Print

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

[NW_Kohaku]

Well, in Christian lore, Jesus was divine, and he raised the dead. And as for the fantasty tradition aspect, it's a matter of taste, but I always enjoy seeing those things subverted. Randomly generated content is great for that, since it has no expectations except the ones coded in. Also, bear in mind that it's an interaction. That's only a curse if it does curse-like things.

Oh boy, an argument on religious interpretations of the Bible, how Fun! What could possibly go wrong?

Anyway, Jesus the mortal died there, but part of the whole Christian model of life and death revolves around the notion that a portion of the soul is immortal.  This immortal portion of the person is supposed to go to Heaven for eternal life if they are deemed worthy, or be destroyed in the Lake of Fire after torment in Hell if not. 

Hence, like I said in my previous post, a Christian priest would still be violating the order of life and death if they were raising the dead - because the good dead should have the right to enjoy the paradise they have earned, and the damned should not be kept from the punishment they have earned.  It's part of Christianity to believe that the dead belong in one of those two places, and you are going against one of the fundamental principles of Christianity, that worldly matters are not as important as those which enrich your spirit or prepare you for Heaven, if you are raising the dead willy-nilly.

Jesus the divine, the other portion of Jesus, was immortal, and simply came back to life, but ascended into Heaven afterwards, where dead people are supposed to go, at that.

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world."

[Dakk]

>MFW people start arguing over various interpretations of religions doctrines on a game that aims to randomly generate 90% of its content.

Consider this is DF, consider ethics may eventualy be randomly generated. In this spectrum, any interpretation is valid. Some religions might view raising the dead as a holy act, while others may despise it. There's nothing completely wrong or completely right, as ethics is a pretty inconsistent thing, even in the real world. While in the US it is a crime to kill your wife if she cheats on you, its accepted in other countries.

If you're going to start an argument over christian lore, you're doing it to disagree with someone, not to contribute with the thread.

[tfaal]

Well, in Christian lore, Jesus was divine, and he raised the dead. And as for the fantasty tradition aspect, it's a matter of taste, but I always enjoy seeing those things subverted. Randomly generated content is great for that, since it has no expectations except the ones coded in. Also, bear in mind that it's an interaction. That's only a curse if it does curse-like things.

Oh boy, an argument on religious interpretations of the Bible, how Fun! What could possibly go wrong?

Anyway, Jesus the mortal died there, but part of the whole Christian model of life and death revolves around the notion that a portion of the soul is immortal.  This immortal portion of the person is supposed to go to Heaven for eternal life if they are deemed worthy, or be destroyed in the Lake of Fire after torment in Hell if not. 

Hence, like I said in my previous post, a Christian priest would still be violating the order of life and death if they were raising the dead - because the good dead should have the right to enjoy the paradise they have earned, and the damned should not be kept from the punishment they have earned.  It's part of Christianity to believe that the dead belong in one of those two places, and you are going against one of the fundamental principles of Christianity, that worldly matters are not as important as those which enrich your spirit or prepare you for Heaven, if you are raising the dead willy-nilly.

Jesus the divine, the other portion of Jesus, was immortal, and simply came back to life, but ascended into Heaven afterwards, where dead people are supposed to go, at that.

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world."

This is becoming somewhat more specific than the intended scope of my example. Perhaps it would be more to the point for me to say that human induced resurrection is not inherently evil in all popular worldviews.

[monk12]

Well, in Christian lore, Jesus was divine, and he raised the dead. And as for the fantasty tradition aspect, it's a matter of taste, but I always enjoy seeing those things subverted. Randomly generated content is great for that, since it has no expectations except the ones coded in. Also, bear in mind that it's an interaction. That's only a curse if it does curse-like things.

Oh boy, an argument on religious interpretations of the Bible, how Fun! What could possibly go wrong?

Anyway, Jesus the mortal died there, but part of the whole Christian model of life and death revolves around the notion that a portion of the soul is immortal.  This immortal portion of the person is supposed to go to Heaven for eternal life if they are deemed worthy, or be destroyed in the Lake of Fire after torment in Hell if not. 

Hence, like I said in my previous post, a Christian priest would still be violating the order of life and death if they were raising the dead - because the good dead should have the right to enjoy the paradise they have earned, and the damned should not be kept from the punishment they have earned.  It's part of Christianity to believe that the dead belong in one of those two places, and you are going against one of the fundamental principles of Christianity, that worldly matters are not as important as those which enrich your spirit or prepare you for Heaven, if you are raising the dead willy-nilly.

