Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Actually, no. If anything, historical and evolutionary (biological, not social) factors tend to favor "kill or be killed", cheat on spouse because it increases the odds of spreading your genes (as well as spreading STDs), and that those who amass wealth and power tend to live longer than those who don't. The "thou shalt not kill" is a relatively modern concept to try to tame otherwise inherently violent humanity. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife has roots in "if you do you'll piss off her husband and he shall kill you" and "if you screw her you'll catch whatever she has or give her whatever creeping crud you have".

What many religions preach against is what's inherently bad about human nature. The aversion you speak of is society's attempt to curb such nature. It is my view that in the absence of religion, we'd either make up the same rules anyway, or we'd invent a religion so that those in charge of said religion imposed such rules on everyone else by force (as has been done historically, and continues to be done in parts of the world).

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I assumed I wouldn't have to discuss religions positive effect on society.

You have colored that particular arguement with the spirit of another one. Except for the second to last comment, the entire arguement is one you will find in any philosphy class. That is why it was finished with the portion you quoted.

Of course. I knew that that possibility would be mentioned. I would suggest asking thugs in prison if they where wrong to kill, but I have no idea what they would say. I'm sure, though, that many would say they were sorry that they got caught.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Actually, IF when he is talking society he is talking about family then the practices of successful societies will likely be the same ones that allow people to live, have sex, and not be killed.

And I'm not sure I'd agree with you on evolution either. Analogy: It guessed that we lost our hair, because it was attractive to our mates and allowed us to run faster.
So, if girls thought it was cool that we didn't kill anything with a schlong, that would allow us to have more children. Also, many primate females will push out violent males and defend virile but less agressive ones.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I think certain aspects could be the result of evolution. For instance, a small tribe/group where murder was rampant would not survive very long. While selfishness benefits an individual in the short term, in the long run groups with more cooperation would have worked better. Of course, you could argue it was a form of 'society' at work at that point too.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I'd actually rather you discuss the positive effect of mass murder on society. As it's incredibly prevalent in and outside of religion.

Just because something has a positive effect (purely perspective) doesn't mean it's overall impact is equated one way or another.

Even if you could possibly understand the scope of the entirety of something like "Religion" or "Murder".

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Well-reasoned, but slightly flawed. What actually happens is that the aggression is turned outwards towards other tribes. Evolution selects for the violent ones, as it is their genes that tend to survive while the "weak" get killed off by those more violent and capable, be it in a bid for power as to who'll rule the tribe, or when tribes war against one another.

It's true that cooperation is the better strategy, but it almost always takes a back seat to the exercise of sheer unbridled power. (The U.S. invasion of Iraq is the latest example of this, and on the largest possible scale. However noble the intentions may have been, and there's a lot of room to doubt even that, it was still morally wrong.) Historically, people have cooperated only so long as they are getting what they want. If they cannot, or cannot get it fast enough, they'll resort to violence in spite of what that violence may invoke in the way of repercussions. Criminals, dictators, and even some ostensibly-elected officials all do this.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

This sounds like more fun, huh? Well:

Mass murder helps society:
-weak and diseased individuals are often easy targets leading to a better gene pool
-stolen/looted money is a great influx to the economy, especially when the murder is of someone who is rich
-stupid or easily misled people can be encouraged to kill themselves in group "suicides"
-murdering people can benefit murderers that derive pleasure from knowing they are personally powerful
-women are often killed by mass murderer, which helps to restrain population growth

I don't think mass murder is commonplace today, however, it does still exist. Although I might be inclined to agree that it is SURPRISINGLY commonplace.

Negative aspects of religion:
-religion is often used to control people
-religion is often used as an excuse to commit mass murder and ethnic cleansing
-religion is used to emasculate, without surgery, many otherwise strong men
-religion is often used as a cover for cowardice
-religion is often used to exclude perfectly fine individual (self-rightousness)
-religion is often a source of unhealthy pride

As for understanding the scope these practices, I think that it is important to try, but impossible to succeed.

ahh, why'd you skip me Arryn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

It's about time we had some fun in the discussion. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif


It's going on *right now* in the Darfur region of Sudan. As it is in the Congo -- by the same people who commited the atrocities in Rwanda. And on a smaller scale in many other countries.

