Dragonlance Dragonlance Philosophy thread

[Paul Farquhar]

No one asked WotC to label it evil. They just asked for it to be changed because of the problematic morality of it.

So, are you, or are you not, labeling divinely endorsed genocide - a core belief of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, "problamatic"?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

So, are you, or are you not, labeling divinely endorsed genocide - a core belief of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, "problamatic"?

I will not answer questions that are obviously written to trap me.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I will not answer questions that are obviously written to trap me.

And the reason it's a trap is the term "problematic" is a term of condemnation. It's fine to say "I have a problem with", and you will find lots of people inside those religions who also say "I have a problem with that teaching". But it's a massive step from that to calling something "problematic". It's pretty much a synonym for "objectively evil".

Irony is that the term "problematic" is itself problematic.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So, are you, or are you not, labeling divinely endorsed genocide - a core belief of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, "problamatic"?

we are not talking about real world religions... we are talking about a game book

 

[GMforPowergamers]

. Key word being "objectively". Alignment in D&D is not supposed to map onto real world morality, whatever you may believe that to be.

the only person trying to make the GAME map to the real world is you. In the game good has meaning and so does evil...

 

[HammerMan]

There IS something worth talking about when it comes to alignment and the deities but nothing that is there to insult monotheistic belief because the change from Mono to polytheism changes too much.
I am not much of a religion scholar (although it appears at least one is in this thread and he doesn’t want to talk about Mormons)but I understand that the three real world religions don’t believe in 18 separate individual deities.

As for the philosophy of dragonlance I think the balance between good and evil is way to hard to pull off in a game maybe in a while written novel (but the DL ones aren’t that either. They are fun though) but the concept needs to be approached with more care the. “Too much good=bad” or the laughable idea that every hood person is secretly evil

I don't understand that last point. Who the heck is calling people bigots?

Maybe you have the person on block or they do but there is a poster saying that becuse you can loosely map real world religions to this fantasy one that any attack on the story any criticism is also an attack on the real world religion and as such is bigotry

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Superman knows he is not good, and therefore tries to do what is right.

what superman stories are you reading?

 

[Umbran]

So, are you, or are you not, labeling divinely endorsed genocide - a core belief of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, "problamatic"?

Mod Note:
It is unclear where you got the idea that challenging people on their positions on real world religion was going to be acceptable.

It is not.

You are done in this conversation.

 

[overgeeked]

Guys, sometimes someone's/some setting's take on morality is just objectively wrong.

You've yet to actually show that in any way. You just keep repeating it without explaining the details. You clearly have an opinion. But can you actually support it with a coherent argument?

You don't need to figure out a comprehensive, proven definition of what good and evil are in order to say that.

You literally do. Without a definition of good or evil you cannot say what is good or evil, therefore you cannot say that an act is good or evil. Which is what you're arguing. This act is evil and wrong. Okay, define evil and show that this act is evil and wrong.

You can just recognize that this one thing is evil and stop feeling the need to defend it for some strange reason.

I don't see many people defending it, only pushing back on your moral absolutism that you keep repeating but refuse to explain or defend or argue for.

 

[overgeeked]

I think Good and Evil are terms objective to the human existence.

Objective things are easily observed and defined. "I know it when I see it" is most often used as a catchall for things the speaker doesn't like. "I don't like it, therefore it's X" where X is this "obvious" thing that "everyone" agrees on when in reality, it's not X, it's not obvious, and not everyone agrees. Like morality.

The possibility of aliens or other animals that don't follow our morality doesn't contradict that. They're not human, so it would be impossible to judge them using our morality, even if it were objective to how we live.

You keep asserting that morality is objective but fail to offer anything to support that. Let me introduce you to another philosophical idea, Hitchen's razor. The short version is: what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.