Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 8498198" data-attributes="member: 42856"><p>While humans in real life have free will, they also are defined by a drive to reproduce and propagate their genes common to most living species. In some creation myth, the creator god of humans told them explicitely to multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. The drive to have children, without removing free will, made it so we actually are attracted sexually and we usually don't kill our children readily. Social structures evolved out of this to ensure the collective care of children. In RPG terms, fantasy humans modeled after that wouldn't be &quot;always reproducers&quot; (some can decide to reject it, other simply can't have children, others will miss the biological opportunity window...) but &quot;inherently reproducers&quot; seems a good depiction, and the half-human half-anything would show that they are indeed conforming to this drive. Now, another creator god could have a drive to kill other people, or to enslave other people, or to eat their brain, or to cut down trees... instead of &quot;reproduce&quot;. Wouldn't they be considered evil? Wouldn't societies who value not upsetting the natural order see the drive to reproduce and consume all natural resource at the risk of causing anthropic change consider humans &quot;inherently evil&quot;?</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Jfdlsjfd, post: 8498198, member: 42856"] While humans in real life have free will, they also are defined by a drive to reproduce and propagate their genes common to most living species. In some creation myth, the creator god of humans told them explicitely to multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. The drive to have children, without removing free will, made it so we actually are attracted sexually and we usually don't kill our children readily. Social structures evolved out of this to ensure the collective care of children. In RPG terms, fantasy humans modeled after that wouldn't be "always reproducers" (some can decide to reject it, other simply can't have children, others will miss the biological opportunity window...) but "inherently reproducers" seems a good depiction, and the half-human half-anything would show that they are indeed conforming to this drive. Now, another creator god could have a drive to kill other people, or to enslave other people, or to eat their brain, or to cut down trees... instead of "reproduce". Wouldn't they be considered evil? Wouldn't societies who value not upsetting the natural order see the drive to reproduce and consume all natural resource at the risk of causing anthropic change consider humans "inherently evil"? [/QUOTE]

Verification