpretation of what is being said. The only ones here trying to construe the evidence in a convoluted manner are Qis and Aren. It is getting to the point where the discussion, while interesting, is no longer serving any purpose. Thankfully a certain law hasn't been invoked yet!

 

On that note, I think I'm done. Other posters can essentially get my point across in a more concise way. I've had fun making my long posts and hope that they have been informative in some way.

 

[Qis]

Making long posts and claiming to be historian doesn't make you are right...

 

Christianity that makes Europe backward, in other way Islam makes Middle East advance. But Muslims following the footsteps of the Catholic that makes Muslims like we see today...

 

Alright, what i am writing about is actually taken from the work of the most popular historian, father of socialism, Ibn Khaldun...it is the theory of the rise and fall of civilization...what i am talking about based on his theory mostly. I also included the work of Ibn Rushd, the father of secularism.

 

I simplify them much, but if you are interested just take a look at their work. Even Voltaire and Karl Marx copying their ideas.

[Qis]

Something that started as liberal movement, will end up become conservative, and they will be replaced by another liberal movement in which will soon become conservative, and the cycle continue. Progression only happen during the birth of liberalism in the conservative community, then it will decline when the generations of the liberals become conservative themselves. It will rise again after new liberal movement appear, but then decline again, this will be repeated as many times in history.

 

It is like what i mentioned before in page 10.

 

Human only progress after they reach "enlightenment" that come out from reasoning, critical thinking, want to change their lives into becoming better. Human stunted after believe in doctrines and dogmas, refuse to change and cling their hope in salvation through higher power, no longer critical.

 

Magic and religion are not so different, both clings to the same things, imagination and belief, these give hope. When human hope something will make things happen, there the point where human will stop progressing, human only wait for salvation that is through God/miracle or magic/demon/spirits

 

The reason why religious people/witchdoctor/shaman always have cynical attitude toward science is because of this, science is reasoning, it totally against the basis of faith/magic, in religion you don't need reasons, you only need faith. The same with magic, you only need to believe in magic and so magic become real.

 

So when science meet religion/magic, it will CLASH...

 

i don't deny scientists also have cults, like evolutionists, this is a cult that almost become like religious peoples/witches. They against science itself and now it become a belief system. They don't escape the rule like what i stated above...they become conservatives...

[Realmzmaster]

Luke don't live at the time of Jesus...

 

None of the Gospel writers live at the time of Jesus, if they did, they won't contradict....all these Gospel writers are fiction characters

 

Your lack of biblical knowledge and of history boggles the imagination.

[Heimdall]

Making long posts and claiming to be historian doesn't make you are right...

Christianity that makes Europe backward, in other way Islam makes Middle East advance. But Muslims following the footsteps of the Catholic that makes Muslims like we see today...

Alright, what i am writing about is actually taken from the work of the most popular historian, father of socialism, Ibn Khaldun...it is the theory of the rise and fall of civilization...what i am talking about based on his theory mostly. I also included the work of Ibn Rushd, the father of secularism.

I simplify them much, but if you are interested just take a look at their work. Even Voltaire and Karl Marx copying their ideas.

Quoting a few antireligious theorists doesn't have the weight of historical fact. I've studied the medieval period and I can confirm that everything Typhrus has said is historically accurate. Religion is not inherently hostile to science.

[Qis]

Your lack of biblical knowledge and of history boggles the imagination.

 

The name Luke only appear 3 times in the Bible, one the physician, one as travelng companion of St Paul, and lastly as one of St Paul workers and a Gentile....which Luke is Gospel according to Luke writer?

[Qis]

Quoting a few antireligious theorists doesn't have the weight of historical fact. I've studied the medieval period and I can confirm that everything Typhrus has said is historically accurate. Religion is not inherently hostile to science.

 

Ibn Khaldun and Ibn Rushd are not anti-religious, they are VERY religious and living in medieval times. Ibn Khaldun live at the time Mongol attacked Baghdad, Ibn Rushd live at the time of Andalus/Spain at it's peak, known as Averroes

 

Voltaire and Karl Marx however are modern thinkers.

 

The problem of western "historians" today is Europe centricism...that's the problem of European historians.

 

[Heimdall]

Ibn Khaldun and Ibn Rushd are not anti-religious, they are VERY religious and living in medieval times. Ibn Khaldun live at the time Mongol attacked Baghdad, Ibn Rushd live at the time of Andalus/Spain at it's peak, known as Averroes
 
Voltaire and Karl Marx however are modern thinkers.
 
The problem of western "historians" today is Europe centricism...that's the problem of European historians.

I know who Voltaire and Marx are, thank you, and I don't think highly of either of them as historians. Regardless, just because you think these philosophers authoritative doesn't mean you can can overrule historical facts that don't bear out their ideology.

[Ashagar]

Especially given Voltaire was infamous for making up facts about earlier historical periods that people would take for truth simply because he was famous.

[Medhia_Nox]

So, have we discovered why guns aren't supposed to be in Dragon Age yet?  

 

We've already got magical dirty bombs... Avina networks in old elven ruins (library in tresspasser)... a mirror superhighway... genetically manipulated super soldiers... gatling laser guns (Descent)... "gaatlok".... stone cyborgs... 

 

Yeah... guns would throw everything really out of balance. 

[Qis]

I know who Voltaire and Marx are, thank you, and I don't think highly of either of them as historians. Regardless, just because you think these philosophers authoritative doesn't mean you can can overrule historical facts that don't bear out their ideology.

 

So you dismiss their work just because you don't like them and believing in your so called historical facts?