If religion was a drug in pill form (it's a drug, but of a different sort), the FDA would ban it because of its dangerous side effects.

Feel better now? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

You can always take it to a higher level, and say that a species that on the whole does not kill each other does better. And even if your theory of strong tribes killing weak tribes is true, our aversion to murder would seem a good way of deterring tribe-internal killing.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I don't thingk this is a disagreement. Widespread would seem to be more like in my neighborhood or town. . . Surprisingly commonplace would be like Darfur, Peoria(IL), etc. To me anyway.



Actually, I meant you should attack my society and evolution arguements (thats right I'm callin you out). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif


As for religion as a drug:
Nah, the FDA would make it prescription only, and charge the drug companies millions of dollars for testing and review.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I sincerely wish I could agree, but there are many species for which this is simply not true, and those species do just fine. It all depends on their ecological niche and how well adapted the species is to its environment. The best I can say is that humanity, via evolving sociology, is adapting (albeit very slowly) away from such behavior, and mainly because we've created weapons that are so lethal that we can no longer tolerate our own aggression and stand much of a chance at not becoming extinct. But we've a long ways to go. We are still, AFAIK, the only species that kills its own *for sport*.

Alas, "good" and "flawless" are a ways apart. Also, not to be overly cynical, but the main thing which stops even more killing from taking place is a fear of punishment, not a moral or inherent aversion to the act. If we as rational beings had a greater sense of community and responsibility for self and for others there'd be far fewer problems in the world. Society, through various means (of which religion is the most popular, but arguably not the best or most effective) attempts to correct our innate lack of such values by trying to instill them in us, preferably at a young age. That there is still a significant percentage for which such indoctrination fails only highlights just how ingrained our innate (bestial some say) nature really is.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Why should I attack your arguments? If you fail to make your case then I needn't go through the effort to kick what I consider to be a dead horse. You peddle snake oil, I'm not buying, and I just keep on walking while you attempt to hustle the next mark coming down the road.

Besides, ignoring the absurd is so much more effective. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I'm quite enjoying the discussion with Quantum. He raises *valid* points which merit consideration and debate.

I do admit that your analysis of mass murder was good. Pity you haven't put as much effort into dissecting religion as you did that. heh http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif


Clue: ball's back in your court ...

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

As you say, whether or not such a mechanism is necessary depends on ecological niche and environment. Nonetheless, I can certainly see the advantage of such built in inhibitions for humans (and in fact many social animals).
It is quite obvious, that whatever causes such aversions, they are not flawless. From an evolutionary standpoint, it is not necessary that they be. Even if they stopped less than 50% of tribe-internal killing, it could still be an advantage.

It does become rather hard to say if it is the sociology evolving, or an actual biological change.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I've visited a prison with a couple of my students and talked to a sentenced murderer. I find it likely that he was sorry that he was caught, but his main concern was some kind of regret. He repeatedly told my students that 'it is very easy to kill a human'. He had a son and wanted a new life outside the prison.

Everyone knows that it is wrong to kill, at least in the eyes of society. Most people understand that if you want to live in it you have to abide by its rules. Most people can also relate to or come up with the notion that you might not want to do to others what you yourself do not want them to do to you. Psychopaths perhaps lack this ability, but can still be taught the implications of not following the rules of society.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

So your arguement is that thoug shalt not kill is modern? I think not. I will attack your arguement directly, and not sidestep or divert.

Maybe you misunderstand my arguement. There is nothing missing. Primate females prefer "nicer" males. This is clearly true of humans as well (though you can argue that women don't like wimps, I doubt you would argue that they prefer thugs to real men). So, nicer males make more babies. Even in todays societies, but then today's society has all kinds of things that don't apply to the evolution arguement.

So, do you believe I can't site research about the primates? Or from the evolution scientists? Or do you simply disagree?