Jesus the divine, the other portion of Jesus, was immortal, and simply came back to life, but ascended into Heaven afterwards, where dead people are supposed to go, at that.

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world."

I do believe he was referring to Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. Although he may get a special exception what with being God and all (er, unless you don't accept the divinity of Christ, in which case maybe he gets a break for being super-cool?)

That said, having life and death play a much bigger role in the motives and doings of people in DF is naturally going to raise some bigger questions those people are themselves asking- is there an afterlife? Is there a god that cares one way or another? If the god(s) do care, what do we have to do to get to the afterlife with the best parties?


EDIT: Ninjas!

[NW_Kohaku]

>MFW people start arguing over various interpretations of religions doctrines on a game that aims to randomly generate 90% of its content.

Consider this is DF, consider ethics may eventualy be randomly generated. In this spectrum, any interpretation is valid. Some religions might view raising the dead as a holy act, while others may despise it.

If you're going to start an argument over christian lore, you're doing it to disagree with someone, not to contribute with the thread.

But that's part of the point of having gods and spheres of death/undeath, isn't it? 

In that last devlog update, Toady talked about how the goddess of death (and disease and blight) was the one that gave out the secrets of necromancy. 

The point I was making, however, was that someone who is supposed to be the opposite of a death god/goddess (life gods/goddesses) (although I do hope that "death" and "undead" don't become associated for very long) shouldn't be doing things exactly the same way that the necromancers do, or else the entire notion of "opposite" gets lost.

Also, currently, we have dwarves that have procedural deities, and what religions they will have is already selected:

Code: [Select]

[RELIGION:PANTHEON]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:FORTRESSES]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:JEWELS]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:METALS]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:MINERALS]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:MOUNTAINS]
[RELIGION_SPHERE:WEALTH]
However, any interpretation is not valid if "Death" spheres means those are gods who give out "raises dead to make zombies" secrets.  There's only one valid interpretation of that - the "Death" sphere means "creates undead".

[tfaal]

That said, having life and death play a much bigger role in the motives and doings of people in DF is naturally going to raise some bigger questions those people are themselves asking- is there an afterlife? Is there a god that cares one way or another? If the god(s) do care, what do we have to do to get to the afterlife with the best parties?

This is a line of speculation I find particularly enjoyable. I believe Toady's canonical response is "all of that's cool, and would ideally be random and optional via worldgen settings."

[Dakk]

Interpretation brah. We don't know anything about toady's definitions on what sphere does what yet, we just know some goddess of death gave one of her worshippers the power to raise the dead.

Its all a matter of interpretation. Just because some death deity gave someone the power to raise the dead, it doesnt mean it might be exclusive to the death sphere. There's nothing stopping a god of life from showing its divity and power over life by raising the dead, or a god of death from despising life so much as to destroy all life he can, including unlife.

We just don't know enough on the matter to go around flailing our arms and taking certain interpretations of the devlog as truth set in stone.

Also, this:

That said, having life and death play a much bigger role in the motives and doings of people in DF is naturally going to raise some bigger questions those people are themselves asking- is there an afterlife? Is there a god that cares one way or another? If the god(s) do care, what do we have to do to get to the afterlife with the best parties?

This is a line of speculation I find particularly enjoyable. I believe Toady's canonical response is "all of that's cool, and would ideally be random and optional via worldgen settings."

[NW_Kohaku]

This is becoming somewhat more specific than the intended scope of my example. Perhaps it would be more to the point for me to say that human induced resurrection is not inherently evil in all popular worldviews.

I was refuting the specific example you listed, however.

I am also not making an association between "raising death" and "evil" (technically, Toady's the one doing that, though...) or with "life" and "good". 

What I am saying, however, is that something that is supposed to be a diametric opposite of the "raising the dead" sphere should not be raising the dead, too. 

If the defining characteristic of two "opposites" are the same, then they aren't opposites at all, are they?

[NW_Kohaku]

Interpretation brah. We don't know anything about toady's definitions on what sphere does what yet, we just know some goddess of death gave one of her worshippers the power to raise the dead.

