Curse

bigwig · Sep 16, 2006, 07:30 AM // 07:30

Their intentions were solely to insure that *they* weren't destroyed, and they murdered innocent people to save themselves. yeah, real nice guys.

Chris A · Sep 16, 2006, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ethiops

Wouldn't you kill a man, if it was to save the lives of billions?

True Mr. Spock, However many villains have used this to do many atrocious deeds. I'll give the Mursaat A for effort, but i give them a F for trying to kill us. Yes their intention MAY have been noble(though they did still want to over rule all humans anyway), the way they 'exacutued'(pun intended) was totally wrong.

Kane Inverse · Sep 17, 2006, 12:19 AM // 00:19

Well, I think the good/evil thing rolls a few different ways, starting with Glint.

- Glint: She already knew everything that was going to happen. She knew you wouldn't die and knew you would defeat the lich, but she could've said "Don't go there because it will unravel a plot that will mean the downfall of tyria."

But the real problem in the chain starts with the Charr, it goes liek this:

Charr attack Ascalon, Kryta and Orr ---> Vizier Kihbrilon uses Black Magic to decimate Orr and turns himself into the Lich ---> Saul D'Alessio finds White Mantle and they help to defeat Charr ---> Scepter of Orr unearthed in Kryta draws Lich's attention ----> Lich attacks Kryta for Scepter ----> Mursaat fear Lich's power because of Titan threat and kill chosen to keep Door of Komalie closed

And at the same time, coming from Ascalon....

Searing causes your group to move into the Shiverpeaks ---> Move through Shiverpeaks into Kryta ----> Justiciar Habilion asks for your aid to defeat undead forces ---> Your group presses on to aid White Mantle in Maguuma Jungle ---> Shining Blade cross paths with you and explain the Mantle's Plot ---> White Mantle become enemies ---> Shining Blade ally with Vizier Kihbrilon to gain Scepter of Orr ---> Lich unleashes Titans

So if the Vizier had not destroyed Orr, none of this would have happened. However, the titan effegies found in Pre-Searing beyond the wall indicates the Charr existed when the Titans did and they were underlings to them. Maybe the Titans ordered the Charr Army to attack the Human Kingdoms?

AJM · Sep 17, 2006, 02:56 AM // 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ethiops

I dont think that the Mursaat were evil overall. They had good intentions (stopping the release of the Titans...which were evil) But just had a bad way of doing it. Humans werent so different, they've killed billions of other species for the preservation of their own, which is all the Mursaat are doing. If anything humans are eviler than the Mursaat, because the Mursaat are actually protecting all of Tyria, including the humans and such. Wouldn't you kill a man, if it was to save the lives of billions?

That and self preservation, which all organisms do, including humans.

No, the Mursaat used the White Mantle as glorified hunting dogs, and judging from the obscurity of the Seer's race, probably waged a war of genocide against them (the Seers, that is). They had nothing against the blasphemous act of using human souls (which 'belong' to Grenth, and Grenth alone) to fuel the bloodstones, which are supposed to be forbidden to mortals in the first place.

I believe their reasoning for keeping the titans behind the Door of Komalie was PURELY selfish. They did not care about the rest of thw world, so long as they survived, and probably barely even considered the morality of their actions.

Of course, they would not perceive themselves as evil, but by the real world's standards of morality (those that can largely be agreed upon, at least) they are a wicked people.

Now, onto the puppetmaster. I highly doubt it's Glint. She has nothing to gain from any of this, she just sits in her cave with the ability to see everything through all of time to keep her busy. Glint is just a messenger.

Everyone else? Likely puppets, including the characters we all play. I doubt we've seen the real source of this evil, but I think the chaos in the Tombs, FoW, and UW gives a pretty good indicator. Perhaps lesser gods are planning an overthrow of the five powerful deities we know so well. Shaking up the whole mortal world would be a wise move for them, then. While Dwayna and company are busy with that, these other unknown deities prepare to make their move. The gods of Tyria are not infallible (who was that guy who beat Balthazar at what I assume is a game of 'go'?), and lesser gods could challenge them.

