Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Welcome to BZPower!

Hi there, while we hope you enjoy browsing through the site, there's a lot more you can do if you register. The process is easy and you can use your Google, Facebook, or Twitter account to make it even faster. Some perks of joining include:
  • Create your own topics, participate in existing discussions, and vote in polls
  • Show off your creations, stories, art, music, and movies and play member and staff-run games
  • Enter contests to win free LEGO sets and other prizes, and vote to decide the winners
  • Participate in raffles, including exclusive raffles for new members, and win free LEGO sets
  • Send private messages to other members
  • Organize with other members to attend or send your MOCs to LEGO fan events all over the world
  • Much, much more!
Enjoy your visit!

Posted Image


Click to ToggleParticipate in our raffle!

Hi, Guest. Come take a look and participate in our raffle:

Chima 2014 Big Raffle
Chima 2014 New Member Raffle
Chima 2014 Little Raffle





Photo

Good And Evil: Points Of View?

Posted by bonesiii , Sep 20 2007 · 433 views

Bionicle


Okay, this is partly just an excuse to have a blog entry. tongue.gif But also I wanted to put my answer to the above question here in full. Gravitan asked me about this in my profile comments but the answer looks way too convoluted split up into 400 char segments. tongue.gif

But in all seriousness, this is a topic many have brought up, and it is VERY relevant to Bionicle -- the answer is one of the core lessons that Bionicle teaches. On a Bionicle fansite, it's pretty important that we recognize that.

So here we go:

Are "Good" and "Evil" just points of view?

QUOTE(Gravitan)
Can it truly be said that good and evil are not points of view?
A (very long tongue.gif) post of yours caused me to wonder about this.


My answer:

Gravitan -- it is possible to "redefine" good and evil so that those words are subjective. It's true that some people and cultures have used the words to just mean "my side" and "my enemy's side".

However: the words themselves also mean some real things that have clear differences, and those differences are NOT just points of view.

"Good" people are more self-LESS than selfish, wanting the good of others above themselves. Nobody's perfect at this of course, but that's the idea. Good guys don't backstab each other (or rather, when they do, they aren't being good).

Evil is self-ISH. Evil beings want everything for themselves above others. They use minions and allies when they need them, but as soon as they don't, they will backstab the heck out of 'em. Again, most of us have aspects of this in us, which is why humans aren't truly one or the other. But it's, again, the basic idea of evil.

The above differences simply are not arguable. What's arguable is whether the uses of the word "evil" and "good" are always used accurately. Often they aren't. But that doesn't change the fact that good and evil mean real things.

So to say "good and evil are just points of view" is simply false, because it blindly rules out the correct uses of the words.

In technical logical terms, t's an Equivocation Fallacy -- it's based on noticing that sometimes good and evil ARE used as points of view, but then equivocating those meanings of "good and evil" for the absolute ones, and trying to say "this proves ALL meanings of good and evil are points of view." It is logically invalid, so it is impossible for it to be true.

What about in Bionicle?

Bionicle has shown this time and time again, with it being a major theme of 2004, 2005, and 2006 (especially 2006). It's also been strongly implied from the beginning, from the moment the legends told us of a "brother" of the Great Spirit, Makuta, who betrayed Mata Nui and cast him into a slumber (one that we now know is killing Mata Nui) and tried to conquer for his own selfish gain.

Bionicle fans really should recognize this basic truth -- evil is selfish. Good is not.

However, it is muddled in real life, and thus it makes sense that not ALL "good" and "evil" are really good and evil. The Bohrok were marketed as the "bad guys" and the Toa fought them. But the Toa found out that the Bohrok weren't actually evil. Just not designed to handle people living where they are commanded to Clean It All with capital letters.

There's an important lesson there too -- the Bohrok weren't doing that for selfish reasons, but as part of what's needed to wake up Mata Nui, thus for the good of all. So it's important to try not to use the words "good" and "evil" just to mean "my side and theirs". Using those words as points of view is wrong.

So pointing it out when it happens is certainly a good thing, and it would be just as wrong to sit here and tell you that "good" is always truly good. Not true.


In different ways, all of Bionicle since has been reliving those two themes in different ways.

The Piraka were the pinnacle of a clear example of how evil stabs itself in the back. The Piraka stand for betrayal with a grin.

The Toa Nuva facing off against the Matoran Resistance in the books was another example like the Bohrok, as was the Piraka's pretending to be Toa. The Matoran were fooled into confusing truly evil beings, Piraka, for good guys (called "naivete"), and once they realized this, they were fooled into the opposite, confusing good guys for evil beings (called "cynicism").


This year, what we're exploring is a different form of evil. One that is (for now) united in purpose, and not backstabbing left and right. It could be mistaken that the Barraki are not as evil as the Piraka. But the Barraki are willing to kill on a whim for their own selfish desires -- they are only on each others' side because it is necessary at the moment, and they're a heck of a lot smarter than the Piraka. They know they have to work together to achieve their selfish goals. They know from experience -- it was how they were originally designed to work back when they were good guys (unlike the Piraka).

But watch how they act towards each other. Do they seem like best friends? Carapar hates Takadox, Pridak threatens to rip arms off to get his way, Ehlek zaps whoever annoys him... Etc. Total betrayal isn't all that makes you evil. It's the little things too -- you know the old saying "if you can't be trusted with the little things, you can't be trusted with the big things either."

Compare it to how the Toa act towards each other. They tease jokingly, they encourage each other -- but sometimes they also mess up, insulting each other, and in Vakama's case betraying each other. But what did that make Vakama? A bad guy. It's clear that the Toa do what they do self-LESS-ly, even to the point of risking their very lives (or losing them) to protect the Matoran and each other (Case in point, Lhikan, though he was a Turaga, heh).

Bionicle clearly shows that good and evil are NOT merely points of view. smile.gif

Not only that, but it shows that good is a much better way of life. When neither side has really won, it's muddled and unclear: Which is better? Evil often uses the mistakes of good guys to say "See? See? They're just as bad -- try life our way!"

But when you see one side or the other winning, you see the truth.

When the Piraka take over Voya Nui, Matoran die left and right because the Piraka really don't care. There is pain and horror and anything but peace.

When the Toa Mata defeated Makuta, the Bahrag, when they defeated the Rahkshi, when there were, for the moment, no selfish enemies of power making life miserable, the Matoran had peace. They enjoyed their jobs because they did them willingly for the benefit of others, they were in practically no danger of death or pain, they could see right before their eyes the fact that selflessness produces better results, ironically, for the "self". For each "self."


Back to the Basics

Think about it: If two beings work together to ensure they each have the best life possible, they are both happy and well off. By itself, makes a lousy story, but a great life. smile.gif

If one being insults, steals from, attacks, wars against, works against the other being, both beings are filled with negatives. The one with anger and hatred, which inhrerently torment the very person who uses them, and the other with pain and suffering, even if he cowers and obeys order. If he fights back in hatred, both simply have equal amounts of hatred and pain, and both are miserable.

Even if one kills the other and has no conscience left at all, heshe has nobody to help them out with chores, enjoy sports with, etc. If the other fights back, not in hatred, but from good motives, he won't suffer the torment of hatred, and won't suffer as much pain if he stops the evil one from attacking, but will always be scarred at least a little because he too has no companion to enjoy life with.



In a nutshell, that is all stories. Just the existence of "conflict stories" should be enough to prove to us that good and evil mean different things -- without conflict there is no story, but without the possibility of good and peace, there also is no story.