Evolution isn't always about making something more powerful, its often about feathers, hair, intelligence, and parenting.

In typical societies families pass their "values" on to most of their children. Therefore, those activities that promote having children, staying out of prison(or not getting killed), and live longer lives will be promoted by SUCCESSFUL families more often than by other families. I dare say that successful families rarely Kill people, because of its inherent danger, rarely steal things (except for very nice things). And so forth. Until it was understood that stealing and such was bad, because it led to massive death (murder in a small society, but generally not in a family). Societies that are violent to other societies are violent amongst families as well.

Social evolution?

It gets rather sticky, however, to argue either one of these points, because you actually have to argue against both. I looked for and found evidence, and professional opinion. AND my arguement has not been significantly altered.

As far as religion goes, you are quite aware that if you disregard "evidence (and I am using the term loosly)," it is rather difficult to even discuss. If you where willing to discuss probability of the few known things it could get us somewhere, but not far enough. I'm sure you've had this arguement many times and where happy to do so again. No one (except God) is ever going to be able to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt the existence of God.

Oh, and you still haven't said anything about my arguements other than that you believe their points aren't valid. So tell me, is it a specific sentence you have trouble with, or just the whole thing.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Thats quite interesting actually. I defends my original preface. More importantly, I want to direct anyone who can't just accept religions as they are to join a philosophy class. Preferably contemporary moral issues. Religion is only as much as you put into it. Oh, and whenever you're in a PHIL class argue with your proffesor whenever you can. I doubt you'll ever win, but maybe, and you'll learn a ton.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

I'm not sure why I'm wading into this, but...

Yup, which is why historians don't consider unsupported oral traditions to be very reliable sources of information.

I think I could prove the existance of Julius Caesar, but it would be a slow process, which would have to start with ideas of what you would consider proof of the existance of any historical person or event... and it would be slow 'cause I'd have to bone up on the philosophy of history, which I don't know. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I'm not sure I'm reading this right... are you saying that you've investigated every claim the Church has made, and found them true to your satisfaction, or that you believe only the ones you've investigated?

And may I assume you're aware that Catholic beliefs have changed over the 1800 or so years that the Church has existed?

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

My hazy understanding is that the real people who practiced blood magic (ie, human sacrifice) believed just that. Apparently, in tropical jungles, people saw new (plant) life rapidly growing on decaying dead things, and concluded that the "life force" was recycled into new living things. I can't remember the intermediate stages of the idea, but the final form was that sacrificing living things -- especially people -- was necessary for the world to keep living.

From that viewpoint, Dom2 has the wrong effects for blood magic. "Real" blood magic should produce effects like nature magic does, but in bursts when blood slaves are sacrificed.

I think the current Dom2 view is essentially that of Christians, in that Mesoamerican and African human sacrificers didn't intend to summon demons or other "unholy" beings, but merely didn't want the sun to go out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

How silly of you! The Aztecs sacrificed blood slaves, and subsequently, the White Man came from an unknown plane of existance and wiped them out. Just like when you cast Summon Horror carelessly.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I assume you're joking around, but that rings a distant bell... Didn't the Aztecs have some prophesy of light-skinned people coming from far away?

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

There's a prophecy for anything that's happened, and a million more for things that didn't. But one would be wise to consult prophecies before performing blood sacrifice.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

You could of just typed "aztec human sacrifice" into your browser . . . I was surprised at the number!

"When the Spaniards under Hernan Cortez gazed upon the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán in Mexico in 1519,they were amazed by the scene before them. There, in the middle of a wide lake was a shimmering city with bright white walls of vast buildings sitting on an island in the middle of a large lake with causeways linked to it. The astonishment of those first Spanish visitors soon turned to horror when they saw the vast scale of ritual sacrifices made by the Aztecs.


Even today, it is hard to comprehend the extent or rationale for this ritual sacrifice. It is estimated that approximately 20,000 people per year were sacrificed by the Aztec royalty. Captives were taken to the top of pyramids where, upon a ritual flat stone table, they had their chests cut upon and their hearts ripped out. Then the bodies of the victims were tossed down the steps of the pyramids. The scene to both the Spaniards of that time and to us today is truly gruesome. But it was not mere thirst for blood that motivated the Aztecs to engage in this mass ritual sacrifice.