Plus there's this talk of a sun god... I haven't heard of one... a sixth god, perhaps? Banished? Exiled? Forgotten? We shall see. Should be fun unraveling it.

lapsus · Sep 17, 2006, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Selfish isnt evil, and better them then me are very good ways to stay alive. how often do you rush in to save another character from a massive mob of enemies? To be honest if you do, good luck with drawing breath. but in being completely honest if you run away and save yourself your acting like the mursaat.

Let humanity die, they werent smart enough to figure it out anyway, so we can keep on breathing. Besides self-centeredness on their part is letting humanity stay alive. Although to some ppl ends dont justify the means. how much would your tune change if you knew unless maybe 50-100 ppl were killed everyone would die? The Mursaat are selfish and mean, but they were prudent enough to not let the titans kill everything.

The reason glint makes a great puppet master is simple, ego. You see the future, you dont die of old age, and your so strong you live in a grain of sand, what do you do for fun? Its very easy to see that Glint likes to manipulate, i.e. the whole flameseeker thing. But she is a dragon and dragons are vain territorial and mean.

Its very easy, to me atleast, to see she had alot to gain by the mursaat, the seers and the titans all dieing. All motivated by simple greed, vanity and pride. Seers can see the future that makes your foresight less useful. The mursaat are so strong they kill all the seers, dont need that walking bomb around. Lastly the titans, they are stronger then you, bigger, and by all accounts stronger. Whats a dragon to do? Have the mursaat play guard and train a powerful group of heroes to kill them and the titans, with your help.

Now with the new god in Nightfall we could see a force working even glint over for gain. With 3 super powers out, and cantha in ruins the lesser gods can make a play for power and "save" the world or destroy it. Saving the world and killing off belief in the 5 originals would effectivly destroy their power. Destroying and ruining everything would make their power worthless or draw them into an open battle.

But thats another thread........
The mursaat although selfish and greedy arnt evil theyr just selfish and greedy.

AJM · Sep 18, 2006, 05:50 AM // 05:50

I don't know what sort of philosophy you live by, but I believe that selfishness and greed are the root of all evil. The devil's toolkit, if you will. Without them, there is really no reason to do anything evil.

Yes, if I had to choose between 100 people dying or everybody dying, I'd go with the former. But what if I had to be one of those 100 people? Would I choose it? I think I would. Would a mursaat? Probably only if other mursaat forced it upon him/her. As far as they are concerned, everyone else is expendable. That is evil by most people's standards.

As for Glint, what would she do if she did accomplish this supposed grand master plan? There really wouldn't be anything more to do than before. Plus things would likely be less interesting with all these problems resolved. She's simply the caretaker of the world. The gods created her for that purpose, and she's been content with that for millenia.

The titans are not more powerful than her. The fact she's still around if you kill her proves that she is not mortal. When killed, she simply comes back.

What makes you think the Seers can actually see into the future? If they could, I think they would have had more success against the Mursaat, who clearly cannot.

Oh, and 3 'superpowers'? I think there's just one. Khilbron and Shiro were it's 'toolkit'. The Charr were probably either another tool, or the impetus for all of this, causing enough chaos to get the ball rolling on our puppetmaster's plan.

As for a possible battle of the gods, I doubt the gods really depend on human worship. They were around a long time before creating humans. This isn't Black & White.

That should make things interesting.

We'll see who's right, if anyone, in October.

Tommy · Sep 18, 2006, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM

I don't know what sort of philosophy you live by, but I believe that selfishness and greed are the root of all evil. The devil's toolkit, if you will. Without them, there is really no reason to do anything evil.

Yes, if I had to choose between 100 people dying or everybody dying, I'd go with the former. But what if I had to be one of those 100 people? Would I choose it? I think I would. Would a mursaat? Probably only if other mursaat forced it upon him/her. As far as they are concerned, everyone else is expendable. That is evil by most people's standards.

As for Glint, what would she do if she did accomplish this supposed grand master plan? There really wouldn't be anything more to do than before. Plus things would likely be less interesting with all these problems resolved. She's simply the caretaker of the world. The gods created her for that purpose, and she's been content with that for millenia.

