|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I don't know whether their motivations are noble or if they simply want to preserve themselves (I imagine some of each), but there is a group calling itself Virtuous Pedophiles which has received some publicity in recent years. The members commit to doing no harm to children.
I guess it depends what that entails. I do not believe Israel will ever come clean about its open secret nuclear weapons and its chemical weapons (they have used white phosphorus; it's safe to assume they have an arsenal of ugly stuff), allow inspections, give up the stuff that no country should have, sign the NPT like Iran has.
I was thinking of the episode in which Athena buffs Diomedes, who then slashes Aphrodite's arm. That seems to support the idea that many of the Greek gods are comparable in power to PF demigods.
Actually the solution may be unification. And all this child abduction has done is convince isis that killing kids on each side can be used to end all future peace and both factions are prepared to attack each other at the drop of a Lego brick.
Well, people seemingly always find reasons for Us/Them, but on the other hand people always have sex, too. Since the Semitic peoples, who have very recent common ancestors, obviously live cheek by jowl, I guess my hope is that interbreeding will gradually efface the distinctions (real or perceived) between peoples.
I was surprised that Dragonlance is right out there, since it has been in the basement for so long, but that strategy makes sense. Classic settings, classic stories, and classic characters are the big chips they have in their competition with Pathfinder (and other games, aside from a few iconic monsters).
Andrew R wrote:
What about wealth "a man" doesn't earn? What about wealth "a man" has unfair advantages competing for?
An 18 ability score was special, though. It doesn't mean anything any more. I never liked the power up that came with 3E, the routine ability score increases. It's possible to go too far in lifting restrictions.
I think context is required. Cleaning out a poor person's few coppers for fun or just to be sadistic is evil. Stealing trifles from a rich person to feed a starving kid, not so much. I think there is a difference in kind there, not just a difference in degree.
OQ, depends how you define altruism. In my experience, people who like Ayn Rand often resort to caricatures of altruism or straw men (e.g., altruism means destroying yourself). But it is a marvelously complex phenomenon that primatologists, evolutionary biologists, and psychologists have devoted many lifetimes to studying, fruitfully I think.
I wonder if this issue is partly baggage because ancient Greek had rough breathing and smooth breathing for words which began with vowels. History, for example, which comes nearly unchanged from Greek, and hippos (horse) start with rough breathing iota in Greek, which we write as initial h, while words like icthus (ichthys, fish) have smooth breathing.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I think the government should do its best to balance competing rights, in this case your right to do what you want vs other people's rights to life and safety. I don't think anything you named is usefully analogous to guns.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Trust, respect, and personal responsibility aren't really the issue. The issue is that human beings have accidents, make poor decisions, have distorted thoughts, become overemotional, act hastily. And that weapons often act as an accelerant. They often potentiate violence (make bad situations worse). I'm not convinced by arguments which are essentially,"If humans would be perfectly rational everything would be OK. Therefore, guns are not the problem."
As far as I know "What a piece of work is a man..." is not ironic, but I have a hard time reconciling it with the intelligence of the writer and the character.
I value Lovecraft as a major non-anthropocentric writer. As much as I like the Western canon (and I really do like it), the Western tradition is almost fetishistically anthropocentric. So it's a big deal, and very refreshing, when this enormously influential writer comes along whose work says that humans are not the center of the universe. We're not the best, the most powerful, the most interesting. There might be godlike entities out there, but unlike the deities of most religions they aren't much interested in humans. In fact, they don't necessarily care about us at all.
Maybe Juggs can be on its own shelf.
Especially for men. Also, in the US treatment for mental illness is upside down: the people who need it most often don't get it, while many people who really don't need an antidepressant are taking one, and it's often prescribed by a doctor who doesn't have specialized training in diagnosing and treating mental and behavioral illness.
How evil stealing is really depends on how much you hurt a person. Stealing from corporations and rich folk doesn't really hurt them. It's more of an ethically quandary. It's when you steal from someone that is really going to suffer from it that it gets evil.
You also have to consider the emotional experience of the victims. Being threatened with grievous bodily harm or death is terrifying and traumatic. Inflicting that on someone is evil, even if you don't inflict physical injury on the person.
Maybe that just left the strongest impression on you. I don't think I was the only fan who, by the end of the run, was groaning over yet another Ferengi comic relief, conservative/capitalist send-up episode.
Well said. I see Rynjin's side, but some people are being aggressively opinionated. Maybe the stars are right and some country gentlemen and their servant save the world (where some Dunedain hardbutts might have failed).
Getting off-topic, but that's not a balance issue. The idea behind chess variants is to restore the primacy of analytical and creative problem-solving in a game which has become to a great extent a contest of preparation and memorization, even at the club level. Fortunately the draw death of chess doesn't appear imminent, even now. At the top level, one now sees more "suboptimal" openings, played to avoid heavily traveled theoretical lines.
Regarding combat formation: it could work if there are strongmen bullying the troops, or perhaps bullying and providing incentives. You may find organization and cooperation distasteful, but if you have a modicum of intelligence you might stomach it because you realize that you can get more out of your raping and pillaging that way.
Jessica Price wrote:
And you avoid misidentifying the person's sex. Also, for all you know the person you are talking to might be a transsexual. It's taking us a while as a race to catch up to the fact that human sex isn't binary.
Sorry if it came across disrespectfully, not at all my intention. Just meant to say matter-of-factly that the city is in dire straits. I was horrified to read about the DIA.
Andrew R wrote:
The media is/are profit-seeking corporate capitalists. They will say whatever they think will make money. The idea that they push a liberal agenda is bunk.
I thought he would be convicted of manslaughter but I am confident the jury made the right decision. I consider Zimmerman responsible but ultimately the prosecution simply didn't have enough evidence to fill in the blanks and create a narrative. There's a blank between the time Zimmerman got out of the car and time he killed Trayvon, and we have no way of knowing what happened during it. Did he shoot him in cold blood? Maybe. Did Trayvon attack him? Maybe. It's clear that there were inconsistencies in Zimmerman's story, even outright lies. But still there wasn't enough evidence to put him away.