Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When was the exact moment that the Technocratcy began to be written as less "evil"?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Ramnesis View Post

    Not really. If the Lysenko’s methods worked the Technocracy would have won already. Unfortunately for them, human reaction and belief is difficult to predict.
    Yes - Convention Book: Progenitors even talks about how during the Industrial Revolution they planned to simultaneously launch a series of technologies that would deal with the pollution brought about by industrialisation ... but the Sleepers just refused to buy into it.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Czernobog View Post

      Yes - Convention Book: Progenitors even talks about how during the Industrial Revolution they planned to simultaneously launch a series of technologies that would deal with the pollution brought about by industrialisation ... but the Sleepers just refused to buy into it.
      Is it in revised?

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Accelerator View Post
        Is it in revised?
        Yes, it is, of course.

        Comment


        • #94
          Not doubting you; but could you provide a page reference?


          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
            Not doubting you; but could you provide a page reference?
            P. 41, the sidebar about the micro-methodologies, "Preservationists" writeup.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Czernobog View Post

              P. 41, the sidebar about the micro-methodologies, "Preservationists" writeup.
              Thank you. I have ADHD, so it's a struggle for me to read through these long books.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
                I'll note, in your defense, that you're not the only one who would prefer the Nephandi to have some sort of redeeming element buried somewhere in their philosophy.
                No 'redeeming element'. That necessarily involves an external judgment imposed upon their system of beliefs. The Nephandi have to be as right as anyone else, if we're going to take seriously what Mage claims to be about.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Melendwyr View Post

                  No 'redeeming element'. That necessarily involves an external judgment imposed upon their system of beliefs. The Nephandi have to be as right as anyone else, if we're going to take seriously what Mage claims to be about.

                  Well hold on, there is no promise that everyone is equally right. Yes in Mage metaphysics belief reshapes reality but surprisingly there isn't any evidence (either for or against) that belief reshapes morality. Indeed, how would anyone even be able to tell? So it's not so much that all the factions are equally right, it's more that all the factions are convinced that they are right but don't actually know. In that regards the Nephandi are very much certain of their views (we think).


                  Mage: The Ice-ension: An Epic Game of Reality on the Rink

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    If, as the game suggests, reality is truly subjective in the Mage universe, the only constraint on anything is the collective opinion of the totality of avatars. That's the only objective truth. Everything else is a construct - or, depending on how we look at it, a lie or a made-truth.

                    Moral standards are no more real and objective than physical laws - most of which are mutable by mages on Earth, practically all of which seem to be mutable by mages in the spirit worlds. It may not be the case that mages can truly alter logic, but they certainly seem to able to determine which axioms apply to observable phenomena.

                    WW was never very good at using themes that arose from mechanics or basic setting principles - it always tried to impose them on the system arbitrarily. As opposed to the works of individual authors - Jenna Moran (formerly R. Borgstrom), who has a background in math and is a brilliant designer who makes games that naturally produce certain kinds of behavior in the players. WW's moral themes were always tacked on, and never was that more the case than with Mage.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Melendwyr View Post
                      If, as the game suggests, reality is truly subjective in the Mage universe, the only constraint on anything is the collective opinion of the totality of avatars. That's the only objective truth. Everything else is a construct - or, depending on how we look at it, a lie or a made-truth.
                      If you wish to play it that way, go for it! But even Mage as written isn't that simplistic. MRev described Cosmological Constants and Historical Inertia; M20 has Earthly Foundations. As a result of these, you can't even say that “reality is truly subjective” is an objective truth of the setting. At the very least, there are some things that are remarkably resistant to being shaped even by the Consensus. There are things that exist independent of the Consensus, and there are things that exist despite the Consensus.


                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Melendwyr View Post
                        If, as the game suggests, reality is truly subjective in the Mage universe, the only constraint on anything is the collective opinion of the totality of avatars. That's the only objective truth. Everything else is a construct
                        I'll leave you a philosophical conundrum

                        If the only constraint on anything it's the collective opinion of the totality of avatars.

                        And then the collective of Avatars decide Nephandi goals are evil.

                        How would this be different from the Word of God (aka, objective truth) saying they're evil?

                        As I see it, only an opinion outside this opinion could judge them as "not evil" (btw, admiting that it's tanamount to admit the Consensus doesn't create truth, as there can be other truths outside of it) - and even then, this opinion would be delusional unless it can change the Avatar collective's opinion

                        Note that, as others and myself have said, Mage never goes so far. There are many canon ways of interpreting the reach of the Consensus as less than absolute - but it's entertaining to think
                        Last edited by Aleph; 01-09-2021, 07:41 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Melendwyr View Post
                          If, as the game suggests, reality is truly subjective in the Mage universe, the only constraint on anything is the collective opinion of the totality of avatars. That's the only objective truth. Everything else is a construct - or, depending on how we look at it, a lie or a made-truth.
                          While I agree that at first glance Mage does present all of reality as subjective and that you can play the game that way, that doesn't have to be the case and indeed the general indication is it isn't.

                          As Dataweaver says, there are things (cosmological constants) that are either beyond the reach of the Consensus or so deeply embedded as to seem beyond reach. I will freely admit that I prefer to use CCs as little as possible, but the very fact that they are in the game indicates that reality is more complicated than pure subjectivity.

                          Furthermore, no one acts like they are wrong but can make themselves right if they convince enough people. The Traditions and the Technocracy both think they are doing the right things. They understand that they still have to convince society at large, of course, but they are not waiting until that time to call their actions moral. Nor are they magically changing morality in their area or using horizon realms to create small pockets where they are right*. They either think of morality as a social construct or as an objective yardstick to be appealed to, neither of which is a metaphysical morality controlled by the consensus.

                          *They may magically enforce consequences for certain behaviors, but that's different.


                          Mage: The Ice-ension: An Epic Game of Reality on the Rink

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X