Conclusion

The answer is yes and no. Sometimes good and evil are points of view, but there are absolute definitions of both words, based on selflessness and selfishness. Good is self-LESS, looking out for others above the self. Evil is self-ISH, looking out for the self above others. To confuse the former definitions of these words with the latter is an equivocation fallacy, which is invalid and logically impossible.

True good and evil mean very real things that are opposite and mutually exclusive: evil is deceptive, seeming to bring benefit for the self but ruining the self in the process, while good truly brings benefit not just for others, but also for the self as a bonus.

  • 0



Photo
Spoony Bard
Sep 20 2007 01:50 PM
"Right and wrong are not what seperate us from our enemies. It's our different standpoints, our perspectives that seperate us. Both sides blame one another. There's no good or bad side. Just two sides holding different views." - Squall Leonhart, Final Fantasy VIII

-Omi
    • 0
I knew you'd say that, Omi. tongue.gif
    • 0
Photo
cags//cunninghat/2x2b
Sep 20 2007 04:17 PM
And he's right, too.


~D
    • 0
Photo
EXTREEEEEME!!!
Sep 20 2007 04:21 PM
I've actually been thinking about this exact thing, recently, and I thought of that exact quote that Omi posted.
    • 0
Lol, I never knew you'd post a whole entry on account of me. tongue.gif

Then again, considering how fast you type, perhaps this wasn't as much work for you as one might think. j/k tongue.gif

This answers the question quite nicely, IMO. happy.gif

Thanks very much. I am certain that I am not the only one who will find this informative. smile.gif


(I still feel special though. tongue.gif )
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 20 2007 04:50 PM
I envy you Grav Bones made a whole Blog Entry for you tongue.gif Anyway I agree that it is a yes and no answer butI have to comment on the Bohrok here. They are neither Good nor Evil they are Neutral and this is where you disapointed me Bones you forgot about that catagory and still mentioned the Bohrok. The Bohrok are Mechanical being who are programmed to be controled by Krana. The Krana are organic things that aer controlled by two "beings" called Bahrag. The Bahrag are only taking orders from the Great Spirit (or was it GBs or OoMN?). Anyway in this chain the Bohrak are at the bottom as they are mechanical and cannot think for themselves. Neither can the Krana or the Bahrag can think for themselves as they are taking orders. If they are controlled by Evil beings are they trully evil? If they are controlled by Good beings are they trully good? They are neither as they are unthinkingly doing what they are told. Well that's all I have to say anyway Bones do you think you could next time do a entry for me? tongue.gif
    • 0
QUOTE(Ca'gerrin @ Sep 20 2007, 05:17 PM)
And he's right, too.


~D

Who, Omi? Or me? Because everything I said clearly shows why the character Omi quoted is incorrect. smile.gif Unless, of course, the sides in FF actually were using the first definition of "good" and "evil" that I mentioned. So not sure what you meant -- could you elaborate?

QUOTE(The keyblade master of light @ Sep 20 2007, 05:21 PM)
I've actually been thinking about this exact thing, recently, and I thought of that exact quote that Omi posted.

Yeah, it's been in Omi's sig before. Or something similar or the like... smile.gif


QUOTE(Gravitan @ Sep 20 2007, 05:26 PM)
Lol, I never knew you'd post a whole entry on account of me. tongue.gif

Then again, considering how fast you type, perhaps this wasn't as much work for you as one might think. j/k tongue.gif

This answers the question quite nicely, IMO. happy.gif

Thanks very much. I am certain that I am not the only one who will find this informative. smile.gif


(I still feel special though. tongue.gif )

Took about two hours. Plus another half hour to make the obligatory banner. tongue.gif

And glad I could be of service. happy.gif


QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Sep 20 2007, 05:50 PM)
I envy you Grav Bones made a whole Blog Entry for you tongue.gif Anyway I agree that it is a yes and no answer butI have to comment on the Bohrok here. They are neither Good nor Evil they are Neutral and this is where you disapointed me Bones you forgot about that catagory and still mentioned the Bohrok. The Bohrok are Mechanical being who are programmed to be controled by Krana. The Krana are organic things that aer controlled by two "beings" called Bahrag. The Bahrag are only taking orders from the Great Spirit (or was it GBs or OoMN?). Anyway in this chain the Bohrak are at the bottom as they are mechanical and cannot think for themselves. Neither can the Krana or the Bahrag can think for themselves as they are taking orders. If they are controlled by Evil beings are they trully evil? If they are controlled by Good beings are they trully good? They are neither as they are unthinkingly doing what they are told.

Fair enough about the Bohrok being neutral. I just meant, they have to do with awakening Mata Nui, which is good. But they don't know that, yeah. laugh.gif

And as to whether they would be truly evil, lemme get back to you on it. I gotta post and go watch Survivor now. tongue.gif

QUOTE
Well that's all I have to say anyway Bones do you think you could next time do a entry for me? tongue.gif

Gimme a fascinating question, and maybe. tongue.gif
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 20 2007 07:23 PM
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Sep 20 2007, 08:00 PM)
QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Sep 20 2007, 05:50 PM)
I envy you Grav Bones made a whole Blog Entry for you tongue.gif Anyway I agree that it is a yes and no answer butI have to comment on the Bohrok here. They are neither Good nor Evil they are Neutral and this is where you disapointed me Bones you forgot about that catagory and still mentioned the Bohrok. The Bohrok are Mechanical being who are programmed to be controled by Krana. The Krana are organic things that aer controlled by two "beings" called Bahrag. The Bahrag are only taking orders from the Great Spirit (or was it GBs or OoMN?). Anyway in this chain the Bohrak are at the bottom as they are mechanical and cannot think for themselves. Neither can the Krana or the Bahrag can think for themselves as they are taking orders. If they are controlled by Evil beings are they trully evil? If they are controlled by Good beings are they trully good? They are neither as they are unthinkingly doing what they are told.

Fair enough about the Bohrok being neutral. I just meant, they have to do with awakening Mata Nui, which is good. But they don't know that, yeah. laugh.gif

And as to whether they would be truly evil, lemme get back to you on it. I gotta post and go watch Survivor now. tongue.gif

QUOTE
Well that's all I have to say anyway Bones do you think you could next time do a entry for me? tongue.gif

Gimme a fascinating question, and maybe. tongue.gif

I'll get back to you on that tongue.gif Oh and I have time. I want a post by tommorow tongue.gif

Edit: Still waiting Bones...
    • 0
Da answer:

QUOTE
If they are controlled by Evil beings are they trully evil? If they are controlled by Good beings are they trully good? They are neither as they are unthinkingly doing what they are told.

Well, that depends -- are they neutral tools being controlled, like a weapon, or are they programmed for evil, programmed for good? With the Bohrok, they're programmed, but what they were programmed for was only good at the right time.

Lotsa selfish people do things "unthinkingly". Many even because that's what they're told.

Not saying that answers the question. tongue.gif It's debatable, and probably varies from instance to instance. With people it's almost impossible to tell -- do they obey orders because they are forced to, or because they like being forced to? With robots... the question to me is whether they are more like a tool, or more like a self-animated worker that carries out programming. Big difference.

I think with the Bohrok, they're more good than neutral, precisely because they have no choice. But in a different way, not like people, and certainly Makuta used them for evil just like a tool, so I wouldn't say "truly good", no.

Obviously there are gray areas, whether it's people or robots. smile.gif
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 20 2007 09:40 PM
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Sep 20 2007, 10:34 PM)
Da answer:

QUOTE
If they are controlled by Evil beings are they trully evil? If they are controlled by Good beings are they trully good? They are neither as they are unthinkingly doing what they are told.