The titans are not more powerful than her. The fact she's still around if you kill her proves that she is not mortal. When killed, she simply comes back.

What makes you think the Seers can actually see into the future? If they could, I think they would have had more success against the Mursaat, who clearly cannot.

Oh, and 3 'superpowers'? I think there's just one. Khilbron and Shiro were it's 'toolkit'. The Charr were probably either another tool, or the impetus for all of this, causing enough chaos to get the ball rolling on our puppetmaster's plan.

As for a possible battle of the gods, I doubt the gods really depend on human worship. They were around a long time before creating humans. This isn't Black & White.

That should make things interesting.

We'll see who's right, if anyone, in October.

then consider all American are evil

greed and selfishness has nothing to do with evil..

Tommy · Sep 18, 2006, 03:22 PM // 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM

I don't know what sort of philosophy you live by, but I believe that selfishness and greed are the root of all evil. The devil's toolkit, if you will. Without them, there is really no reason to do anything evil.

Yes, if I had to choose between 100 people dying or everybody dying, I'd go with the former. But what if I had to be one of those 100 people? Would I choose it? I think I would. Would a mursaat? Probably only if other mursaat forced it upon him/her. As far as they are concerned, everyone else is expendable. That is evil by most people's standards.

As for Glint, what would she do if she did accomplish this supposed grand master plan? There really wouldn't be anything more to do than before. Plus things would likely be less interesting with all these problems resolved. She's simply the caretaker of the world. The gods created her for that purpose, and she's been content with that for millenia.

The titans are not more powerful than her. The fact she's still around if you kill her proves that she is not mortal. When killed, she simply comes back.

What makes you think the Seers can actually see into the future? If they could, I think they would have had more success against the Mursaat, who clearly cannot.

Oh, and 3 'superpowers'? I think there's just one. Khilbron and Shiro were it's 'toolkit'. The Charr were probably either another tool, or the impetus for all of this, causing enough chaos to get the ball rolling on our puppetmaster's plan.

As for a possible battle of the gods, I doubt the gods really depend on human worship. They were around a long time before creating humans. This isn't Black & White.

That should make things interesting.

We'll see who's right, if anyone, in October.

then consider all American are evil

greed and selfishness have nothing to do with evil.. and we dont care who is dying as us as not the ME!

Addone_Abaddon · Sep 18, 2006, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Oh Noes!!! Spoilers!

AJM · Sep 18, 2006, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy

then consider all American are evil

greed and selfishness have nothing to do with evil.. and we dont care who is dying as us as not the ME!

First off all, that's a bigoted stereotype. Things like that are what keep the world in conflict, and have for the past 6000 years.

Secondly, to say greed and selfishness have nothing to do with evil is supremely naive and foolish. You're saying people don't kill each other over money, power, and other things of value they desire? You're saying that being concerned only for one's own self isn't conducive to stealing, rape, murder, torture, and pretty much and other action with causes pain and suffering to fellow human beings?

lapsus · Sep 19, 2006, 02:30 AM // 02:30

meh, if someone gave me a choice, say he was going to shoot either my self or a random stranger take a guess who just got shot. And yes they do have something to do with evil but to say that they cause all of it isnt smart either. Selfishness is democracy, selfishness is the way all successful economic systems work, greed is simply an extension of that.

Tommy · Sep 19, 2006, 04:01 AM // 04:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapsus

meh, if someone gave me a choice, say he was going to shoot either my self or a random stranger take a guess who just got shot. And yes they do have something to do with evil but to say that they cause all of it isnt smart either. Selfishness is democracy, selfishness is the way all successful economic systems work, greed is simply an extension of that.

