Print

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

[Seriphyn]

Nice post there!

Of note, has the Slavery FP article been brought up for breaking apart? It's a massive article.

[ArtOfLight]

I brought it up at the very beginning, Seri.

[Seriphyn]

Okay 

Yeah I wasn't following that early on...

[Nicoletta Mithra]

This is just....such a disturbing conversation. Comments are made that Amarrians slavers will not be seen as sympathetic characters, and we have people arguing that slavery at its core isn't so bad, and people are just biased by their own world morality. REALLY?!

 

Just to make myself clear, if I say:

It seems to me that I've been told now multiple times that playing an Amarr who's portraying the practice and institution of slavery as something that can be good and in certain cases is good is a case of 'U r doin it wrong!'.

The reasons brought up so far are:
1. Historically was never good.
2. Slavery is evil.
3. Slavery is abuse is evil.

So, while I object to point 1. to 3. even if they all were true, these are not sufficient reasons to justify the call of "U r doin it wrong!". Even if Slavery is objectively evil by necessity, it doesn't follow in the least that Amarr can't practice it in a way that makes it appear as acceptable and good as possible.

And say there that I object to points 1 to 3, then I'm not saying that these points are not true, but merely that they are not simply true. There is in my opinion nothing in the term slavery that makes it obvious that it's not good and if we nowadays think that it is obviously not good, then we do so from a point of view that needed more than 500 years to develop, if we see Bartolomé de Las Casas as the one with whom it started.

There has been put a lot of time, thought and debate into that and claiming that it is obvious that slavery is bad or that it's in the word slavery that it is evil or bad is in my opinion - as someone staunchly opposed to slavery IRL - a disservice to those people that poured their heart-blood into the undertaking of showing that slavery is indeed bad. It diminishes the appraisal of their accomplishments in this regard and trivializes the problem of slavery and the problems that are connected to it.

Tl;dr: I really want to make clear that I'm opposed to slavery and think of it as objectively bad. I still think it's trivializing the problem of slavery if one claims that slavery is obviously bad.

[Khloe]

Cultural relativism could rationalize any behavior as morally acceptable and necessary from a certain point of view. I'm sure one could explain the act of genocide itself at its core isn't wrong from a certain perspective, but it doesn't really address the point that slavery makes Amarrian characters unsympathetic. I suppose I'd take issue with the insinuation that many characters are influenced by their player's personal viewpoints on slavery when three of the four major cultures in New Eden are just as fervently opposed to the idea.

[ArtOfLight]

I suppose I'd take issue with the insinuation that many characters are influenced by their player's personal viewpoints on slavery when three of the four major cultures in New Eden are just as fervently opposed to the idea.

That's the thing, they're not.

The Caldari aren't fervently opposed to slavery, the general outlook is that it's simply an inefficient business model. The State has never practiced slavery and doesn't have slavery in its history (in fact, it's the only nation that doesn't), not because it's morally reprehensible to them but simply because nothing in their history would have prompted them to use such a system - community is the stronger, more efficient and productive model.

The Minmatar actually have slavery in the Republic but it's only in the higher government areas and certainly not common knowledge.

The Federation has slavery in its past and present, in fact there are a number of lobbyists in the Federation seeking to abolish slavery in the Federation to this day.

[Ciarente]

The Federation has slavery in its past and present, in fact there are a number of lobbyists in the Federation seeking to abolish slavery in the Federation to this day.

If your source is http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery you may have mistaken lobbyists trying to have CONCORD outlaw slavery everywhere for attempts to have slavery outlawed in the Federation itself. Slavery is illegal in the Federation, though illegal slavery 'remains a problem' - much as illegal slavery remains a problem in our own societies.

[Matariki Rain]

The Minmatar actually have slavery in the Republic but it's only in the higher government areas and certainly not common knowledge.

I'm going to echo Cia's response, but in the Matari context. It's illegal and "abhorred".

[Khloe]

I suppose I'd take issue with the insinuation that many characters are influenced by their player's personal viewpoints on slavery when three of the four major cultures in New Eden are just as fervently opposed to the idea.

That's the thing, they're not.

The Caldari aren't fervently opposed to slavery, the general outlook is that it's simply an inefficient business model. The State has never practiced slavery and doesn't have slavery in its history (in fact, it's the only nation that doesn't), not because it's morally reprehensible to them but simply because nothing in their history would have prompted them to use such a system - community is the stronger, more efficient and productive model.

The Minmatar actually have slavery in the Republic but it's only in the higher government areas and certainly not common knowledge.

The Federation has slavery in its past and present, in fact there are a number of lobbyists in the Federation seeking to abolish slavery in the Federation to this day.