Its all a matter of interpretation. Just because some death deity gave someone the power to raise the dead, it doesnt mean it might be exclusive to the death sphere. There's nothing stopping a god of life from showing its divity and power over life by raising the dead, or a god of death from despising life so much as to destroy all life he can, including unlife.

We just don't know enough on the matter to go around flailing our arms and taking certain interpretations of the devlog as truth set in stone.

Also, this:

That said, having life and death play a much bigger role in the motives and doings of people in DF is naturally going to raise some bigger questions those people are themselves asking- is there an afterlife? Is there a god that cares one way or another? If the god(s) do care, what do we have to do to get to the afterlife with the best parties?

This is a line of speculation I find particularly enjoyable. I believe Toady's canonical response is "all of that's cool, and would ideally be random and optional via worldgen settings."

And who's just doing something to disagree, again? 

Anyway, no, it's not a matter of interpretation.  You can't "interpret" that 2 + 2 = 5, you're just wrong. 

If Toady codes in that the Death Sphere means that you can raise zombies, then the only valid interpretations of the death sphere are ones that are compatible with raising zombies.

If Toady puts these things in raws or worldgen parameters, then what you're doing is modding the game.  Modding and "interpretations" are two totally different things, however.  If you make [SPEED:0] dwarves, you aren't "interpreting dwarves differently", you're rewriting how the game works, you're making an actual change.

[tfaal]

This is becoming somewhat more specific than the intended scope of my example. Perhaps it would be more to the point for me to say that human induced resurrection is not inherently evil in all popular worldviews.

I was refuting the specific example you listed, however.

I am also not making an association between "raising death" and "evil" (technically, Toady's the one doing that, though...) or with "life" and "good". 

What I am saying, however, is that something that is supposed to be a diametric opposite of the "raising the dead" sphere should not be raising the dead, too. 

If the defining characteristic of two "opposites" are the same, then they aren't opposites at all, are they?

Good points. Still, someone with power over death would quite reasonably have the ability to delay or undo it. Someone with power over life would reasonably be able to extend or restore it. There is a necessary element of overlap and confusion in any interpretation that tries to divide these two things.

To ramble on a bit about the undead we have in the unreleased version, which are not necessarily indicative of future varieties, we can confirm that they do not have souls; the only connection they have to the people who once inhabited their bodies is in the mind of the bereaved. As such, I don't think this can be meaningfully called resurrection. More of an "animate dead bodies" spell, not too different from the ability to animate plants or stone. In that way it's firmly death based. That said, Sweatsucker did engrave her slab with the "secrets of life and death", so it seems Toady may be overlapping them a bit. New-agey and ancient chinesey yin and yang business being as it is, I've no real problem with that.

[EmeraldWind]

This is becoming somewhat more specific than the intended scope of my example. Perhaps it would be more to the point for me to say that human induced resurrection is not inherently evil in all popular worldviews.

I was refuting the specific example you listed, however.

I am also not making an association between "raising death" and "evil" (technically, Toady's the one doing that, though...) or with "life" and "good". 

What I am saying, however, is that something that is supposed to be a diametric opposite of the "raising the dead" sphere should not be raising the dead, too. 

If the defining characteristic of two "opposites" are the same, then they aren't opposites at all, are they?

-1 and 1 are numbers therefore their defining characteristic is the same. However, they are are opposites. Sometimes opposites aren't as different as people like to think. Opposites need some kind of common ground to be considered opposites. Left and Right are horizontal directions. Hot and Cold are temperatures.

Let's say, I want a god of Life and Death. In some cultures, Death and Life are treated as separate existences: a world of the living and the world of the dead. In others, Life and Death are simply part of one another. So shouldn't there be a possibility for a single god with the abilities of both Life and Death Spheres.

While, I think you are correct that a priest of the Life sphere might not want to disrupt the cycle of Life. What if the cycle of Life is already upset for some reason?

Wouldn't a god of Life attempt to fix the balance somehow, even if it required raising a hero that falls to unnatural causes? This doesn't necessarily mean raise them in an undead form, however. More like raise them or restore them before they are embraced by the sphere of Death. Granted, the god of Life in this case might try to have the hero born or select a champion from the living and give them a secret. There are many roads.

If the system is run by a god of both Life and Death spheres... well, stuff like Lazarus and Jesus will happen. 

