|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:07 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:24 am
|
|
|
|
reagun ban Starlock Any action is a change, and change neccessitates generation and destruction in some way or form. What one labels as "good" and "bad" depends on perspective. Question becomes, then, which perspective to use? In the end, perhaps the only one you can truly use is your own, eh? Silly me. I should have taken the rapists point of view into consideration. Or the pederast. What the ******** was I thinking. I'm such a b*****d.
No, you're not a b*****d. It's interesting to consider the criminal's view point to understand WHY they act as they do. Note, I'm not making an assessment here on whether or not these actions are moral or immoral (as it should be damned common sense that they're considered immoral by the common human moral consensus and really shouldn't need mentioning); mostly making commentary on point of view and the subjective nature of moral attributions. There are some relatively universal moral paradigms that exist throughout all human cultures, so it can be well-argued that there are some aspects of morality that are not subjective... provided you're talking exclusively about human morality and not nonhuman applications thereof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:27 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:29 am
|
|
|
|
reagun ban Starlock No, you're not a b*****d. It's interesting to consider the criminal's view point to understand WHY they act as they do. Note, I'm not making an assessment here on whether or not these actions are moral or immoral (as it should be damned common sense that they're considered immoral by the common human moral consensus and really shouldn't need mentioning); mostly making commentary on point of view and the subjective nature of moral attributions. You should be more careful with what you say then.
True, of course. Text communication can be troublesome... 'tis good to ask for clarification when things are unclear.
You, explicitly, What one labels as "good" and "bad" depends on perspective. This is wrong. As it happens, there are Gods of each of these things.
I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying here... are you saying that because there are deities who are specifically ruling over "good" and "bad" domains that they exist and that's that (ie, there can absolutely be nothing good about the bad or bad about the good deity)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:50 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:13 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:16 am
|
|
|
|
reagun ban Starlock I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying here... are you saying that because there are deities who are specifically ruling over "good" and "bad" domains that they exist and that's that (ie, there can absolutely be nothing good about the bad or bad about the good deity)? That would be the standard Celtic line. There are evil gods.
I see (likes the fact that Celtic pantheon has evil gods).... heheh. Then I suppose whether you view them as explicity evil depends on the human interpretation. If the system is meant to be interpreted in such a way that the deity is explicity evil, it should be taken that way by practitioners. I still wonder, though, if embodying evil neccessitates the deity's consequences being evil...
Evil Deity: "I shall smite all first born children!!"
The Fates: (chuckle in the shadows as the evil deity slays the firstborn child who was fated to be the next Hitler)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:17 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:22 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:36 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:13 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:46 pm
|
|
|
|
Elfin Brill Dragon_Witch_Woman I belive Kali's necklace of skulls came from the demon she battled to save the world. Thats also why she's covered in blood. Every time this demon's blood hit the ground, 1000 more demons were born. She stopped that by licking up the blood. The skulls are the wisdom/letters, the 51 letters of the sacred script. ( the wisdom is in the head) The demon story says more about her red tongue sticking out then her necklace. Interresting deity indeed. 3nodding [Cite]Scroll to the "populair forms of Kali"
Thanks. I remember she's normaly seen holding a severed head, a sword, a bowl, and I forget the whats in her last hand. The severed head is the main head of the demon she fought. I thought the skulls were his other heads. xd . I've seen the necklace as skulls or as heads.
*edit* her last hand his holding a trident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:21 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Nuri I was thinking hubris is the one that Tea was thinking of (sorry, no computer where I was staying). Basically, hubris is a wanton act of violence or pride against a God. When Archane compared herself to a God, she was committing hubris. When she insulted Athene even more, she was punished. I was trying to think of the overarching code that Hubris falls under. Then it probably is eusebeia. Sound right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|