/agree
look our value is like this, we make choice that benefits most for the US<<<
we care nobody else but us<nothing personal, what my professors in my college taught me over the years>, we make rational choice that benefit only us. we are greedy and selfish, but we are not evil.If i can choose which side i am backing in Tryai I will stick with my white mantle and mursarrs brothers for sure

we are all greedy and selfish, all human are, that is why we need education, we learn what to take and what not to take. we learn the law and the rules and the way to control our greed and selfishness.that is what made us different than animals. btw do you think the people in middle east care about us? i dont think so. selfish is the nature of human being.

rick1027 · Sep 19, 2006, 04:23 AM // 04:23

this reminds me of a scenario that took place during wwII. winston churchill had much the same decision. his forces had broken the nazi codes and he found out a certain town was going to be attacked. he decided at that time not to bring his forces to protect the town allowing them to be sacrificed so that the nazis wouldnt know their precious code had been broken. he felt he was saving millions by the info that was gotten from decoding the code. this same decision is the one i feel the mursatt were taking and made the same decision. quoted later winston churchill regretted the decision but still would have made the same one.

arcanemacabre · Sep 19, 2006, 05:37 AM // 05:37

First of all, good and evil are completely subjective concepts. I'm sure everyone knows that. However, there is a big difference in real world implications versus a fantasy story. In the real world, there are morality issues, law, burden of proof, and cultural issues that can all blur the lines of what can be called 'good' or 'evil'. Let's leave the real world issues where they belong, out in the real world.

In GW, most if not all of those issues are completely irrelevant. The concept of morality changes with the age of the world, and is much, much different today than say in the middle ages. GW takes place in a time period that reflects the middle ages (or Medieval Times), so if any real world aspects need to be applied, morality should be applied in that context.

Just because it seems 'wrong' or 'evil' to slaughter innocents for what they think is a greater good in our modern times, doesn't mean it did in the past, or in the world of Guild Wars. Using a real world example, the inquisition saw the slaughter (and torture) of many innocents all because of a belief. For the most part, that was not seen as 'evil' then, in fact it was seen as 'good'.

Laws also change with the times, but also differ among cultures, too. We have no idea what the 'laws' of the societies in GW are, so we can't even apply this. Is it wrong to kill? Evil? In today's society, many would say "absolutely", but in GW? We get rewarded often for killing and dishing out our own justice. Cannot be applied.

Burden of proof. What I mean here is the justice system to prove innocence (or 'good') versus guilty (or 'evil'). Related to laws, except this deals with the proof of such wrongdoings. Basically, this is where I will compare the White Mantle to the Nazi's...

The White Mantle effectively follow 'unseen gods'. They do many -seemingly immoral- things (again, subjective, but hang in there) like slaughtering innocents on Bloodstones for these gods they can't even see. They do this because they're -told- that this is for the greater good (possibly, they might just be doing it blindly). Without any proof of this greater good, they just follow orders, don't ask questions, and kill, kill, kill. See a correlation to the Nazi's, there? (yes, I know Hitler did exists, but his ideals didn't, they were just invisible promises and ideals that were romanticized)

Now, I'm not going to straight up say that the Nazi's were evil, or even that Hitler was evil. That conclusion is for you to draw, with your own definition of what is considered 'evil'. I am saying that I think the White Mantle operated like the Nazi's. Which essentially makes the Mursaat, Hitler.

The big difference here between Hitler and the Mursaat is that the Mursaat potentially had a good reason for operating as they did. This could potentially redeem them. However, the White Mantle still operated based on faith of their word, and without mercy, for no apparent reason.

So, in summary, if anyone was the most 'evil', in my opinion, it was the White Mantle. The ironic part is they portrayed themselves as warriors of light (wearing white and acting like paladins). We have learned from our own past, that that is usually a sign of grim intentions (like the crusades, for example).

Wow... I talk(type) a lot...

AJM · Sep 19, 2006, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapsus

meh, if someone gave me a choice, say he was going to shoot either my self or a random stranger take a guess who just got shot. And yes they do have something to do with evil but to say that they cause all of it isnt smart either. Selfishness is democracy, selfishness is the way all successful economic systems work, greed is simply an extension of that.

Selfishness is democracy? I think selfishness would be despotism. The most selfish and powerful rules. Democracy is the least selfish political system active in the world today, because it takes into account the feelings and needs of others. Whether, after taking that into account, it is ignored, is irrelevant. In other systems, it would not be taken into account in the first place.

