Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JinOtsi]

Also, no one is asking you to accept that the Amarr are sparkly fun time religionists, because they aren't.  No one is asking you to accept them IC as good people, because they aren't in the vast majority of cases, according to our western standards.

I just don't think that using IRL texts in arguments with Amarrians is fair, tbh.  They're the ones who are RPing the religion, let them define the terms of the engagement, since they're the ones invested in it, and meanwhile you can just keep your arguments more general.  I think thats reasonable, unless you want me suddenly defining how Wayism works, or something, or telling the Minmatar what form their animism takes.

Well, since the religion does imply "Everyone's going to be assimilated, god damn it!", it kind of means all characters have investments in it. I honestly wish it wasn't so, since it would make RP far easier to deal with, but that's how the setting is.

[Laerise [PIE]]

yep. That's the setting.

So, whats your argument again?  I mean, apart from "religion is evil" obviously 

Need more straw?

Excellent, now that we've established that you actually know what a strawman argument is, could you please stop using them? 

[Jev North]

All I care to say is that the meta-discussion is rapidly becoming as unproductive and boring as the IGS thread itself.

Regarding that one, I find that the comparison to /r/atheism and the RL debate is actually pretty apt. In that I don't think either side will be convinced by the others' rhetoric any time soon, given the respective fighters' excellent skill at goalpost-moving, strawman-burning,  argument by attrition and other such niceties that tend to appear in debates where neither side is willing to be convinced, or even agree on the delineation of the subject matter.

I suppose that's very realistic -- to the point where people seem to think nothing of dragging RL references into fiction without a second thought -- but  I don't find it terribly interesting.

Y'all do a brah a solid and just call me when one side actually manages to convince the other, then tell me how they managed it? Thanks.

[Laerise [PIE]]

All I care to say is that the meta-discussion is rapidly becoming as unproductive and boring as the IGS thread itself.

Regarding that one, I find that the comparison to /r/atheism and the RL debate is actually pretty apt. In that I don't think either side will be convinced by the others' rhetoric any time soon, given the respective fighters' excellent skill at goalpost-moving, strawman-burning,  argument by attrition and other such niceties that tend to appear in debates where neither side is willing to be convinced, or even agree on the delineation of the subject matter.

I suppose that's very realistic -- to the point where people seem to think nothing of dragging RL references into fiction without a second thought -- but  I don't find it terribly interesting.

Y'all do a brah a solid and just call me when one side actually manages to convince the other, then tell me how they managed it? Thanks.

It's not about convincing tbh, its more about who has more time to waste on circular arguments 

[Stitcher]

Also, no one is asking you to accept that the Amarr are sparkly fun time religionists, because they aren't.  No one is asking you to accept them IC as good people, because they aren't in the vast majority of cases, according to our western standards.

I just don't think that using IRL texts in arguments with Amarrians is fair, tbh.  They're the ones who are RPing the religion, let them define the terms of the engagement, since they're the ones invested in it, and meanwhile you can just keep your arguments more general.  I think thats reasonable, unless you want me suddenly defining how Wayism works, or something, or telling the Minmatar what form their animism takes.

"Fair" works both ways. It doesn't mean that one side gets to have exclusive access to a subject - that would be like calling a boat race where one team is rowing and the other has an outboard motor "fair". What's fair is for everyone to have equal access to the same resources.

The fact that I chose to RP a given faction doesn't grant me exclusive rights to detail-build for that faction. Among other things, I'm as likely to disagree with another Caldari RPer on, say, the rules of Splinterz as I am to disagree with an Amarrian RPer on the details of the scriptures.

I'm all for an open season. If you feel you've got something constructive, interesting and realistic to add to the detail we're all building together, go right ahead. I'll call bullshit if I think it's "wrong", but I'll do it in-character. People believe that atheists are satan-worshippers IRL, after all. Wildly inaccurate, exaggerated claims about what other people believe is something that happens, why shouldn't it happen in-character?

In any case, if the Amarrian RPers get exclusive rights to define what's in their religion then that's not fair on me, because it opens the door to them producing the most wonderful, balanced, caring, enlightened and beautiful faith that has never existed.

RP in this context is a back-and-forth thing; either everyone gets to have their say or we wind up with a million mary-sues all standing in their corner sulking and never straying into somebody else's world. Whether or not any given person's say on the subject is picked up and run with, or dropped and ignored, is up to how good it is, how much it makes sense, and what depth it brings to the conversation.

[Morwen Lagann]

I think that people need to walk away from the computer for a bit and cool down.

Rather than let this thread spiral further out of control to the point where the entire thing will need to be sent to the catacombs - there are already many posts in here that violate the rules in some fashion - I'm going to lock it at least until Silver gets home so he can take a second look.

[Silver Night]

[mod]Seeing a lot of 'You're doing it wrong' in this thread. There were some good posts too, but I think that on the whole if the problem ones were taken out the rest wouldn't make much sense without context. Also quite a bit of off-topic (for example, discussions about what logical fallacy someone is engaging in in the thread is not, itself, on topic for the thread).[/mod]