So the Caldari think the practice is bizarre, but philosophical Practicals think it worth researching. Given the rise of Tibus Heth and opposition to worker exploitation, and even their struggle for independence from the Federation, I think one could make a solid case for why opposition to slavery by a Caldari might not be an unusual stance.

The Federation stopped practicing long ago and openly oppose assimilation by the Empire, and the Minmatar (who were former slaves) are actively fighting to free the rest of their people from bondage. I don't think you're going to find much sympathy for slavery there. The Blood Raiders, Sansha's Nation, Angel Cartel, and unaligned criminals all engage in the practice at the expense of their victims. The fact that the Amarr share the practice with criminals (despite their differences) is another point against them.

I'm not saying, nor did I ever imply that slavery is non-existent outside the Empire, but I think one could make a reasonable extrapolation that a character outside of the Empire might have a negative outlook on slavery.

[Merdaneth]

I'm not saying, nor did I ever imply that slavery is non-existent outside the Empire, but I think one could make a reasonable extrapolation that a character outside of the Empire might have a negative outlook on slavery.

I would say most cultures in New Eden would have a very negative outlook on slavery. Therefore the hatred of slavery isn't a position hard to RP for us living in a modern western culture, since we share that outlook. It also isn't hard to play the reverse role: an abusive slaver, since that role also perfectly fits the modern western outlook.

It *is* hard to play a genuinely 'good', non-abusive or humanitarian slaver, since the concept is just so alien to our culture and the subject matter evokes such negative initial visceral responses. You'd not only have to fight your own sense of what is proper, but also need to overcome the biased OOC stereotypes of others (there cannot be good slavers, so its impossible for someone to play a good slaver).

It stands to reason that a functional stable society like the Amarr Empire cannot operate if all of its citizens are immoral depraved people constantly abusing the slave population. Additionally, history provides us with plenty examples that slavery is not and never was universally hated and reviled, and one could have stable progressive societies and practice slavery at the same time.

The stuff gets even harder because among most EVE players, religion, conformism, dogmatism etc. is also very alien to our cultural psyche.

If you cannot OOCly separate our cultural bias against slavery (and religion etc. etc.) from the actual practice, then it would be ideal to play Minmatar characters, and avoid trying to RP believable Amarr characters.

[ArtOfLight]

Oh I agree Gyra, I wasn't trying to assert that you said it was acceptable outside the Empire in New Eden. My response does appear that way, sorry.

My intention was only to show that slavery occurs (or has) in three of the four major nations even though the general populace is thoroughly against it now. Nothing more.

Cia, I was actually referring to the ones that work to raise awareness of the illegal slavery occurring in the Federation, but it was still misunderstood from my part, forgive me on that.

The idea I was trying to point out is that slavery isn't foreign to most, it's considered illegal in three of the four, hated in two of the four. That's all.

EDIT: My response came from misreading the original post by Gyra and mistaking the world culture for nations. I read too much into it from there, I apologize for the confusion.

[Publius Valerius]

This is just....such a disturbing conversation. Comments are made that Amarrians slavers will not be seen as sympathetic characters, and we have people arguing that slavery at its core isn't so bad, and people are just biased by their own world morality. REALLY?!:s

Meh..... but here is the problem.... with this FOX news feeling discussion or FOX News like brainless ilogical/undeductiv discussion about "Cultural Relativism". The problem isnt that RL or my RL morality.....that I personally dont like slavery etc....

When I see so comments "slavery at its core isn't so bad, and people are just biased by their own world morality[/i]. REALLY?!:s" or Gottis brain fart:


My problem is that people..... forget how that shit works.... first you have a topic... than you define Slavery and other improtant subjects..... than you make your theory which you like to test*....than you look for errors in the theory.... than you look in the RL..... I know I know.... "This Publius and his nazi Popper stuff." [1]

Belive me... we can than skip all this crap here.... which shows more about the people on the other site of the monitor than it produce content (Publius looks hellgremlin, Lyn, Gotti etc....).





So back to this thread: Like I mention before I start. I will try to make really ...really, really, really easy example with a discussion which I had with Morwen Lagann. Ehm.....And that I dont forget... the star above:
*this theory which you like to test.... We all know, that all theorys should be logical and deductiv (not like FOX-News like). It means you have a global "law"... the same like in a the deductive-nomological theory (with your explanandum and explans).... so lets say in our fictional case it is:

"Only CCP Primefiction influence players in their RP." (Which means, that a player cant have a influence). Good...