Well, that depends -- are they neutral tools being controlled, like a weapon, or are they programmed for evil, programmed for good? With the Bohrok, they're programmed, but what they were programmed for was only good at the right time.

Lotsa selfish people do things "unthinkingly". Many even because that's what they're told.

Not saying that answers the question. tongue.gif It's debatable, and probably varies from instance to instance. With people it's almost impossible to tell -- do they obey orders because they are forced to, or because they like being forced to? With robots... the question to me is whether they are more like a tool, or more like a self-animated worker that carries out programming. Big difference.

I think with the Bohrok, they're more good than neutral, precisely because they have no choice. But in a different way, not like people, and certainly Makuta used them for evil just like a tool, so I wouldn't say "truly good", no.

Obviously there are gray areas, whether it's people or robots. smile.gif

What about people who are tricked into doing stuff beleiving they are doing it for good?
    • 0
QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Sep 20 2007, 10:40 PM)
What about people who are tricked into doing stuff beleiving they are doing it for good?

Oh, yes, those make for great stories. biggrin.gif Simple cause and effect in the most basic sense -- the real fault would lie with the one who did the tricking. But it might depend on whether the trickee chose to ignore facts for selfish reasons that would have enabled himher to see the truth. Wisdom would play a role -- are they thinking... well... logically? tongue.gif And if the trickee learns the truth... it can be devestating and hard to really be sure that heshe didn't have some small fault in it too. Only the perfect trickster could pull that off without some mistakes being made on the trickee's part.

One example of that would be Vakama being tasked with making the Vahi for Makuta (thinking it was Dume). In that case it was clearly Makuta on whom the fault would lie, if Vakama had succeeded and handed Makuta a Vahi, and Makuta then carried out his plan of speeding time up on the pods and awakening a civilization of brainwashed slaves. Nothing "Dume" had done had given it away that it was Makuta, as far as one maskmaker could tell.

Good questions. But none that need a new blog entry yet. tongue.gif
    • 0
Photo
Spoony Bard
Sep 21 2007 02:00 PM
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Sep 20 2007, 08:00 PM)
Who, Omi? Or me? Because everything I said clearly shows why the character Omi quoted is incorrect. smile.gif Unless, of course, the sides in FF actually were using the first definition of "good" and "evil" that I mentioned. So not sure what you meant -- could you elaborate?

In FFVIII, basically there is Esthar, Galbadia, and SeeD.

Around 20 years previous to the game's events, Esthar was being ruled by an evil sorceress named Adel and she wanted to expand her power and also seek out successors (young females she can pass her powers too). Galbadia in a sense revolted against them and protected the young girls. A man named Laguna ousted Adel from power and he became the new leader of Esthar and hid the country from existence (therefore becoming good).

Now fast forward to the game. Galbadia is now the bad guys, and being lead by President Deling and also under the influence of Sorceress Edea (who was being possessed by Ultimecia from the future). When Edea gained control of herself, Galbadia went back to being normal. SeeD was "placed" in opposition, even though they can help anyone. They are somewhat a neutral group doing the right thing.

So even though the evil leaders wanted personal gain, the sides they controlled were just doing what she wanted and believing in what they were told. Esthar was originally evil, but became good. Galbadia was good, but became evil, and back to good. SeeD actually had their own civil dispute during one part of the game, but are good up to the end.

-Omi


    • 0
QUOTE(Omicron @ Sep 21 2007, 03:00 PM)
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Sep 20 2007, 08:00 PM)
Who, Omi? Or me? Because everything I said clearly shows why the character Omi quoted is incorrect. smile.gif Unless, of course, the sides in FF actually were using the first definition of "good" and "evil" that I mentioned. So not sure what you meant -- could you elaborate?

In FFVIII, basically there is Esthar, Galbadia, and SeeD.

Around 20 years previous to the game's events, Esthar was being ruled by an evil sorceress named Adel and she wanted to expand her power and also seek out successors (young females she can pass her powers too). Galbadia in a sense revolted against them and protected the young girls. A man named Laguna ousted Adel from power and he became the new leader of Esthar and hid the country from existence (therefore becoming good).

Now fast forward to the game. Galbadia is now the bad guys, and being lead by President Deling and also under the influence of Sorceress Edea (who was being possessed by Ultimecia from the future). When Edea gained control of herself, Galbadia went back to being normal. SeeD was "placed" in opposition, even though they can help anyone. They are somewhat a neutral group doing the right thing.

So even though the evil leaders wanted personal gain, the sides they controlled were just doing what she wanted and believing in what they were told. Esthar was originally evil, but became good. Galbadia was good, but became evil, and back to good. SeeD actually had their own civil dispute during one part of the game, but are good up to the end.

-Omi

Okay - I'm still a leeeetle confused (tongue.gif), but it sounds mostly sensible to me. But when you say "good", do you mean from the POV of the game? Or do you mean the selflessness thing I was talking about? And I'm not sure how the guy that gave the quote fits in. Regardless, it sounds a lot like real history -- countries at different times behaving in radically different ways, different allegiances, and certainly different levels of morals. A little to complex to just go "they good guys", heh.

Still, if for the moment one side is being more selfless, then objectively (for the moment tongue.gif) that side is the most good.
    • 0
Photo
Spoony Bard
Sep 21 2007 02:50 PM
He said that quote because in the game someone asked "why are we fighting" and "what makes us different than the bad guys (as in the guys they were fighting at the moment)" and stuff of that sort.

Esthar was good by both selflessness and POV, considering Laguna had no personal gain and wanted to save the world.

Galbadia is good cuz of peaceful terms.

SeeD is good because they are both selflessness and POV. They were targeted as "bad guys" in the game, although they were the ones doing the good guy stuff.

And yeah the game is just like real world stuff.

-Omi
    • 0
Okay, makes sense. Certainly his quote is a lot more eloquent for the situation than my blog entry. tongue.gif

My point is more the people that say good and evil are "only" POVs; that is what I'm mainly disagreeing with. Because really it both is and isn't. Just depends.
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 21 2007 04:44 PM
Ah well Bones at least I got a couple of interesting posts out of you tongue.gif Dont worry I'll end up thinking of something that could be made into a blog entry.
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Sep 22 2007 12:29 PM
Ooh! Can you make an entry for me, too? I care not about the context, but at least something about the logic behind Rudolph's glowing nose? tongue.gif

So the Bony Bloggy is not dead... yet?


Okay, so, your entry is quite interesting. But I think good and evil is more defined as a philosophy.

QUOTE(Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary @ 1984)
Philosophy,n, def. 9. A system of fundamental and motivational principarl: basis for action and belief 10. A general viewpoint: THEORY 10. The overall values by which one lives


Note "general" viewpoint. It does not mean just one's personal preference in the definition betwix good and evil at all, but rather a general standing on the matter.

Now, although we can agree that eil and good are indeed opposites, the term "general" cannot be applied unless all parties are represented, evin the evildoesrs. Most criminals have no choice on where to go, so they enter crime, aka evil. For some, stealing the rich lady's purseful of money at gunpoint is a way of life forced upon them. They know it is evil, but they have no choice. (NOTE: Tis is not neuteral as they do know what their actions are and are aware ofany penalties therein.) Thus, the definition is there, but ingorance makes them oblivious to what they do because they know no other way.

But as for the definitions of good and evil:

QUOTE(Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary @ 1984)
Good, adj, 1. Having desirable or positive qualities. Serving the desirable end: SUITABLE.


Take this in. In some places in the world, the person with the most shrunken heads gets the bride; the the bigger kahuna who runs a crime gang gets the cut; the one with the more kills gets the prize. These are not "points of view," these are necessities forced upon them that evonled into a class and system of sociology.

