Mourning Star Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 14 hours ago, Mister Smikes said: The problem with dualistic religions is that they promote a by-any-means-necessary ethic. Which is why Mel has no problem with human sacrifice and the murder of children. The Faith of the Seven is not dualistic, and is instead loosly modelled on medieval christianity, a monotheistic (but not dualistic) religion. The Faith of the Seven does have a concept of good and evil, though. Unclear what you are trying to say here. Morality is about good and evil by definition. Otherwise the word is meaningless. Morality can be about good and evil without being about good versus evil. It is the conflict that is unnecessary and so highlighted by a dualistic worldview. This is increasingly true if you start ascribing conscious godhoods to each side. 12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said: That's more or less accurate, I think. The Faith of the Seven is basically Medieval Catholicism, a religion GRRM sort-of likes, altered through the modern lenses of agnostic secular humanism, and New Age neopaganism. He basically took the idea of Three Persons in One God, expanded it to 7 persons in one god, filled out the 7 by adding the Maiden, Mother and Crone from neopagan Goddess worship; and made it more humanistic by focusing on the idea that most of the aspects of God are human archtypes. Adding woman makes it a little more palatable as a modern reader, I will admit. Quote Although GRRM has given the Faith of the Seven lots of warts and flaws, especially as embodied by its leaders and practitioners, I think he is more or less on its side, at least compared to all the other religions. The Septons are the ones who oppose human sacrifice, and do not think one should be allowed to throw dwarfs into the sea. I think we see a general negative view of organized religion, but not necessarily every moral lesson they espouse. I think this is related to and comparable to the contrast between the order of knights and being a “true” knight. Quote I have this idea that Rh'llor, the Great Other, the Lion of Night, the Storm God, and maybe the Drowned God too, are all (or can appear as) aspects of the many-faced god of death. They are all on the same team -- the destruction of humanity -- and their followers are dupes. Ya, I tend to think that while magic and supernatural powers are real in Planetos, gods are not, at least in the classical sense. Quote As seen through Aeron's eyes, he has an almost Christlike aspect to him. And in Aeron's vision, the Drowned God is one of the victims of the God of Death, rather than one of its aspects. Maybe I just liked the pun on “unfathomable” too much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Mourning Star said: Morality can be about good and evil without being about good versus evil. It is the conflict that is unnecessary and so highlighted by a dualistic worldview. This distinction is too fine for me. Again, I agree that Good and Evil are not equal opposed forces (which would be Dualism). But they are opposed. And there is conflict. Quote This is increasingly true if you start ascribing conscious godhoods to each side. Well, I guess you're an anti-theist of some kind, and I am not. Quote I think we see a general negative view of organized religion, but not necessarily every moral lesson they espouse. I think this is related to and comparable to the contrast between the order of knights and being a “true” knight. Religion tends to be organized, even when the organization is not top-down. When a Sisterman complains about those meddling Septons trying to stop them from throwing dwarves into the sea, whose side are we supposed to be on? Septons are organized religion. The High Septon that Cersei had murdered was part of organized religion as well. Bonifrer's Holy Hundred, the only military force in Westeros that does not rape, is a manifestation of organized religion. Septon Meribald is part of organized religion. The Elder Brother is part of organized religion, and now, Sandor apparently is as well. The ideal of the True Knight is arguably a manifestation of organized religion as well, though I suppose you could argue that the ideas are separable. It is human nature to be organized, as humans are a tribal species. Religion will always be part of that, including all the warts and abuses of power. Quote Ya, I tend to think that while magic and supernatural powers are real in Planetos, gods are not, at least in the classical sense. Davos has already talked to the Mother. And of course Mel receives messages from the Red God. Jaime has also maybe talked to the Mother; unless that was merely his Mother and the distinction is relevant in GRRM's humanistic rewrite of the concept of godhood. But dreams and visions have plausible deniability, and I suppose GRRM intends to keep it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourning Star Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: This distinction is too fine for me. Again, I agree that Good and Evil are not equal opposed forces (which would be Dualism). But they are opposed. And there is conflict. The conflict is the human heart struggling with hard choices, not good and evil struggling with each other. Good and evil might be different, but I don’t think they are opposing forces. They are moral judgements not factions in a struggle. 