Critical to understanding the motivation behind the ritual sacrifices is the concept of ”tonalli,” which means “animating spirit.” The tonalli in humans was believed to be located in the blood, which concentrates in the heart when one becomes frightened. This explains the gods’ hunger for the heart. Without this sacrifice, all motion stops, even the movement of the sun. So when the Aztecs made their sacrifices, as far as they were concerned, they were keeping the sun from halting in its orbit.

...

There was another reason for these ritual sacrifices---cannibalism. After the hearts were removed and the bodies tossed down the temple steps, the limbs were removed and later cooked. As repugnant as cannibalism is to us today, back then to the Aztecs, cooked human bodies were looked upon as great delicacies which explains why only Aztec royalty, not the common people, were allowed to engage in cannibalism. The favorite parts for the Aztecs to munch on were the hands and thighs. The Aztec emperor, Moctezuma, was reported to have been partial to cooked thighs served with tomatoes and chili pepper sauce.

..."

HAPPY EASTER!

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Huh ? Why that ? In Dom2 Unholy is for necromancing nations (it gives reanimation powers), and has nothing to do with Blood (Demonic) magic. Granted, for us judeo-christians Westerners all this fall under "Evil" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/evil.gif but this is no reason to confuse everything http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Most of what I've seen in this thread (believe me, I didn't read the whole thing), seems to be a boiler-plate argument between the Freddie N's and the JC's. If, of course, you ascribe to the merits of "Relativism" you can wash away milleia worth of Dogma and logical thought and claim that everyone is correct, and no one group or faction can be more or less right than any other http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

As for the rules of Holy/Unholy magic.... Raising the dead is not necessarily a nefarious act. It is quite possible that the dead want to come back and serve a/the god. Obviously, those who raise the dead will want their followers to believe it righteous and those who do not will desire their followers to believe it blasphemous (Relativism raises it's ugly head oncemore). It is best to simply consider them empirically rather than using the connotation of their naming. We shall call "Holy" magic "Living" magic and Unholy, "Dead". Races that lean toward "Living" sacred units will be more thematically suited to "Holy" magic while those who tend toward "Dead" units or who require additional (low-rank) troops to flesh out their ranks will be benefitted more by "Unholy" magic.

If we examine the traits of blood magic, we find that it includes no sacred units, 3 types of undead units, and most of it's units have high morale, but are generally lower in population than say...Nature. Thusly, Blood magic finds its niche with "Unholy" because of a) little need for Courage magic, b) no need for Blessings on non-undead units, c) a need for rank-and-file troops (not, really, but one could make an argument), and d) an interest in using the general undead "buff" spells for vampires/bone fiends.

Thus, Blood magic is both empirically and thematically suited for Unholy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

It is all fine and good if some nations have unholy and blood magic. But I don't think they should be linked together any more than say, astral and holy. You argument could just as well be used to say that nations with blood magic should all have earth magic, since they work so well together.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Indeed, but I wansn't stating that the two should be inextricably linked. Simply that nations favoring blood should prefer Unholy to Holy.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Take, thematically, the nation of Marignon in it's blood aspect. The veneration of demons yields a certain "sacred" air to blood magic resulting in a thematic preference to "Holy" which ignores the empirical evidence suggesting that Blood and Holy be disjoint. A sacred demonic unit would help to solidify this relationship...

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

You could give a nation Blood and Unholy, but it may "unbalance" the nation. Unholy adds fodder to the punch of demonic units, so Unholy "fits" better with Demons.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Unholy also allows leadership of demons, while holy does not, strongly indicating a positive relationship.

Re: ArcoBlood Mod Finished
 

Ah yes. I missed that point. By the way... (Back on topic after 11 pages of tangents) I thought the mod was interesting, but a little vaporous--I'd like to see more stuff. Maybe a different National spell or something to replace the Heart Companions....