QUOTE
14a. Of moral exellence: UPRIGHT. b-c. Kind; loyal. 15b. socially correct: PROPER.


These can all be translated in a way to reveal the philosophies buried within.


The definition of evil will of course be the opposite of that of good, but still, what is a definition if the two are just a way of life, and therefor a philosophy?

Now, I can see that my comment may actually agree with you on several issues, but I think I got something here...


~EW~
    • 0
I wanna get back to you later on your whole post, EW, but real quick before I can't see anymore and must stumble up to bed -- One of the things I've said often on the subject of good and evil is that for something to be truly evil, there IS an element of choice involved. This usually comes up about Toa not killing. Basically, if there TRULY is "no choice" for the criminal, then what he does can't really be considered evil. But in reality, the vast majority of criminals do have other options and they DO have a choice, although admittedly not the easier choice.

Basically what I mean is sometimes the law is what's the problem, but usually there IS a choice involved. But to do this subject justice I'll have to spend more time on it tommorrow. smile.gif
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Sep 23 2007 04:23 PM
Though at the same time laws can prove to be uneeded barriers. An example of this would be the law that homeschooling is illegal in some European states, like Germany. If someone like myself were to move there, I would be forced to go to school, even though I know that that will flounder my grades subtansialy. Naturally, there would be the choice, but if I deceded to do homeschooling there, then would that mean that I had made the worse choice? I may become a victim of geovermental jurisdictiion, but did I truly commit a crime? From the moral viewpoint, a viewpoint based off the mass of homeschoolers, I did not. From the side of the geverment, which set up the laws, I was a criminal. But in a philosophical view, which governs morality and introspect, I did the best choice possible.

Therefore, the law is what is flawd sometimes, not the philosophy. 'Course, that was only in response to your comment and not my defense of theory.

Lol, now you have two posts to talk about, both by me. tongue.gif

~EW~
    • 0
QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Sep 22 2007, 01:29 PM)
Ooh! Can you make an entry for me, too? I care not about the context, but at least something about the logic behind Rudolph's glowing nose? tongue.gif

That doesn't need an entry, man. It's simple. Glowing noses, when red, enable a deer to blend in amongst the christmas trees that grow in the North Pole, since their fruit resembles a glowing red ornament.

QUOTE
So the Bony Bloggy is not dead... yet?


Okay, so, your entry is quite interesting. But I think good and evil is more defined as a philosophy.

That can be argued, because "philosophy" is one of those light and fluffy words that can mean just about whatever. tongue.gif But I think of it more as behavior; what you do, related to your mindset and reasons for doing it. If you claim to have the loftiest philosophy of nonviolence in the world but lash out in sheer selfish anger during a temper tantrum and kill somebody, it's your deed that matters.

Of course, you could claim temporary insanity, XD.

QUOTE
QUOTE(Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary @ 1984)
Philosophy,n, def. 9. A system of fundamental and motivational principarl: basis for action and belief 10. A general viewpoint: THEORY 10. The overall values by which one lives


Note "general" viewpoint. It does not mean just one's personal preference in the definition betwix good and evil at all, but rather a general standing on the matter.

Yes, all of these definately can apply. But notice that they do refer to a point of view. Remember in situations like with the quote Omi provided, it is a "mass point of view" that's at work, so it doesn't have to be personal only. I think it's important to point out that no philosophy can change the fact that some actions are motivated by selfish reasons and others by selfless reasons. They can dress those up and disguise them, and certainly many do, but not change that basic fact.

QUOTE
Now, although we can agree that eil and good are indeed opposites,

On that at least I'm pretty sure everybody agrees, yes.

QUOTE
the term "general" cannot be applied unless all parties are represented, evin the evildoesrs.

Right -- it turns right and wrong into a popularity contest, which is very dangerous. Hitler is the case in point. In essence, it relies on an Ad Populum logical fallacy. Most people might, for example, believe that bleeding a diseased patient is good medical help, when in fact it is counterproductive. Or with Hitler most people might support his hatred towards Jews and other "undesirables" at the time (and this was often argued by surviving Nazi war criminals).

QUOTE
Most criminals have no choice on where to go, so they enter crime, aka evil.

There's a big difference between "crime" and "evil", though. Crime is what goes against the laws that the country in question happens to have on the books. In my town, for example, there's a rather odd law against riding bikes on sidewalks, even on busy streets. So people who have been obeying that law have been hit by cars, naturally. That's a great example of a time when the law is the problem, not the "criminal". (The law dates before cars, but legislators have been lazy and haven't gotten rid of it.) There's nothing selfish about taking common sense precautions to keep yourself (and those in the cars!) safe by riding on the sidewalk in dangerous areas (slowly enough to not hit pedestrians, of course).

So it's an important distinction that for "crime" to be evil, there must be a better choice. The robber that holds up a convenience store could have, in the vast majority of cases, got a job and earned money the honest way. That act of crime is done for selfish reasons; laziness and carelessness towards others leading to a desire to "get rich quick" at others' expense. Thus that action IS evil.

If, on the otherhand, there truly was no choice, like if the robber's family was taken hostage by someone else and threatened with execution unless he robbed this place, then it's less clear. Going with this hypothetical all the way, if there really was no way out for the robber, then robbing in that instance was not evil. Another example would be soldiers stealing a car in street battle for battle purposes.

Same sort of idea with heroes; if a hero kills an enemy when there was a better way to incapacitate them without risking their escape, getting information from them, etc. then killing them is an "evil" choice, in essence. This is why the Toa "do not kill", yet they did kill the Morbuzahk King Root.



QUOTE
For some, stealing the rich lady's purseful of money at gunpoint is a way of life forced upon them. They know it is evil, but they have no choice. (NOTE: Tis is not neuteral as they do know what their actions are and are aware ofany penalties therein.)

Again, if they truly have no choice, then it is not IMO evil.

QUOTE
Thus, the definition is there, but ingorance makes them oblivious to what they do because they know no other way.

But as for the definitions of good and evil:

QUOTE(Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary @ 1984)
Good, adj, 1. Having desirable or positive qualities. Serving the desirable end: SUITABLE.


Take this in. In some places in the world, the person with the most shrunken heads gets the bride; the the bigger kahuna who runs a crime gang gets the cut; the one with the more kills gets the prize. These are not "points of view," these are necessities forced upon them that evonled into a class and system of sociology.

Well, it can be argued that that is the definition of "point of view". tongue.gif Just not an individual POV, a "mass POV". A societal POV. Which is usually what people mean when they say g&e are POVs.

QUOTE
QUOTE
14a. Of moral exellence: UPRIGHT. b-c. Kind; loyal. 15b. socially correct: PROPER.


These can all be translated in a way to reveal the philosophies buried within.


The definition of evil will of course be the opposite of that of good, but still, what is a definition if the two are just a way of life, and therefor a philosophy?

Well, I think you're missing a key part of the equation. In the examples you listed, you have to pay attention to conflict, since that's where any question of good and evil come in. With the shrunken head thing (wherever that is, man tongue.gif), what do those with the least shrunken heads think? Do they see practical reasons this idea is seized upon by the society? Or is it arbitrary, selfish on the part of those with the most shrunken heads? (Dude, this example is just weird. laugh.gif) I'm not even talking consciously, per se -- they might consciously accept the unfortunate situation but deep down they feel that it is wrong. IMO.

With the crime gang, the conflict is obvious. Think of that as like TSO. There's conflict boiling everywhere among the DH, hatred towards him, etc. which you don't see among the Toa (not to those extremes, though). They are used to it, but that doesn't mean it isn't harming them. It is.