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Well, I guess you're an anti-theist of some kind, and I am not. I mean sort of I guess, so is the author. But, it’s hard to be in favor of things you don’t believe in, so… ya 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Religion tends to be organized, even when the organization is not top-down. When a Sisterman complains about those meddling Septons trying to stop them from throwing dwarves into the sea, whose side are we supposed to be on? Septons are organized religion. The High Septon that Cersei had murdered was part of organized religion as well. Bonifrer's Holy Hundred, the only military force in Westeros that does not rape, is a manifestation of organized religion. Septon Meribald is part of organized religion. The Elder Brother is part of organized religion, and now, Sandor apparently is as well. Organized religion has a pretty clear definition. Traditions that punish innocents are also bad, like throwing dwarves into the sea, even if they aren’t necessarily “organized religion”. Religions are responsible for a lot of evil, but they don’t have a monopoly on it. It seems like you are having some correlation/causation issues here… 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: The ideal of the True Knight is arguably a manifestation of organized religion as well, though I suppose you could argue that the ideas are separable. Yes! That was my point. The ideals aren’t necessarily flawed just because the religion or organization or oaths are. 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: It is human nature to be organized, as humans are a tribal species. Religion will always be part of that, including all the warts and abuses of power. Wrong. Religion is not necessary for organization or morals. 46 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Davos has already talked to the Mother. And of course Mel receives messages from the Red God. Jaime has also maybe talked to the Mother; unless that was merely his Mother and the distinction is relevant in GRRM's humanistic rewrite of the concept of godhood. But dreams and visions have plausible deniability, and I suppose GRRM intends to keep it that way. I don’t think anyone has or will actually converse with a god. I don’t think the Red God is sending visions, I think people see visions and attribute them to the red god. The Old Gods for instance are dead ancestors gone down into the trees, not “gods” in the classical sense at all, and it’s not clear the visions attributed to them are being sent by any consciousness at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 48 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: The conflict is the human heart struggling with hard choices, not good and evil struggling with each other. Good versus Evil within the human heart is still Good versus Evil. Quote I mean sort of I guess, so is the author. He usually calls himself agnostic. And the Faith of the Seven is his own creation, altered from Medeival Catholicism. to suit his tastes. HP Lovecraft WAS an atheist, but in the context of his stories, Yog Sothoth and Cthulhu are intended to be accepted as real. Quote Organized religion has a pretty clear definition. LOL, no. "Religion" itself is a fuzzy enough term, without debating how much organization is too much organization. And of course, one always prefers one's opponents to be disorganized as possible. Quote Traditions that punish innocents are also bad, like throwing dwarves into the sea, even if they aren’t necessarily “organized religion”. Religions are responsible for a lot of evil, but they don’t have a monopoly on it. People are responsible for lots of evil, and most people are religious in one sense or another. Quote It seems like you are having some correlation/causation issues here… Not me. All I suggested is that GRRM probably likes the Faith of the Seven more than most of the other religions in his world. Quote Wrong. Religion is not necessary for organization or morals. Different issue. I merely said that humans are tribal, and that most humans are religious. Quote I don’t think anyone has or will actually converse with a god. Davos has already conversed with the Mother. But yes, I agree there will always be plausible deniability for those who do not like that aspect of the story. Quote I don’t think the Red God is sending visions, I think people see visions and attribute them to the red god. I think the most natural reading is that someone or something is sending the visions. It is a god in the sense that people worship it. It demands human sacrifice, so I obviously don't believe that such a depraved entity ought to be worshipped. So I agree that it is not a "real god" in that sense. Whether Christians would call it a "demon" or an atheist would call it a space alien or an orbiting supercomputer, is beside the point as far as I'm concerned. As the song goes, don't feed the Plants. Quote The Old Gods for instance are dead ancestors gone down into the trees, not “gods” in the classical sense at all, and it’s not clear the visions attributed to them are being sent by any consciousness at all. Ancestor worship was indeed "classical". I think you mean that they are not "gods" in the monotheistic sense that there is only One God. Which is true enough. To me, communication implies consciousness. Especially in a fantasy context, where robots and supercomputers are maybe a bit opposed to the theme. But who knows? Maybe Sansa Stark is a biological machine, which is entirely unconscious of the things her biological sensors pick up, and the manner in which her brain is programmed to react. Maybe that's true of all the people in Westeros, whether gods or not. It seems pointless, and ideological, to debate whether a fictional fantasy entity capable of communication is "conscious". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourning Star Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Good versus Evil within the human heart is still Good versus Evil. No. Its one thing to say something is good or evil and another to pretend there is some greater conflict between these ideas. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: He usually calls himself agnostic. And the Faith of the Seven is his own creation, altered from Medeival Catholicism. to suit his tastes. HP Lovecraft WAS an atheist, but in the context of his stories, Yog Sothoth and Cthulhu are intended to be accepted as real. ok… you don’t have to be a believer to invent a faith. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: LOL, no. "Religion" itself is a fuzzy enough term, without debating how much organization is too much organization. And of course, one always prefers one's opponents to be disorganized as possible. What? Words have meanings, even if you disagree with the excepted ones that’s a common ground for discussion. I don’t know what you are talking about here. What opponents? 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: People are responsible for lots of evil, and most people are religious in one sense or another. Again, coronation is not the same as causation. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Not me. All I suggested is that GRRM probably likes the Faith of the Seven more than most of the other religions in his world. Maybe, you’d have to ask him. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Different issue. I merely said that humans are tribal, and that most humans are religious. ok… 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Davos has already conversed with the Mother. But yes, I agree there will always be plausible deniability for those who do not like that aspect of the story. Haha ya, it’s pretty easy to see how that’s not a literal god talking to Davos though right? Hasn’t GRRM even said we won’t see gods showing up in the series any more than we see in real life? Not really much room for debate there I don’t think. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: I think the most natural reading is that someone or something is sending the visions. It is a god in the sense that people worship it. It demands human sacrifice, so I obviously don't believe that such a depraved entity ought to be worshipped. So I agree that it is not a "real god" in that sense. Whether Christians would call it a "demon" or an atheist would call it a space alien or an orbiting supercomputer, is beside the point as far as I'm concerned. As the song goes, don't feed the Plants. You may think that sounds natural, but that isn’t a good use of the word or a good assessment of the story. There is nothing natural about divine intervention, and the author has said it’s not happening, on top of the textual hints to the same ends. Honestly, I think it would take away from the story anyway. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Ancestor worship was indeed "classical". I think you mean that they are not "gods" in the monotheistic sense that there is only One God. Which is true enough. No, I meant that ancestors are not gods in the classical sense. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: To me, communication implies consciousness. I would dispute that communication is going on at all. Seeing visions doesn’t mean those visions are a message from someone. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Especially in a fantasy context, where robots and supercomputers are maybe a bit opposed to the theme. But who knows? Maybe Sansa Stark is a biological machine, which is entirely unconscious of the things her biological sensors pick up, and the manner in which her brain is programmed to react. Maybe that's true of all the people in Westeros, whether gods or not. You lost me. 34 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: It seems pointless, and ideological, to debate whether a fictional fantasy entity capable of communication is "conscious". I’m debating that there is communication going on at all. One can see a vision without it having a sender, in fact it makes a lot more sense, especially in a world with magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 3 hours ago, Mourning Star said: Its one thing to say something is good or evil and another to pretend there is some greater conflict between these ideas. Good and Evil are opposed by definition, unless you want to define them out of existence. I have no idea what you mean by "greater conflict". Greater than what? King Robert supports baby killing, which is evil; Ned opposes baby killing, which is good. They argue bitterly about it. Which is conflict. King Robert struggles with his conscience and finally repents on his deathbed. Which is conflict. Quote What? Words have meanings, even if you disagree with the excepted ones that’s a common ground for discussion. It is used very commonly in secular and irreligious circles. But it has little clarity