[Cthulhu]

Perhaps the life secret (a life secret, no one said there could only be one per sphere) could be vanilla immortality and resurrecting the dead, restoring the body and soul, while the death one could be vampiric immortality, requiring stealing souls or bathing in blood, and can't restore the soul.

Or maybe we could just use the game's simple and powerful moddability to make the game we want to play, instead of arguing over easily changeable mechanics.

[NW_Kohaku]

Good points. Still, someone with power over death would quite reasonably have the ability to delay or undo it. Someone with power over life would reasonably be able to extend or restore it. There is a necessary element of overlap and confusion in any interpretation that tries to divide these two things.

However, you are trying to portray these two as opposites, even while making the direct effect be the same...  For a dualism to have meaning, they have to be actual opposing forces. 

"Good versus Evil" makes an internally consistent dualism if you define "Good", and then define "Evil" as anything that is opposing Good.

Something else, like "Heat versus cold" or "healing versus harming" makes a dualism because there is something where you can make a judgement about which is one, and which is the other.

If both "Life" and "Death" have the same actual effect, then you can't tell which doctrine you are actually following, and the dualism is meaningless.

To ramble on a bit about the undead we have in the unreleased version, which are not necessarily indicative of future varieties, we can confirm that they do not have souls; the only connection they have to the people who once inhabited their bodies is in the mind of the bereaved. As such, I don't think this can be meaningfully called resurrection. More of an "animate dead bodies" spell, not too different from the ability to animate plants or stone. In that way it's firmly death based. That said, Sweatsucker did engrave her slab with the "secrets of life and death", so it seems Toady may be overlapping them a bit. New-agey and ancient chinesey yin and yang business being as it is, I've no real problem with that.

Well, "Life and Death" should actually be the opposite of undeath, as far as I'm concerned.  But I've already put that part into writing.

However, something is going into those corpses to power them.  I wonder if there is some sort of Conservation of Spiritual Energy that might go into effect?  An upper limit on the number of ghosts or whatever that can possess a zombie, even in an evil region.

[tfaal]

Perhaps the life secret (a life secret, no one said there could only be one per sphere) could be vanilla immortality and resurrecting the dead, restoring the body and soul, while the death one could be vampiric immortality, requiring stealing souls or bathing in blood, and can't restore the soul.

Or maybe we could just use the game's simple and powerful moddability to make the game we want to play, instead of arguing over easily changeable mechanics.

I would consider it more a friendly discourse, a debate at most. I believe all of you to be wonderful people and I enjoy your opinions on various matters. Given the opportunity I would gladly hug you all.

[NW_Kohaku]

-1 and 1 are numbers therefore their defining characteristic is the same. However, they are are opposites. Sometimes opposites aren't as different as people like to think. Opposites need some kind of common ground to be considered opposites. Left and Right are horizontal directions. Hot and Cold are temperatures.

No, -1 and 1 are positive and negative.  They are opposite in that respect.  Opposites have to be opposite somehow or they aren't opposite.

If we have both "Life" spheres and "Death" spheres do the same thing, then nothing is opposite at all.

Let's say, I want a god of Life and Death. In some cultures, Death and Life are treated as separate existences: a world of the living and the world of the dead. In others, Life and Death are simply part of one another. So shouldn't there be a possibility for a single god with the abilities of both Life and Death Spheres.

While, I think you are correct that a priest of the Life sphere might not want to disrupt the cycle of Life. What if the cycle of Life is already upset for some reason?

Wouldn't a god of Life attempt to fix the balance somehow, even if it required raising a hero that falls to unnatural causes? This doesn't necessarily mean raise them in an undead form, however. More like raise them or restore them before they are embraced by the sphere of Death. Granted, the god of Life in this case might try to have the hero born or select a champion from the living and give them a secret. There are many roads.

If the system is run by a god of both Life and Death spheres... well, stuff like Lazarus and Jesus will happen.

This is, again, confusing the ability to mod the game with something like "different interpretations".

If Toady encodes "Death" to mean "raising the dead", then that's what it means, period. 

If this is something moddable (a big "if"), and you mod the game so that "Life" means zombies, and "Death" means happy bunnies or something, then that's what it means in your particular modded game, period.  But even then, it's what you have defined, it's still not vanilla, and it's still not interpretable in different ways, it's defined.

That's what code does: it defines things, because computers don't deal in "interpretations", they deal in concrete, measurable values.