The more kills means there are victims involved -- again, the selfish aspect is an ironclad fact amongst all this that isn't changed by majority opinion or philosophy.

QUOTE
Now, I can see that my comment may actually agree with you on several issues, but I think I got something here...


~EW~

I don't see that it changes anything. But it is how a lot of people approach the issue, yes. Really, though, it seems like what you're picking up on most is individual POV versus mass POV. Both are still POVs, so neither can override the absolute definitions of good and evil that I mentioned.





QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Sep 23 2007, 05:23 PM)
Though at the same time laws can prove to be uneeded barriers. An example of this would be the law that homeschooling is illegal in some European states, like Germany. If someone like myself were to move there, I would be forced to go to school, even though I know that that will flounder my grades subtansialy. Naturally, there would be the choice, but if I deceded to do homeschooling there, then would that mean that I had made the worse choice?

Now there's a good question. Well, it's still true in that case that you would have a choice (assuming you spoke German tongue.gif) of attending a school of relative quality, so I don't think the "choiceless" aspect can be applied. There is a concept of "letting the fault lie with others". The safe choice is to obey that law.

But that one is debatable -- if you were dealing with a school of indoctrination, say if this took place during Nazi Germany, and you were a Jew... Well, firstly you'd want to get out of there if you could... but you get the idea. It would basically depend on the situation.


QUOTE
I may become a victim of geovermental jurisdictiion, but did I truly commit a crime? From the moral viewpoint, a viewpoint based off the mass of homeschoolers, I did not. From the side of the geverment, which set up the laws, I was a criminal. But in a philosophical view, which governs morality and introspect, I did the best choice possible.

Okay, but remember the selfish/selfless thing. What would the motivations be for choosing this? It would depend on a lot of different factors, and that would, to me, indicate whether it was wrong or right. BTW, technically, yes, you would commit a crime merely because you broke a law. But that doesn't necessarily mean it would be wrong. And let's not forget parents are as much a factor here as the child.

If it was merely the child's decision (just pretend here tongue.gif), heshe would be putting his parents in danger, at least of legal action. That would be arguably selfish. But if it was the parent's decision to take the risk to better prepare their child for life, that would be arguably selfLESS, because they willingly take on the risk for the benefit of someone else. See the diff?

If, hypothetically, you could homeschool yourself totally, then it's harder to judge. If you harm nobody, literally, by risking it, then arguably you aren't being selfish by doing what is logically best for your education, which you can then use later in life to help others. On the other hand, if by doing so you cause problems for people just trying to do their jobs in the government, are you then being selfish?

You picked an excellent example of a gray area. smile.gif

QUOTE
Therefore, the law is what is flawd sometimes, not the philosophy. 'Course, that was only in response to your comment and not my defense of theory.

Lol, now you have two posts to talk about, both by me. tongue.gif

~EW~

There's no doubt that law would be flawed, yes. But the idea of letting the fault lie with the lawmakers can come into play here. I think it depends on how harm would be judged to be done to you by being forced to go to a normal school. And that could vary quite widely.
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Sep 24 2007 03:58 PM
Argh! I. Hate. Typos.

... And blame Survurlode and his THE Chief Gremlin.


The shrunken heads example was based upon certain Papuan and Amazonian tribes who use(d) the shrinking-head philosophy in their daily lives. Surely you would know about such tribes, if you listened to your teachers. tongue.gif

QUOTE(a smart skeleton)
In the examples you listed, you have to pay attention to conflict, since that's where any question of good and evil come in. With the shrunken head thing (wherever that is, man ), what do those with the least shrunken heads think? Do they see practical reasons this idea is seized upon by the society? Or is it arbitrary, selfish on the part of those with the most shrunken heads? (Dude, this example is just weird. ) I'm not even talking consciously, per se -- they might consciously accept the unfortunate situation but deep down they feel that it is wrong. IMO

It is a way of life, a way that has gone on for centuries. It has been held as a way to define the richness and prosperity of the families as long as it has gone on, and those with the least number are seen as weaker beings and they view it as simple twists of fate. So, nothing other than a better way can remove the pagan ways that they hold onto in their system.


As for the German schooling example, that was entirely based upon current times and events. I do indeed speak German (as I am German. Well, half German), and Germany currently banned homeschooling in favor of more orthodox public methods, blaming the parents of brainwashing their kidns when the actualy performed academically advanced. Several families have been torn apart by the selfless acts of the parents to home educate their kids. Obviously, the act would be a good one according to the parents and kids, seeing as academic exellence is a priority, but according to the goverment, the family is evil. Now, although this may be considered a POV, I see it as the philosophy adopted by the creators of the Constitution of the said country. This is not a question of brainwashing, but rather internal belifes. It can be argued as a POV, albeit individual, but that can also be seen as a philosophy if the parents belive that HSing is the fundamental way for their kids to learn in a quality way.

IMO, what defines good and evil depends on the judge, the circumstance and the philosophies in both. Laws cannot make a difference in good versus evil, as Thomas Jefferson once said:

QUOTE(TJ)
Law is not justice, justice should be law.


So, just a simple law cannot mean anything to it. Circumstance, yes. Defying the speed limit to ram another car in the fender obviously is evil and against the law, but it was the intent that caused the person to defy the limit i the first place. But defying the limit to get to the hospotal in an unmarked car? No.


So, in the end, I must confess that you (as usual) have the superior logic. That is what you do. BTW, I intend on making a blog entry defining the differences in our ways someday, and what causes us to be a leeetle varied in our POVs (tongue.gif). Along with other essays in the beggining process.

~EW~
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 24 2007 06:31 PM
You guys lost me before you even said anything tongue.gif

Edit: How about your next entry be about the orca THE Chief Gremlin raised? Have an interview with it tongue.gif
    • 0
In reverse order:
QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Sep 24 2007, 07:31 PM)
You guys lost me before you even said anything tongue.gif

Edit: How about your next entry be about the orca THE Chief Gremlin raised? Have an interview with it tongue.gif

I'm not sure who I'm going to interview, but I'm definately going to try to get somebody soon. With Binky's departure, ironically Survurlode was dealt a big blow just before that has led to a much better server. But the past few weeks Survurlode's started to make a comeback. I was trying to get ahold of Gollaga, but he's an elusive guy. I wanted to ask him what he knows about the One Refresh, and also about his favorite brand of cheese puffs. If I can't get him, I might be able to find the Orca. Of course, I don't speak whale, so... yeah.


QUOTE(EmpressWhenua @ Sep 24 2007, 04:58 PM)
Argh! I. Hate. Typos.

... And blame Survurlode and his THE Chief Gremlin.


The shrunken heads example was based upon certain Papuan and Amazonian tribes who use(d) the shrinking-head philosophy in their daily lives. Surely you would know about such tribes, if you listened to your teachers. tongue.gif

QUOTE(a smart skeleton)
In the examples you listed, you have to pay attention to conflict, since that's where any question of good and evil come in. With the shrunken head thing (wherever that is, man ), what do those with the least shrunken heads think? Do they see practical reasons this idea is seized upon by the society? Or is it arbitrary, selfish on the part of those with the most shrunken heads? (Dude, this example is just weird. ) I'm not even talking consciously, per se -- they might consciously accept the unfortunate situation but deep down they feel that it is wrong. IMO

It is a way of life, a way that has gone on for centuries. It has been held as a way to define the richness and prosperity of the families as long as it has gone on, and those with the least number are seen as weaker beings and they view it as simple twists of fate. So, nothing other than a better way can remove the pagan ways that they hold onto in their system.