of meaning. "Organized religion" is basically a way to say one is against religion without offending friends and neighbors who may be religious. Quote I don’t know what you are talking about here. What opponents? Take your pick. The history of the world is the history of better-organized groups conquering, oppressing and suppressing less-well-organized groups. Secular folk, when they see religious groups organizing fear (not without cause) the threat of theocracy. When religious groups see other groups organizing they may fear (not without cause) the rise of State worshipping ideologies like communism or fascism, or the victory of a hostile theocracy. The current culture wars are quite bitter, and the liberal compromise is teetering. The danger of organizing is that organizations have a distressing tendency to become corrupt. The danger of not organizing is that one's group is less able to defend itself when attacked. Quote Again, coronation is not the same as causation. Autocorrect problem? Quote Haha ya, it’s pretty easy to see how that’s not a literal god talking to Davos though right? It's got plausible deniability, sure. Quote Hasn’t GRRM even said we won’t see gods showing up in the series any more than we see in real life? Not really much room for debate there I don’t think. My understanding of his words is that he intends to keep things ambiguous. Your understanding that he means to come down hard on the side of the militant atheists. Which is confirmation bias on steroids. Quote You may think that sounds natural, but that isn’t a good use of the word or a good assessment of the story. There is nothing natural about divine intervention, and the author has said it’s not happening, on top of the textual hints to the same ends. Something is intervening, and it is supernatural. Either Thoros got aid from a supernatural being when he raised the dead, or he is himself a supernatural being who raised the dead. We know Thoros' own opinion on this, and I don't know why we would claim to know better. Quote No, I meant that ancestors are not gods in the classical sense. But they are. In classical antiquity, ancestors were gods. Quote I would dispute that communication is going on at all. Seeing visions doesn’t mean those visions are a message from someone. And I guess you would also dispute that there is any animating of corpses going on. If you see a vision, it is either (1) a hallucination; (2) a message from someone; or (3) a manifestation of one's own supernatural powers. If we rule out the first, then either Mel is communicating with a (low key) god; or she is herself a (low key) god. We know Mel's opinion on this, and I don't know why we would claim to know better. Quote I’m debating that there is communication going on at all. One can see a vision without it having a sender, in fact it makes a lot more sense, especially in a world with magic. I see. So you think Mel herself is a (low key) god, who does not understand her own godhood. She just magically knows things, because she is magic. And her own opinion on this does not count because atheist ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EggBlue Posted October 18, 2021 Author Share Posted October 18, 2021 you guys do know that your little chat sounds too much like a conversation between a believer of god in real world with an atheist ...right? I skimmed through it but it seems like @Mister Smikes you are saying that westerosi gods are real in their world and one of these religions ( faith of the 7) can be counted as the good/right one that distinguishes right from wrong and good from evil correctly unlike for example R'llor's religion that is on the side of death. is that what your saying? or did I misunderstood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisdaw Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 23 hours ago, Mister Smikes said: So, in the end. Valyrian lords are mortal just like anyone else. They just live a little longer, in one form or another. They die and their souls become fire and that's what feuls the dragon's flame. But their fire doesn't last forever, it fades and the dragons die. I don't know however that they necessarily just cease to exist completely afterwards, because these people here, Quote Ghosts lined the hallway, dressed in the faded raiment of kings. In their hands were swords of pale fire. They had hair of silver and hair of gold and hair of platinum white, and their eyes were opal and amethyst, tourmaline and jade. "Faster," they cried, "faster, faster." She raced, her feet melting the stone wherever they touched. "Faster!" the ghosts cried as one, and she screamed and threw herself forward. A great knife of pain ripped down her back, and she felt her skin tear open and smelled the stench of burning blood and saw the shadow of wings. And Daenerys Targaryen flew. are Valyrians who were dragons whose flames ran out, that's why they're faded, ghosts and why their fire is pale. They appear to exist in some capacity, willing Dany to go forth and do what they did. The dragons are (or can be) celestial beings with more than one soul within them (think Bran inside Hodor and the left overs inside the birds Bran skinchanges - multiple souls inside one body, with a dominant presence), and it may be the case if Dany were to have become a dragon that they all would reunite inside it with her. I believe the whispering stars in Dany's dreams/visions to be "lost" souls waiting for her to become the dragon so that they may join with her. I don't know if they're all those who have died in her service or Valyrians waiting for a new dragon home or both. The end game here is Dany dies and enters Drogon, inside is already Drogo and Rhaego and that's the three heads (think TV show HOTU). When she becomes Drogon the dragon will reflect her soul, and become huge and breathe hotter fire. And in taking over the dragon she will allow inside it the souls of other dead. Quote Haldon nodded. "Benerro has sent forth the word from Volantis. Her coming is the fulfillment of an ancient prophecy. From smoke and salt was she born to make the world anew. She is Azor Ahai returned … and her triumph over darkness will bring a summer that will never end … death itself will bend its knee, and all those who die fighting in her cause shall be reborn …" Another attribute of a god, judgement and the granting of an afterlife. Euron, Aeron, Varamyr and in part Bran are stepping stones to explaining how Valyrians second lifed dragons and that more than one goes into the same dragon. It is all ground work leading to Dany, Drogo and Rhaego being reunited as the three heads of the dragon inside the same dragon when Dany dies. Falia, her child and Aeron are a trial run, they're going to do the same as what will happen to Dany, Rhaego and Drogo, but within a whale instead of a dragon. Though Aeron isn't the father like Drogo was, they are the same blood, and the chapter points out that they're kin. The chapter also takes pains to point out the parallel between Falia and Dany, they are to be like sisters, a salt wife and a rock wife. The whole chapter is about Aeron's faith, has his god truly forsaken him? Is it as Euron says, that his god is a lie, that when Euron drowns him he'll stay drowned Or, is Euron wrong, and for his faith in the face of everything he endured will there be salvation for Aeron? I suggest the ending of the chapter tells us everything we need to know. Quote “Falia Flowers,” he called. “Have courage, girl! All this will be over soon, and we will feast together in the Drowned God’s watery halls.” The girl raised up her head, but made no answer. She has no tongue to answer with, the Damphair knew. He licked his lips, and tasted salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 21 minutes ago, EggBlue said: I skimmed through it but it seems like @Mister Smikes you are saying that westerosi gods are real in their world More or less. He may regard the 7 gods, metaphorically, as aspects of the human condition. And he is on the side of humanity; and against Death. Quote and one of these religions ( faith of the 7) can be counted as the good/right one that distinguishes right from wrong and good from evil correctly It is the one he prefers. It is his own lapsed religion, altered to his taste, made more humanistic, and given a few warts for realism. IMHO, of course. I don't think he's down with those religions that practice human sacrifice. But who know? Maybe he kidnaps and sacrifices babies in his spare time. Quote unlike for example R'llor's religion that is on the side of death. I think Mel's communicant is a diabolic entity of the kind who sent visions to the protagonist in The Armageddon Rag. Its goal is to trick humans into killing each other in the delusion that they are opposing a Great Enemy. They further the apocalypse under the delusion that they are struggling to prevent it. I think Rh'llor and the Great Other are on the same team -- Death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EggBlue Posted October 19, 2021 Author Share Posted October 19, 2021 but wouldn't that be too ... real-world ordinary? a real faith that is more or less ignored against all the demon worshipping ones? that is exactly what is taught in religions like Islam and Catolism too I think . the thing that puts R'llorists on the side that you believe is death is their arrogance and their entitlement...the belief that "they" are right. the same goes for faith of the seven with the difference that they don't have magical/prophetic knowledge that we are aware of yet. it's the sense of being on the right side that makes followers of these religions problematic not their faith itself. by now we had Meribald, dwarves saving septopns and elder brother but we also had sparrows who got angry with Brienne and her companions just because they had to go their own way instead of giving them service, we had high sparrow who used means of torture both mentally ( with Cersei and marg) and physically and we had tree burning andals who drove away children of the forest. and I think we are going to see the Evil side of this faith in the next book where they have power. so I don't really see the author more in favor of this faith. he only had the chance to explore it's followers more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 19, 2021 Share Posted October 19, 2021 9 hours ago, EggBlue said: but wouldn't that be too ... real-world ordinary? Nobody familiar with medieval sources would call medieval Christianity "real-world ordinary". It was very colorful and over-the-top. Quote a real faith that is more or less ignored against all the demon worshipping ones? Are you talking about Christian exclusivism? My answer is that, while I expect him to acknowledge that the Faith of the Seven has some exclusivist tendencies (though it is also common, as