 

That's the problem of western people, denial syndrome to the peak...you guys simply deny, deny, deny and deny to satisfy your own ego, to the extent of denying everything, wow...i never see such ego.

 

The only thing you guys did since the begining of this thread is DENYING....wow

 

Denying for the sake of denying...

[Qis]

So, have we discovered why guns aren't supposed to be in Dragon Age yet?  

 

We've already got magical dirty bombs... Avina networks in old elven ruins (library in tresspasser)... a mirror superhighway... genetically manipulated super soldiers... gatling laser guns (Descent)... "gaatlok".... stone cyborgs... 

 

Yeah... guns would throw everything really out of balance. 

 

Yes, because primitive gun will be a lot more awesome than primitive bow in which already more awesome than magic and making magic senseless and useless.

 

A gun will destroy Thedas and everything about Thedas

 

This is how Qunari cannon will look like

 

[CardButton]

Yes, because primitive gun will be a lot more awesome than primitive bow in which already more awesome than magic and making magic senseless and useless.

 

A gun will destroy Thedas and everything about Thedas

Why?  Primitive firearms took longer to reload, could misfire or not fire at all, had a far shorter range with far less accuracy than a traditional bow or crossbow.

[Qis]

Why?  Primitive firearms took longer to reload, could misfire or not fire at all, had a far shorter range with far less accuracy than a traditional bow or crossbow.

 

Tempest Archer prove that archery in Thedas is unlike archery in real world, so why would primitive gun should act like real gun?

[Heimdall]

So you dismiss their work just because you don't like them and believing in your so called historical facts?
 
That's the problem of western people, denial syndrome to the peak...you guys simply deny, deny, deny and deny to satisfy your own ego, to the extent of denying everything, wow...i never see such ego.
 
The only thing you guys did since the begining of this thread is DENYING....wow
 
Denying for the sake of denying...

You've yet to provide a coherent argument for any of your points besides repeatedly stating your own opinion as if that were enough and refusing to address any historical evidence against your assertions. And I'm the one in denial?

We've challenged your assertions, that isn't ego, it's dialogue. It isn't our fault that you lack any facts to back them up with. If you expect everyone to agree with you, you should address your own ego issues.

I dismiss the work of those philosophers in this case because I've studied history and I don't think history supports their ideas. I don't put blind faith in writers just because they were famous or popular.

[Heimdall]

Tempest Archer prove that archery in Thedas is unlike archery in real world, so why would primitive gun should act like real gun?

Tempest archers are consuming magical elixirs to do what they do, archery works the same.

[Qis]

As we can see the performance of primitive technology in Thedas that is the Tempest Archer, there is no reason why the advance technology will not look like this

 

[Giantdeathrobot]

So you dismiss their work just because you don't like them and believing in your so called historical facts?

 

That's the problem of western people, denial syndrome to the peak...you guys simply deny, deny, deny and deny to satisfy your own ego, to the extent of denying everything, wow...i never see such ego.

 

The only thing you guys did since the begining of this thread is DENYING....wow

 

Denying for the sake of denying...

 

Heaven forbid that we evil westerners don't bend down and accept all your dubious premises as fact just because you want us to.

 

We are all clearly being in denial. Thank you for showing us the light, you are so good at it you seemingly don't need such outdated concepts as evidence or facts after all.

[Qis]

This is what i am talking about, this is why gun should not be in Dragon Age, because it will look like this picture...archery is already more awesome than magic, how awesome a gun would be? If guns being incorporated in the game, it should not be in lower standard than Tempest Archer, guns must look like proton cannon, because it have been established that archery, the primitive technology can do things beyond imagination, a gun should be more and not less

 

And when that happen, it destroy magic and religion

[Heimdall]

This is what i am talking about, this is why gun should not be in Dragon Age, because it will look like this picture...archery is already more awesome than magic, how awesome a gun would be? If guns being incorporated in the game, it should not be in lower standard than Tempest Archer, guns must look like proton cannon, because it have been established that archery, the primitive technology can do things beyond imagination, a gun should be more and not less

Alright, I'll say it one more time.  The Tempest archer is using magic.  That's not archery technology or skill, that's magical elixir.  There's nothing stopping someone with a gun from drinking the same mixture.

[Qis]

Alright, I'll say it one more time.  The Tempest archer is using magic.  That's not archery technology or skill, that's magical elixir.  There's nothing stopping someone with a gun from drinking the same mixture.

 

So you agree with Tempest Cannoneer/Musketeer/Gunmen?

[X Equestris]

The name Luke only appear 3 times in the Bible, one the physician, one as travelng companion of St Paul, and lastly as one of St Paul workers and a Gentile....which Luke is Gospel according to Luke writer?

Most definitely the first two, and possibly the last one, are all talking about the same person.

https://en.m.wikiped..._the_Evangelist

This is what i am talking about, this is why gun should not be in Dragon Age, because it will look like this picture...archery is already more awesome than magic, how awesome a gun would be? If guns being incorporated in the game, it should not be in lower standard than Tempest Archer, guns must look like proton cannon, because it have been established that archery, the primitive technology can do things beyond imagination, a gun should be more and not less
 
And when that happen, it destroy magic and religion

That's quite the leap in logic.

[Heimdall]

So you agree with Tempest Cannoneer/Musketeer/Gunmen?

No,

 

I'm just pointing out that you are wrong.

[Qis]

No,

 

I'm just pointing out that you are incorrect.

 

No reason why the Tempest thing cannot being applied at gunmen, or a person with a gun, or cannon...

 

Dragon Age : The Avengers confirmed