Well, it's hard to tell if that is simply what they say, or even consciously think, and deep down they still resent it. Obviously it would be much different than for you and I, though, so that's more of a guess than anything. Telepathy would be the only way to know for sure, probably.


QUOTE
As for the German schooling example, that was entirely based upon current times and events. I do indeed speak German (as I am German. Well, half German), and Germany currently banned homeschooling in favor of more orthodox public methods, blaming the parents of brainwashing their kidns when the actualy performed academically advanced.

Ich sehe. I guess I'm not up on my current German events enough... That's too bad. Homeschooling is proven to be effective (though it might certainly vary depending on the parent) -- I'm a case in point. tongue.gif I literally would not be a logician if I hadn't been homeschooled for a few years. They don't teach logic in these schools, you know; the Prof in Narnia is right on.

QUOTE
Several families have been torn apart by the selfless acts of the parents to home educate their kids. Obviously, the act would be a good one according to the parents and kids, seeing as academic exellence is a priority, but according to the goverment, the family is evil. Now, although this may be considered a POV, I see it as the philosophy adopted by the creators of the Constitution of the said country. This is not a question of brainwashing, but rather internal belifes. It can be argued as a POV, albeit individual, but that can also be seen as a philosophy if the parents belive that HSing is the fundamental way for their kids to learn in a quality way.

Yep, I agree with all of that. BTW, did you mean "beliefs"?



QUOTE
IMO, what defines good and evil depends on the judge, the circumstance and the philosophies in both. Laws cannot make a difference in good versus evil, as Thomas Jefferson once said:

Well, I agree wholeheartedly that the circumstances matter, but I don't see the judge as that relevant -- basically because I'm talking about the "actual truth" sort of thing. If someone chooses an action for selfish reasons, it might be that no "judge" can recognize it or know it, but that doesn't change the action.

Differences in how some people or cultures "judge" can change the circumstances, though. Like with the shrunken heads example, that obviously changes how you act, and it can change what you might consider selfish. I assume that society would pressure you to feel guilty for resenting the elitism of those with the shrunken heads. Under those circumstances, it would be possible to hold grudges for selfish reasons, even though the root cause isn't the fault of that person.

But it's the circumstances that define that. If someone stands up against that discrimination for selfless reasons; to stand up for justice (which applies to far more than just that someone), a "judge" in that culture would appeal to the tradition as a basis to say "you are committing evil here". But that judge would quite simply be wrong.

As far as philosophy, I think we covered that already well enough.

QUOTE
QUOTE(TJ)
Law is not justice, justice should be law.


So, just a simple law cannot mean anything to it. Circumstance, yes. Defying the speed limit to ram another car in the fender obviously is evil and against the law, but it was the intent that caused the person to defy the limit i the first place. But defying the limit to get to the hospotal in an unmarked car? No.

Yep, I agree. Again, that's basically what it comes down to; the circumstance.

Not sure I agree with the idea that the law "cannot mean anything to it" though. The laws do change the circumstance, although they ideally shouldn't.

I agree with the quote from Thomas of Jeffer though. Law isn't justice -- what is it though? Well, it's just what the elites of one society happen to decide they want everybody to act. Even in a "democracatic republic" like America (not to get too political here though tongue.gif) It's abstract, and often not rooted in real practicality or logic, heh.

QUOTE
So, in the end, I must confess that you (as usual) have the superior logic. That is what you do. BTW, I intend on making a blog entry defining the differences in our ways someday, and what causes us to be a leeetle varied in our POVs (tongue.gif). Along with other essays in the beggining process.

~EW~

I look forward to it. smile.gif
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 24 2007 07:55 PM
You could always use Bioran as a translator. I believe he know's Orca tongue.gif
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Sep 24 2007 09:14 PM
GB, this is about logic, understanding and good versus evil, not Evel Lord Survurlode, the Orca, THE Chief Gremlin and the now nonexsistent bubblewrap trap. wink.gif If you had anything to say about that, you could have just posted in his profile with all due sillyness, not an important discussion.

But what can I say? I am not a smart skeleton. tongue.gif


In no particular order:
QUOTE
Not sure I agree with the idea that the law "cannot mean anything to it" though. The laws do change the circumstance, although they ideally shouldn't.

I agree with the quote from Thomas of Jeffer though. Law isn't justice -- what is it though? Well, it's just what the elites of one society happen to decide they want everybody to act. Even in a "democracatic republic" like America (not to get too political here though ) It's abstract, and often not rooted in real practicality or logic, heh.

True, but I was thinking about the actual intention, not the actual act. In that case, my comment is still valid.

And there is a name for such a goverment: kakistracacy. You should look it up, if you have not done so already. wink.gif

QUOTE
Well, I agree wholeheartedly that the circumstances matter, but I don't see the judge as that relevant -- basically because I'm talking about the "actual truth" sort of thing. If someone chooses an action for selfish reasons, it might be that no "judge" can recognize it or know it, but that doesn't change the action.

Differences in how some people or cultures "judge" can change the circumstances, though. Like with the shrunken heads example, that obviously changes how you act, and it can change what you might consider selfish. I assume that society would pressure you to feel guilty for resenting the elitism of those with the shrunken heads. Under those circumstances, it would be possible to hold grudges for selfish reasons, even though the root cause isn't the fault of that person.

But it's the circumstances that define that. If someone stands up against that discrimination for selfless reasons; to stand up for justice (which applies to far more than just that someone), a "judge" in that culture would appeal to the tradition as a basis to say "you are committing evil here". But that judge would quite simply be wrong.

The judge is rather important. Right now, we are all making judgements on good and evil. Some judges are indifferent, other impartial. Whenever we view an act, we judge it. That effetively makes us judges (hence the name ^^). Of course, how we viw the matter relies of philosophies of individuality and POVs on the actual act. So, actualy, the judge is important in every matter, as heshe is mormaly the deciding factor.

In a courtroom, a judge is even more important, as he is the immediate deciding factor and can be currupt (especially with the problematic law thing), so he can certainly make wrong decisions on the matter, even highliting his impotance more.

QUOTE
QUOTE
As for the German schooling example, that was entirely based upon current times and events. I do indeed speak German (as I am German. Well, half German), and Germany currently banned homeschooling in favor of more orthodox public methods, blaming the parents of brainwashing their kidns when the actualy performed academically advanced.


Ich sehe. I guess I'm not up on my current German events enough... That's too bad. Homeschooling is proven to be effective (though it might certainly vary depending on the parent) -- I'm a case in point. I literally would not be a logician if I hadn't been homeschooled for a few years. They don't teach logic in these schools, you know; the Prof in Narnia is right on.

Yep, I agree with all of that. BTW, did you mean "beliefs"?

I heard a rumor once that you were homeschooled at one time or another, I juste never felt like bothering you about a petty thing like that, or worse, make it an arguement with others. Well, now I safely know for sure that you were indeed HSed. smile.gif

Remember, I hate typos. tongue.gif


~EW~
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 25 2007 05:26 PM
Hey I was giving him ideas for the next blog entry so it does belong here as this was where he told me that if I get something good he'll do it. tongue.gif
    • 0
QUOTE(EmpressWhenua @ Sep 24 2007, 10:14 PM)
GB, this is about logic, understanding and good versus evil, not Evel Lord Survurlode, the Orca, THE Chief Gremlin and the now nonexsistent bubblewrap trap. wink.gif If you had anything to say about that, you could have just posted in his profile with all due sillyness, not an important discussion.