Also, early economic systems, based on bartering, were fueled by need, not greed. "My crops are failing but my livestock are healthy. I see you have no sheep. I'll give you five sheep for eight bales of grain." No greed there. One guy needs grain to eat. He offers the guy with grain something he has an excess of, but the other guy does not. Of course, greed can come into the equation if they start haggling, but that haggling isn't required, the guy with the grain could just agree and take the sheep. The impetus for the whole deal is the need for a man to get some grain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy

/agree
look our value is like this, we make choice that benefits most for the US<<<
we care nobody else but us<nothing personal, what my professors in my college taught me over the years>, we make rational choice that benefit only us. we are greedy and selfish, but we are not evil.If i can choose which side i am backing in Tryai I will stick with my white mantle and mursarrs brothers for sure

we are all greedy and selfish, all human are, that is why we need education, we learn what to take and what not to take. we learn the law and the rules and the way to control our greed and selfishness.that is what made us different than animals. btw do you think the people in middle east care about us? i dont think so. selfish is the nature of human being.

I don't believe that is the nature of humanity. It is an abberation caused by the fact we use a social system we have not yet evolved for. Our psychology is still set up for living fairly peacefully in little tribes... yet we live in comparitively immense social groups. This promotes greed.

A good example is in our closest relatives, chimps. Jane Goodall found that they are not normally greedy. Violent, yes, but not greedy. They shared amongst themselves and cooperated. Then she gave them a crate of bananas (a fruit native to the americas, not the chimps' native Africa)... they went batshit crazy and started hitting and screaming at each other, and hoarding the bananas, something they would not do in the conditions for which they are psychologically evolved.

I believe greed and selfishness are artificially induced. Back before the dawn of civilization, there was no reason for greed, unless there was a severe drought or famine, and even then, cooperation was usually more conducive to survival. It's hard to hunt or grow crops if you kill everyone else, or if everyone hoards everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick1027

this reminds me of a scenario that took place during wwII. winston churchill had much the same decision. his forces had broken the nazi codes and he found out a certain town was going to be attacked. he decided at that time not to bring his forces to protect the town allowing them to be sacrificed so that the nazis wouldnt know their precious code had been broken. he felt he was saving millions by the info that was gotten from decoding the code. this same decision is the one i feel the mursatt were taking and made the same decision. quoted later winston churchill regretted the decision but still would have made the same one.

Winston Churchill was fighting the Nazis. That was his goal, and I think few will debate that fighting Hitler was a good goal.

The Mursaat are fighting for survival. That is their goal. There goal is not to protect the world, or to stop a great evil, it is to survive, and if they believe that entails murder and genocide, they don't give it a second thought. Put in the same situation described above, they would likely make the same decision, but I doubt it would weigh on their conscience, as it did Churchill's.

They really don't care if they're saving the world in the process of saving themselves. If the titans were not interested in them, they'd simply let them run loose and kill everybody else.

Basically, the Mursaat, while having their own cultural view of morality which says they are good, would be viewed as evil by the people in the GW world.

As for the whole USA thing, every country puts itself before others. The US is simply more bold about it.

lapsus · Sep 20, 2006, 04:07 AM // 04:07

The reason i say selfishness is what makes democracy work is because we want and demand to be heard above other people, selfishly trying to benefit. Selfishness is the reason we still breathe today, the founding fathers acted selfishly by declaring independance. They wanted to have no one over them and to have complete control over their government. that is the definition of selfish action. selfish actions are wars, i dont have to burn this city but ill make it worthless to the enemy, selfishly turning the people in town homeless.

Democracy is the majority rule the opinions of the lesser have no say. With an altered democracy feelings get taken into account and although the majority still wins there are concessions to the weaker.

greed is defined as a desire for something beyond ones needs, i have 5 chickens i need only 5 but want 7. Wanting the extra 2 chickens so you can safely trade for say a cow or cash is greed, you dont need the money or the cow but you want it. that my friend is capitalism pure and simple. Greed is what drives every person to greatness. I want this knowledge, I want to develope this faster carrige so I can be there faster. We dont need cars, we dont need to know astro-physics, we dont need to know how to speak greed and selfishness there. If a town hoardes its crops in early civilization then it will survive, if it fights off its neighbors it survives. that is greed and selfishness.