So If someone saids... that my stuff influence players... means it in a logical way... that either I say that my stuff is CCP Primefiction, or it means an logical error on Morwen saids..... So... again... lets see... Morwen said: two times that my stuff influenz other player (here and here).

Lets cheak the his half-ass syllogisms.
* Only CCP Primefiction influence players in their RP.
* Publius stuff is CCP Primefiction.
* Publius stuff infuence a shit load of people. "That affects a ******* huge number of people" (here).

You see what an error he had done.... his end premise was wrong... and it could only survive with a minor premise which says: "Publius stuff is CCP Primefiction." without this minor premise his whole talk was for shit..... thats why when he wrote: "What you, Publius and a bunch of other people write? That isn't canon." (here). Is totally... for ass.... he could also write "I love Hamburger". Why?.... with this premise that I dont write prime fiction havent he and me and wyke no problem at all.... I know.... I know "What?!, Amercia?"

Okay...let me explain again... I know it was really hard. His theory would be:

* Only CCP Primefiction influence players in their RP.
* Publius stuff isnt CCP Primefiction.
* Publius stuff infuence a shit load of people.

You see the brainfart?... Yes...Nice, you people are awesome (on another note thats why I had the explain in a Fight Club style).....


Now.... Im to laty to explain again...so stupid shit to other like here.


So I ask you people... what was your theory? How you define Slavery? And most of all can you people see without my help.... your errors? Plz...Plz...   Plz.... Plz....


I wrote this down.... not because just Im a positivist.... I wrote it, because It will help you people (Publius looks at some of the earlier post) to understand what you people have done without knowing..... like bringing "institution and homosexuality in a correlation together" (which would make rick santorum really happy). Or some other stuff which had me look twice on some topics..... I dont say.... like Gotti: Moroic FOX-News like accusations that some would love slavery in real life.... (here and to lazy to search for the second ones....)
Long story short: I see just: A fat american moron which sould falsify the other fat american moron . This way we wouldnt have a discussion about nice or good... or "Your question is unfair and biased, and only serves to derail the subject." those other brainfarts.


So for know... we have two options:

1.) I come ones a week .... laugh my ass of... like on a scripted realiyt TV series.... where you feel always superior as the people which are in. And I can Roast one or two..... Option one would be great for me.

2.) Start to think logical deductiv about this topic. Come up with an theory and in the end (last step), test this thoery white the information we have in the CCP lore. Option Two would be great for me and you.





P.S. And before the first idiot again... writes "Publius nazi men...nazi... you hear me." I love america and I know alot of service persons.... and love them..... But also think some people are even lazier than me here. And that lets me say... "fat american" ...you can do both....say to a fat heartland american that he is lazy or stupid and love the toops and the country..... I know, I know.... "But dude, dude"
 

[Publius Valerius]

And ltes start again with an really, really, really, really easy theory.

Theory to checking:

"Is Slavery a Institution in the Amarr Empire?"

Now let use "define Slavery and other improtant subjects.."

First institutions.... I would go with North:  North defines institutions as “humanly devised constraints that structure political, economic and social interactions.” Constraints, as North describes, are devised as formal rules (constitutions, laws, property rights) and informal restraints (sanctions, taboos, customs, traditions, code of conduct), which usually contribute to the perpetuation of order and safety within a market or society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglass_North

Now lets see... If we find nice defintion about slavery?

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Publius, I think sometimes it's a good idea to waltz along instead of driving a battleship into a wall.

[Publius Valerius]

Publius, I think sometimes it's a good idea to waltz along instead of driving a battleship into a wall.

I know.... on the other hand... if I wouldnt use battleship mode.... this guy would still think that.... A trillion would be a stupid number for the Amarr Empire.....
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1074129#post1074129

He had learn something.... I know, I know... learning so nazi ..... but still.... some comments are really.... really bad...and in the wrong hands even dangours..... like Seriphyn ones (on another topic).. which meant that in short form (I know.... he just use it for his democracy and federation example, but as a general axiom)....... that institutions would have an impact in, if a human is homosexual... Which is in the hand of Rick Santorum dangours.... if that would be true.... he could say... that "the Republic of the founding fathers wouldnt led to homosexuality.... and that the current Repbulic with its modern institutions would led to homosexuality"..... which is wrong..... Lets say, Im a homosexuell.... I wouldnt be less homosexuell in the USA or in Europe or in the old america.... Im what Im, sorry , but thats the true.....

Its like the brainfart of the Belarus president against our forgein minister (Westerwell), because of his sexuell preferences.


The same counts for here (this topic)..... If I use some of this brainsfart as axiom... I would just come to illogical(inductiv FOX-News like stuff.... sorry guys.