But what can I say? I am not a smart skeleton. tongue.gif

Well now you just reminded me about the defeat of the bubble wrap, so yeah. tongue.gif

Seriously, if we made a list of blows dealt to Survurlode and his minions lately, what would it be? Really, his only success is that every once in a while we still slow down. A little. A tad. rtfm.gif



Anyways....

QUOTE
In no particular order:
QUOTE
Not sure I agree with the idea that the law "cannot mean anything to it" though. The laws do change the circumstance, although they ideally shouldn't.

I agree with the quote from Thomas of Jeffer though. Law isn't justice -- what is it though? Well, it's just what the elites of one society happen to decide they want everybody to act. Even in a "democracatic republic" like America (not to get too political here though ) It's abstract, and often not rooted in real practicality or logic, heh.

True, but I was thinking about the actual intention, not the actual act. In that case, my comment is still valid.

Fair enough.
QUOTE
And there is a name for such a goverment: kakistracacy. You should look it up, if you have not done so already. wink.gif

Hwatever you say dude. tongue.gif



QUOTE
QUOTE
Well, I agree wholeheartedly that the circumstances matter, but I don't see the judge as that relevant -- basically because I'm talking about the "actual truth" sort of thing. If someone chooses an action for selfish reasons, it might be that no "judge" can recognize it or know it, but that doesn't change the action.

Differences in how some people or cultures "judge" can change the circumstances, though. Like with the shrunken heads example, that obviously changes how you act, and it can change what you might consider selfish. I assume that society would pressure you to feel guilty for resenting the elitism of those with the shrunken heads. Under those circumstances, it would be possible to hold grudges for selfish reasons, even though the root cause isn't the fault of that person.

But it's the circumstances that define that. If someone stands up against that discrimination for selfless reasons; to stand up for justice (which applies to far more than just that someone), a "judge" in that culture would appeal to the tradition as a basis to say "you are committing evil here". But that judge would quite simply be wrong.

The judge is rather important. Right now, we are all making judgements on good and evil. Some judges are indifferent, other impartial. Whenever we view an act, we judge it. That effetively makes us judges (hence the name ^^). Of course, how we viw the matter relies of philosophies of individuality and POVs on the actual act. So, actualy, the judge is important in every matter, as heshe is mormaly the deciding factor.

But what does heshe decide? I'm just saying, the judge doesn't actually cause the act to be good or evil -- it's the motives of the "acter" that do that. But sure, the judge is important. But not for what I was talking about. Basically, the judge doesn't determine the actual truth of the event he's judging. He just forms his own opinion and then consequences for whatever that opinion is follow. Or she. Or they, etc.

QUOTE
In a courtroom, a judge is even more important, as he is the immediate deciding factor and can be currupt (especially with the problematic law thing), so he can certainly make wrong decisions on the matter, even highliting his impotance more.

QUOTE
QUOTE
As for the German schooling example, that was entirely based upon current times and events. I do indeed speak German (as I am German. Well, half German), and Germany currently banned homeschooling in favor of more orthodox public methods, blaming the parents of brainwashing their kidns when the actualy performed academically advanced.


Ich sehe. I guess I'm not up on my current German events enough... That's too bad. Homeschooling is proven to be effective (though it might certainly vary depending on the parent) -- I'm a case in point. I literally would not be a logician if I hadn't been homeschooled for a few years. They don't teach logic in these schools, you know; the Prof in Narnia is right on.

Yep, I agree with all of that. BTW, did you mean "beliefs"?

I heard a rumor once that you were homeschooled at one time or another, I juste never felt like bothering you about a petty thing like that, or worse, make it an arguement with others. Well, now I safely know for sure that you were indeed HSed. smile.gif

Remember, I hate typos. tongue.gif


~EW~

I shalt duly remember that. Thus, you typed "juste". tongue.gif


QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Sep 25 2007, 06:26 PM)
Hey I was giving him ideas for the next blog entry so it does belong here as this was where he told me that if I get something good he'll do it. tongue.gif

Here there, whereeverwhere. I don't care.

Rhyme not intended. blink.gif
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Sep 26 2007 05:05 PM
Well Bones that was directed at EW not you tongue.gif
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Sep 26 2007 07:42 PM
Correction os the spelling of a certain word: Kakistocracy.

That sounds better. tongue.gif


QUOTE(the same skeleton who can type with his bony fingers( tongue.gif ))
But what does heshe decide? I'm just saying, the judge doesn't actually cause the act to be good or evil -- it's the motives of the "acter" that do that. But sure, the judge is important. But not for what I was talking about. Basically, the judge doesn't determine the actual truth of the event he's judging. He just forms his own opinion and then consequences for whatever that opinion is follow. Or she. Or they, etc.

Let's look at a hypothetical situation:

Take a deep breath. Close your eyes. Tight. I SAID CLOSE THEM!

... -.-

Okay, now, there is a person who has killed someone in a rage because the killee killed his dog (man's best friend, remember?). So, the judge sits before him, gavel in hand. It is the judge who will decide on the fate of the criminal and decide whether he is guilty or innocent (No jury; this is a kangaroo court. What? Yes, that is a term given to courts that have only a judge.) What will he use to figure out the "truth?"

The Judge: Is he impartial? Is he negative? Has his affiliation been damaged? Has (heaven forbid) recived bribes? Is ne a noob or a old-timer at the proffesion? Is he upright?

The Circumstance: Was the act done under vile pretence? Was it in concordance with the laws, both supernatural and earthly? Was the act done under pressure, anger, spite, etc?

The Philosophies: This sums both the above together. Was the killer a thinker or doer? What was his life like? Was he agressive or passive? Is the judge either of those, too?

With these things in mind, the answer to the hearing is obvious if you use the choices in the corresponding grid. That is why I view those three things as the things that determine good and evil in earthly prespective (the other being Godly). Though they do not determine the logical truth, they determine the truth that would make or break the fate of the killer.

Naturally, it is only one example of the truth behind TJ's saying.

Of course, this is my view on the issue on a very limited scale. But I never said philosophers were the most logical people on earth. tongue.gif

But, I have my opinion, you can have yours. ( tongue.gif ) j/k

~EW~
    • 0
Question: What stops people from doing evil things that actually benifit them? Is it:
1) Morality
2) Guilt
3) Public Image
If your answer is a combination, can you tell me which is the major factor pirate.gif
    • 0

Welcome To The Bones Blog

You must understand this: that in creation, there is destruction. In destruction, there is rebirth. There is no such thing as void; all things are in flux.
--Nuju

Fave This Blog | Track | RSS | Archive
PM | Email | capnbonesiii
bonesiii (pronunciation: "bones triple 'i'")











Recent Entries

0 user(s) viewing

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Recent Comments

Skeletal Industries Teleportal

Important Entries:


Evil Lord Survurlode:
Interviews:
Chief Evil Clock -- Exclusive!
Evil Lord Survurlode
The Chief Gremlin, Minion of Survurlode
Gollaga, Enemy of Survurlode
Orca Goblahk, Ex-Minion Of Survurlode
Lawyerahk Bob, of the Dreaded Real Life Attack Wing


Powerpoint Art Guides:
Vector Art In Powerpoint: Quality, Inexpensive, Easy
Coolifying With Powerpoint Vector Art

Ions of Opine:
Character Death
Walmart is Not Evil
Stop the "Everybody Hates" Nonsense
Join Petiton for Ban Bad Grammer Toady!
BZP's "Some-won Dyed!1!1!" Culture

Chronicles of Bio:
What Most Fans Want
Focus Groups
Easy Makuta Powers Guide
2008 Is Not The End
Science Fantasy = Bionicle
Good and Evil: Points of View?
Ruthless Elegance: A Visual Guide To Cool
A Magical Forest Called Bionicle
Why Kopeke as Chronicler?