Darwin said the strong will survive and in a world (GW) that is readily visible. kill to stay alive, kill to grow stronger, kill to make money, its not evil its life.

Pick Me · Sep 20, 2006, 02:38 PM // 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapsus

The reason i say selfishness is what makes democracy work is because we want and demand to be heard above other people, selfishly trying to benefit. Selfishness is the reason we still breathe today, the founding fathers acted selfishly by declaring independance. They wanted to have no one over them and to have complete control over their government. that is the definition of selfish action. selfish actions are wars, i dont have to burn this city but ill make it worthless to the enemy, selfishly turning the people in town homeless.

Democracy is the majority rule the opinions of the lesser have no say. With an altered democracy feelings get taken into account and although the majority still wins there are concessions to the weaker.

greed is defined as a desire for something beyond ones needs, i have 5 chickens i need only 5 but want 7. Wanting the extra 2 chickens so you can safely trade for say a cow or cash is greed, you dont need the money or the cow but you want it. that my friend is capitalism pure and simple. Greed is what drives every person to greatness. I want this knowledge, I want to develope this faster carrige so I can be there faster. We dont need cars, we dont need to know astro-physics, we dont need to know how to speak greed and selfishness there. If a town hoardes its crops in early civilization then it will survive, if it fights off its neighbors it survives. that is greed and selfishness.

Darwin said the strong will survive and in a world (GW) that is readily visible. kill to stay alive, kill to grow stronger, kill to make money, its not evil its life.

I'm sorry, but I must disagree with some of what you just said.

Greed does not drive people to greatness. Your definition of greed would mean if you want/desire anything above food, shelter and clothing (only the most minimal of each) then it you become greedy. In which case, fine, everyone is greedy and it does drive people to greatness.

I think greed is a desire for things in excess of a comfortable life style. A 500k house is comfortable (maybe 600k now adays), but a 10 million dollar house is inexcess. Clothing from Winners is comfortable, but clothing stitched by hand, woven in the finest silk is excessive. If you have 100 million dollars, a wonderful family, a wonderful job, great friends, but you desire to control the entire world from your laz-e-boy in you den, that is greed (way too excessive).

Fighting to defend yourself is not selfishness. If you have 100 k and a begger asks you for 5 cents, and you decide not to give that begger 5 cents because you want to keep it for yourself, that is greed and selfishness.

Technology is not greed nor selfishness. Its an easier way to do things. Basically, its laziness.

Darwin's theory of evolution (only the strong survives) while it is true, it isn't the only theory. I mean lets face it, the flu, the common cold, etc. can potentially kill people with weak immune systems. But people with normal immune systems or even those with strong immune systems will take flu shots, pills, cough syrup, etc. to get rid of their ailment. Dependancy on such medication will reduce their immune system (as their bodies will not produce enough white blood cells to combat foreign invaders). So what you are saying is, people are greedy because they won't lie there and die by the flu, they will laugh in Darwin's face because they use medicine to help their weak immune system combat a stronger force and survive. This would dictate that a weaker defender with the aid of a temporary strong re-enforcement can defeat a stronger foe. Staying alive according to you is greedy. Strange isn't it?

Anyway, enough of my semi-coherent ramblings.

Queenie · Sep 21, 2006, 03:26 AM // 03:26

Mursaat sucked and were easy to kill ^^; provided your armor is infused ;3

johnmedgla · Sep 21, 2006, 04:21 AM // 04:21

People who say the ends can never justiy the means always amuse me, it's sort of a stunted view in which personal conscience overrides and all considerations, sometimes there really IS a greater good which must be served.

Speaking subjectively, as a vastly powerful race who enslaved, exterminated and mainpulated others towards their own ends, yes the Mursaat are text book evil, all they need is a maniacal laugh.

