Print

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

[Nicoletta Mithra]

I mean, one might say the the excerpt from Amarr Prime Customs Agency regulations, section 17, subsection 4, paragraph 8:

The following items may only be imported or exported with the express prior approval of the Imperial Underscrivener for Commercial Affairs:

Narcotic substances; handheld firearms; slaver hounds (except as personal property); Mindflood; live insects; ungulates; Class 1 refrigerants and aerosols; forced laborers/personal slaves (or other sapient livestock); animal germ-plasm; biomass of human origin; xenobiotics; walnuts.

Is Scripture, legal Scriptures in an Empire that has no separation between Church and State, no?

Not all laws in the Empire are Scriptural. There's a distinction between civil law and Scriptural law. The latter is less easy to change, the former seems something that would regulate import of walnuts to certain planets - which is not to say that it'd be easy to change either, given how traditional Amarr are.

Anyhow, that said, that the Bible is to be taken literally only arose as an idea with Martin Luther: Most of the time and to most Christians that lived it was clear that biblical texts are to me taken as trying to convey another meaning than the litteral one (though sometimes a litteral meaning was meant to be conveyed atb the same time). If you read the 'minutiae of God's schedule while creating the universe' in the Bible you will become quite aware that they couldn't be meant to be taken literally, as then god would a) crate humankind after creating the animals and b) at the same time create the animals after creating mankind.

So... it's really not the 'conservatives' that insist on literal bible interpretation, it's the nutters. A 'conservative' would instead insist on the metaphorical nature of the Bible, it's spiritual message and the exegetical tradition (handed down within the body of the church) that is the key to that meaning.

Thus, a conservative Christian would have little problem with bringing science into accord with his understanding of the Bible. Again, it is really a pretty old and established (at least since Aquinas) idea of Christianity that God handed down two testaments: The Bible and the book of Nature. I could go on how modern science is indepted as much to the (rather Christian) idea of God ordering nature by laws as it is to the idea of systematized study of nature by the greek philosophers.

And all that said, I'm not sure whether that was the intended implication, but good philosophy is neither evasive nor metaphorical. Of only bad philosophy was meant, then it can equally be bad scientific texts that are opaque. God knows I read more than one of those.

[Vic Van Meter]

I mean, one might say the the excerpt from Amarr Prime Customs Agency regulations, section 17, subsection 4, paragraph 8:

The following items may only be imported or exported with the express prior approval of the Imperial Underscrivener for Commercial Affairs:

Narcotic substances; handheld firearms; slaver hounds (except as personal property); Mindflood; live insects; ungulates; Class 1 refrigerants and aerosols; forced laborers/personal slaves (or other sapient livestock); animal germ-plasm; biomass of human origin; xenobiotics; walnuts.

Is Scripture, legal Scriptures in an Empire that has no separation between Church and State, no?

Not all laws in the Empire are Scriptural. There's a distinction between civil law and Scriptural law. The latter is less easy to change, the former seems something that would regulate import of walnuts to certain planets - which is not to say that it'd be easy to change either, given how traditional Amarr are.

Anyhow, that said, that the Bible is to be taken literally only arose as an idea with Martin Luther: Most of the time and to most Christians that lived it was clear that biblical texts are to me taken as trying to convey another meaning than the litteral one (though sometimes a litteral meaning was meant to be conveyed atb the same time). If you read the 'minutiae of God's schedule while creating the universe' in the Bible you will become quite aware that they couldn't be meant to be taken literally, as then god would a) crate humankind after creating the animals and b) at the same time create the animals after creating mankind.

So... it's really not the 'conservatives' that insist on literal bible interpretation, it's the nutters. A 'conservative' would instead insist on the metaphorical nature of the Bible, it's spiritual message and the exegetical tradition (handed down within the body of the church) that is the key to that meaning.

Thus, a conservative Christian would have little problem with bringing science into accord with his understanding of the Bible. Again, it is really a pretty old and established (at least since Aquinas) idea of Christianity that God handed down two testaments: The Bible and the book of Nature. I could go on how modern science is indepted as much to the (rather Christian) idea of God ordering nature by laws as it is to the idea of systematized study of nature by the greek philosophers.

And all that said, I'm not sure whether that was the intended implication, but good philosophy is neither evasive nor metaphorical. Of only bad philosophy was meant, then it can equally be bad scientific texts that are opaque. God knows I read more than one of those.

My favorite was that you're supposed to take literally that the Earth and all things were created in seven days.  A day is the rotation of the Earth on its axis.  He doesn't get around to gathering stuff into a ball until day two.  Obviously, it's a little more metaphorical than that.  With all the talk of lights and lighting in the first part of Genesis, I keep laughing thinking that God is a contractor trying to explain to some homeowner why it's taking so long to wire the lights.

"Yeah, this might take a couple days.  I mean, you've got light, you can see that.  But you gotta run this light through the firmament between the heavens, or you're not gonna have seasons, years, or days, man.  And I haven't even started putting together any animals yet.  Look.... this might take a week to set up."

But yeah, I'm sure the Amarr has its variety.  Everything from ministers that want the whole world to join hands all the way to grouchy slavers who think the only way to get the universe in order is to enslave every single living person in the cluster and addict them to Vitoc.  They're probably more conservative on whole, comparatively, to the other empires probably because they take such a long view for their plans and they're very careful about how to proceed.

With everyone I've RPed with, the one personality trait I see least in Amarrian characters is impatience.  Maybe they exist and I just never play with them, but impulsiveness seems to be the one thing that's counter-intuitive to the culture at large.

[Arista Shahni]

Impatience?

* Arista Shahni smiles serenely.

[Vic Van Meter]

Impatience?

* Arista Shahni smiles serenely.

*Results may vary

[Louella Dougans]

Scientific progress is "slower" in the Empire, because the Holders, Heirs, and the Emperor are all long lived.

For an example: A variety of wheat is developed, what is the cost of using that wheat ?
It would increase the food production from the farmland, which would increase the power and prestige of the Holder who owns that farmland.
There would be increased demand for phosphates and other fertilisers, a different Holder would benefit from that, increasing their power and prestige.
The run-off of fertilisers would affect the fishing and other aspects of the environment, reducing the prestige of the Holder in the coastal areas.
The increase in population that the food would support, would affect things such as military recruitment by Imperial forces, Imperial taxation, and much more.

So, the new variety of wheat, would alter the balance of power between the planetary Holders, the planet's overall Holder, and also the relationship between other planets in the star system, constellation, region, as well as the relationship with the Imperial authorities.

And the Holders, Heirs and Emperor can see such situations arising within their lifetimes. So they are conservative in implementing some technologies.

The Empire is conservative in implementing things, but not necessarily in researching them.


And with the whole thing about newer works making older works apocryphal, then there is the thing that the Amarr religion places scripture within the context of the time.

If an old text says Pi is 3.14, and a newer text determines that Pi is 3.142, and a more recent one says 3.14159, then it does not mean the older one is apocryphal, as it is entirely righteous within the context of the time.

It may also be inspirational - "The ancient philosophers determined Pi to be 3.14, with only simple tools. Consider the difficulty of that achievement, and reflect on what is then expected of you, with modern tools."

Or something

[Nicoletta Mithra]

The example of Pi gave me the funny thought that somewhere in the scriptures there's a part that is simply noting down Pi to an incredibly accurate precision that'd be printed out quite a few pages. ^^