we have seen, to swear by the old gods and the new), I don't expect him to take such a stance himself. GRRM himself is too modern for that. And while I expect Rh'llor and the Great Other and the Storm God to be portrayed as demons, I don't expect GRRM to take the same stance with respect to the Butterfly God of Nath, or the Great Shepherd, nor perhaps not even the Drowned God - who - at least as worshipped and understood by Aeron, seems to have some positive aspects. Quote the thing that puts R'llorists on the side that you believe is death is their arrogance and their entitlement...the belief that "they" are right. What puts them on the side of death is that they put children to death as part of blood sacrifice rituals. Quote we also had sparrows who got angry with Brienne and her companions just because they had to go their own way instead of giving them service, Wow. Talk about focusing on the negative. Maybe you should reread the entire passage. The encounter begins and ends with blessings and good wishes, and the Septon rebukes the one or two who spat or spoke mean words. Which is damned good behavior for people traumatized by rape and murder. Quote we had high sparrow who used means of torture both mentally ( with Cersei and marg) and physically I'm not justifying torture of any kind. But I'd rather be tortured by the High Sparrow and his mean septas than by Cersei and her buddy Qyburn. Looks like night and day to me. Quote and we had tree burning andals who drove away children of the forest. I'd rather burn a few plants than burn people. Especially if the plants are being fed in human sacrifice rituals. As the song goes, Don't Feed the Plants! You are going back a thousand years to find things to complain about, and still can't find much. Quote and I think we are going to see the Evil side of this faith in the next book where they have power. We'll see, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourning Star Posted October 19, 2021 Share Posted October 19, 2021 22 hours ago, Mister Smikes said: Good and Evil are opposed by definition, unless you want to define them out of existence. Two things being opposites does not mean they are actively opposed. White and black are opposites, they aren't fighting each other. Good and Evil existing does not mean the world is some battleground defined by a struggle between good and evil. They are moral judgements placed on actions not forces moving the world. Quote I have no idea what you mean by "greater conflict". Greater than what? King Robert supports baby killing, which is evil; Ned opposes baby killing, which is good. They argue bitterly about it. Which is conflict. King Robert struggles with his conscience and finally repents on his deathbed. Which is conflict. I am using Melisandre's explanation in the text as a basis for the distinction. She puts forward the "greater conflict" as being good versus evil, and not a war of petty kings. An argument over an action, be it good or evil, can happen without being caused by good fighting evil. I'm saying that what is important is petty details, not some cosmic war between good and evil. Quote It is used very commonly in secular and irreligious circles. But it has little clarity of meaning. "Organized religion" is basically a way to say one is against religion without offending friends and neighbors who may be religious. If you are going to deny the meanings of words, conversation will be meaningless. I am not afraid of offending religious people by using a dictionary. organized religion - a belief system that has large numbers of followers and a set of rules that must be followed Quote Take your pick. The history of the world is the history of better-organized groups conquering, oppressing and suppressing less-well-organized groups. Secular folk, when they see religious groups organizing fear (not without cause) the threat of theocracy. When religious groups see other groups organizing they may fear (not without cause) the rise of State worshipping ideologies like communism or fascism, or the victory of a hostile theocracy. The current culture wars are quite bitter, and the liberal compromise is teetering. What liberal compromise? It is a pretty classic bad faith argument to equate religious faith with being a member of a society. Quote The danger of organizing is that organizations have a distressing tendency to become corrupt. The danger of not organizing is that one's group is less able to defend itself when attacked. Oh no, organizing is hard, people do bad things, lets just go back to being hunter gatherers and praying the sun keeps coming up. LOL Yes, things can be hard, that doesn't mean they are not worth doing. Quote Autocorrect problem? Phones do that, but maybe you can figure it out. Point stands. Quote It's got plausible deniability, sure. My understanding of his words is that he intends to keep things ambiguous. Your understanding that he means to come down hard on the side of the militant atheists. Which is confirmation bias on steroids. Militant Atheists? Get a grip. You are clearly arguing in bad faith. Rather than making up terms like "low key god", try using the definitions words already have. Rather than attacking people discussing a book series, try to use the text to make your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 19, 2021 Share Posted October 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: Good and Evil existing does not mean the world is some battleground defined by a struggle between good and evil. The world is a battleground for good and evil whether you define it that way or not. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: They are moral judgements placed on actions not forces moving the world. Moral judgments are generally applied to actions, yes. And actions are forces moving the world. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: I'm saying that what is important is petty details, not some cosmic war between good and evil. Those details can include a battle between the might-make-right ruffian who wants to rape the weak; and the True Knight who wants to defend the weak. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: What liberal compromise? The system prevailing in (for instance) the U.S.A. for the last 200+ years, guaranteeing religious liberty, and allowing different belief systems to live in harmony without too much oppressing or being oppressed. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: It is a pretty classic bad faith argument to equate religious faith with being a member of a society. Speaking of bad faith, are you trying to insinuate I made such an argument? 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: Oh no, organizing is hard, people do bad things, lets just go back to being hunter gatherers. LOL Why are you saying dumb things and laughing at yourself for saying them? Surely you are not such a liar that you would insinuate I said such a thing. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: Militant Atheists? Get a grip. You are clearly arguing in bad faith. HPL was a militant atheist, judging by his letters. But he was not so militant that he used his fiction for that purpose. In his fiction, gods (of a sort) were real. GRRM, I believe, is even less militant than HPL. So I see no reason why his gods should not be real. Quotes from GRRM indicating he wants the gods to remain ambiguous do not become absolute proof that gods do not exist at all. That, again, is confirmation bias on steroids. If you disagree, feel free to dig up the GRRM quote that you claim absolutely proves that the gods in Westeros are not real. 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: Rather than making up terms like "low key god", try using the definitions words already have. Rather than attacking people discussing a book series, try to use the text to make your point. I did reference the text. But you don't seem interested in that kind of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourning Star Posted October 19, 2021 Share Posted October 19, 2021 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: The world is a battleground for good and evil whether you define it that way or not. I'm not really concerned with your definitions, and don't expect you to care about mine, we are here to discuss the text. I'm presenting to you what I think the text is saying, using the text itself. If you disagree that's fine, but it's not really a meaningful contribution unless you make a case based on the text. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Moral judgments are generally applied to actions, yes. And actions are forces moving the world. Yes! And men are the ones making the actions. Men are the ones in conflict, not the moral judgements on the actions. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Those details can include a battle between the might-make-right ruffian who wants to rape the weak; and the True Knight who wants to defend the weak. Or a True Knight backing an illegitimate king, or a might make right ruffian dethroning a mad king. The devil is in the details. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: The system prevailing in (for instance) the U.S.A. for the last 200+ years, guaranteeing religious liberty, and allowing different belief systems to live in harmony without too much oppressing or being oppressed. 200 years ago there was still slavery in the US, simmer down there buddy. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Speaking of bad faith, are you trying to insinuate I made such an argument? Yes 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Why are you saying dumb things and laughing at yourself for saying them? Surely you are not such a liar that you would insinuate I said such a thing. Yes. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: HPL was a militant atheist, judging by his letters. But he was not so militant that he used his fiction for that purpose. In his fiction, gods (of a sort) were real. GRRM, I believe, is even less militant than HPL. So I see no reason why his gods should not be real. I understand you do not see it. 7 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said: Quotes from GRRM indicating he wants the gods to remain ambiguous do not become absolute proof that gods do not exist at all. That, again, is confirmation bias on steroids. If you disagree, feel free to dig up the GRRM quote that you claim absolutely proves that the gods in Westeros are not real. I did reference the text. But you don't seem interested in that kind of discussion. Nope not really interested. Be well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Smikes Posted October 19, 2021 Share Posted October 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said: Yes Yes. Goodbye then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.