Objectively, and very much more usefully, irrespective of any and all other actions, what the Mursaat did directly prevented the release of the Titans, an Armageddon and so very much the End of The World and EVERYTHING in it. Saints, I say, canonize them immediately!

There's a very real difference between harming the few for the perceived or imaginary benefit, or even way of life of the many, and harming the few to ensure the actual survival of the many. In all but the most cowardly and weasely moral systems, the needs of the many ALWAYS outweigh the needs of the few, distinction between right and wrong is only valuable when considering how many must lose, and how much, and so how many will gain, and how much.

Simplified grossly, if there were some hypothetical (and absurd) situation in which the planet would explode and all life on Earth would end unless we rounded up and killed everyone over 6' 3" tall, you'd better believe I'd be out there with a metre stick and a shotgun.

Coincidentally, Darwin Never said the strong will survive, he wrote, after a fashion, survival of the fittest. By 'fittest,' Darwin did NOT mean those with rippling abs, adonine physiques or superior physical strength. Fittest means quite simply best adapted AND most adaptable.

Darwinism in a nutshell: traits which are beneficial (whatever those traits may be - most evolution has actually been AWAY from superior physical strength) give an advantage to those who possess them, who are therefore more likely to reproduce, and so those beneficial traits show up more and more in the population generation after generation.

Curiously, Darwinism can be used to put forward pretty convincing arguments for both Greed and Altruism.

Irrespective of anything else, the Mursaat act with Perfect logical consistency. Anyone who sees anything illogical in the Mursaat's actions really needs to learn that reason, logic and morality are three fundamentally different things.

Once again - Yay Mursaat! (Honestly, I just like their Hornbows

)

Pick Me · Sep 21, 2006, 06:00 PM // 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmedgla

People who say the ends can never justiy the means always amuse me, it's sort of a stunted view in which personal conscience overrides and all considerations, sometimes there really IS a greater good which must be served.

Speaking subjectively, as a vastly powerful race who enslaved, exterminated and mainpulated others towards their own ends, yes the Mursaat are text book evil, all they need is a maniacal laugh.

Objectively, and very much more usefully, irrespective of any and all other actions, what the Mursaat did directly prevented the release of the Titans, an Armageddon and so very much the End of The World and EVERYTHING in it. Saints, I say, canonize them immediately!

There's a very real difference between harming the few for the perceived or imaginary benefit, or even way of life of the many, and harming the few to ensure the actual survival of the many. In all but the most cowardly and weasely moral systems, the needs of the many ALWAYS outweigh the needs of the few, distinction between right and wrong is only valuable when considering how many must lose, and how much, and so how many will gain, and how much.

Simplified grossly, if there were some hypothetical (and absurd) situation in which the planet would explode and all life on Earth would end unless we rounded up and killed everyone over 6' 3" tall, you'd better believe I'd be out there with a metre stick and a shotgun.

Coincidentally, Darwin Never said the strong will survive, he wrote, after a fashion, survival of the fittest. By 'fittest,' Darwin did NOT mean those with rippling abs, adonine physiques or superior physical strength. Fittest means quite simply best adapted AND most adaptable.

Darwinism in a nutshell: traits which are beneficial (whatever those traits may be - most evolution has actually been AWAY from superior physical strength) give an advantage to those who possess them, who are therefore more likely to reproduce, and so those beneficial traits show up more and more in the population generation after generation.

Curiously, Darwinism can be used to put forward pretty convincing arguments for both Greed and Altruism.

Irrespective of anything else, the Mursaat act with Perfect logical consistency. Anyone who sees anything illogical in the Mursaat's actions really needs to learn that reason, logic and morality are three fundamentally different things.

Once again - Yay Mursaat! (Honestly, I just like their Hornbows

)

Well said.

I do have a couple of questions though. Since the White Mantel were supposed to get the Scepter of Or, did they have orders to keep it? Or did the Mursaat want to use it for their own reasons. Also, that skinny jittery guy that does endup giving you the Scepter, is he a traitor (because he tells you to move quickly with the Scepter), or is he just so naieve that he believes everything that people tell him?