Wall of History:
History of Technicism Vs. Bioniclism
History of Set Gimmicks in Bionicle
History of Violence in Bionicle

Logic is the Key:
Criticizing Me

Dissecting Nostalgia
Friends Can Disagree
Taste Discrimination Fallacy, Taste Equality
Am I Against Free Speech?

Complaint Topic Archive
Can Opinions Be Wrong?
Why I Do What I Do
BZP Debate Terms Guide

Log of B:
Track Blog Toolbar Code


Blog Contests:
1: Pet Peeve Contest -- Help Fight Survurlode!
Pet Peeve Winners & Reward art!
2: Powerpoint Faces
.ppt Faces Winners!
3: 2nd Chances MOCs: Beasts! (BPC#1)
Beasts MOC winners
4: Monstery Mystery Powerpoint Art (BPC#2)
Unseen (Ch. 1 of slow-reveal of Monster Mystery winner)
5: Blue MOCs 2nd Chances (BPC#3)
Blue Results
6: Bohrok Kool (BPC#4)
7: Multiverse Guide Art (EMC#3.5)
EM Guide Art Results

.ppt Faces Top 3

These are the top three winning entries of the Powerpoint Faces art contest on the Bones Blog.

1st Place by Ary


2nd Place by Rangan Mercenus™


3rd Place by Thormen


The other winning entries are listed here, along with bio info about the artwork.

Skull Of Approval



Use of this image is valid only when posted by bonesiii. High quality content is requisite. The blog entry itself wins the award. If you win multiple times, you are permitted to say so whereever you display the award.

Pet Peeve Gallery

The following Pet Peeves were identified by BZPower members in a contest for use in an allergenic weapon to be used against Evil Lord Survurlode. These photos taken by me when the Peeves were in captivity. Peeve names link to full bios.

Grand Prize: Flame
By Wysp

Adult form (click thumbnail):


2nd Place: The Misinformed
By Electric Turahk


3rd Place: Ignorance
By Kopaka's Apprentice


4th Place: Corrector
By xccj


5th Place: Double Posters
By EmperorWhenua


6th Place: CAPS Locker
By Toa of Dancing


7th Place: Miwo
By Lluvio


8th Place: Endtag Argh
By Kakaru


9th Place: Blushroom
By Darkspine Neya


10th Place: TB-RPG Overlord
By Nero


11th Place: Polloflower
By The Infection


12th Place: Emoticanus
By Kohena: Great Warrior of Pie


13th Place: Toktomee
By Wyattu


14th Place: Typcgraphical Gnomelette
By Arpy


15th Place: Shortenator
By Axinian the Chronicler


16th Place: Pica'huge
By ~Kativa~


Peeves by me:

Bionicles:


Plural Apostrophe's:


Alwayzon Turnsignal:


Neveron Turnsignal:


Chalkboard Scratcher:


DoomAH:


Stolen Thunder:

Evil Lord Survurlode Says...



"Brave Knight Binkmeister thought he could banish me with new software. Ha! Lord Survurlode is immortal--I survived because I retained a connection with the One Refresh To Rule Them All. Sauron tried to survive in the telephone system with his One Ring--but that dastardly Frodo tossed it into Mount Dume. Sauron was lost. But the Refresh still exists, oh yes, and as long as it does, I live also, to bring my floods to the BZP forums!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
in a BZP interview


"Killeth them with kindness. That's what my mother taught me. So I figured, instead of trying to fight Brave Knight Binkmeister's attempt to overthrow me... I would instead give him the one thing he loves most. Bubble Wrap. Not only him, but all of his followers. BZP members once knew me as their common enemy. But now... am I just a kind old man who has free Bubble Wrap?"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Why in the world am I calling him Brave Knight Binkmeister?! That term sounds... nice. It makes him sound like a hero! NO!!! He's my enemy! No, no, henceforth he shalt be known as 'Cowardly Scum Binkmeister'!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Yes, my new minion, you now see the dastardly plans BZP members have--they seek to avoid my floods by getting on in the morning or the late evening, or worse, the nighttime. Sauron might have been a sleepless creature of the night, but personally I can't stand coffee. But not to worry! You, my friend, will go out and enslave the members. You will sit enthroned on their shelves, hung from their walls like a cursed mark, and wrapped around their wrists like handcuffs. Even they shalt know the constraints of time! Behold, the Evil Clock!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What is that you sayeth, Evil Clock? BZPower is now five long years old? So what? I am thousands upon thousands of years old! I am, in fact, as old as the ocean that I command with my floods! I am even older than clocks like you! What's that? Yeah, yeah, but I just don't feel like AARP is for me..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What do you mean, I'm not speaking in proper Old English? I am Lord Survurlode. If I say this is Old English, it iseth!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What doth mine eyes spyeth? I see-eth a member attempting to posteth! No! I shalt not alloweth it! Rise, ye Floodes! Riseth! ...What? No, I ameth noteth tryingeth hardereth to speaketh Oldeth Englisheth! Ye Silly Clocke!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"No, I am NOT an April Fool's Joke! Just because my power increases tenfold on that day doesn't mean my existence depends on it."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Frodo? Why would I be scared of him? He sailed off to the West--it means he died, yo! Besides, the One Refresh cannot be melted in some volcano. It would take a... No, wait... Sorry, that information is classified. Muahahahaha!"

--Evil Lord Suvurlode


"The term 'Yo' can be Old English! Yeesh!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"See, my problem is that I am far older than Old English. To me it's that newfangled slang those Anglo-Saxon types speak. You'll forgive me if I get it confused with the five million different versions that came out since then. Yes, you will. Or else."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode's
Kopeke Impression


"What do you mean, it's really 'Mount Doomah?!'"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"You are getting veeery sleepy. You need more Bubble Wrap. That's right, little member. Wallow in bubble wrap forever. Say it with me now. 'Must. Have. More.'"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Brave Knight--I mean, Cowardly Sponge Binkmeister has attempted to attacketh me once again! But lo, I am-- What? Sponge? Is that what I said? I meant Scum. Brave Scum Binkmeister-- What now? Oh, be quiet, minion."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"No, I am not a girl!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
on his power over water


"Muahahahahahahahaha*cough* *hack* *gurgle* ..... *ahem* Must remember to watch the evil laugh when the floodwaters get that high..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Oh, that's an easy question. See, Sauron's One Telephone Ring looked like a metal ring, right? Well, the One Refresh looks like a ring made out of those green arrows... like on that refresh button up there. Wait... why am I telling you this?!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
in a BZP interview


"No, I do not get rusty! This is Stainless Steel! What? Yes, yes! They had stainless steel thousands of years ago. Yeesh."

--Evil Lord Survurlode

Gallery Of Explosions

Because explosions are the answer.





























Profundities

"While it's all well and good for someone to turn the other cheek in daily life, in times of great hardship another thought comes to mind instead; namely that one cannot turn a blind eye to the actions of evil and still call himself good."
---Nako



"This is a discussion forum for a reason; it's a place where opinions can be discussed and debated civilly, not where one person can claim their opinion as fact and all others as "just opinions." Every person should, however, support their opinions with facts and evidence of all kinds."




"'The challenge of being a Biological chronicler is understanding why Lego are using another method to sell better. It gets boring using the same ones all the time. Variety is the spice of selling, after all.'
— A Biological chronicler"



"I could convince a thousand people that the moon is made of cheese... and yet it would remain as rocky as ever."



"This is simple, people! If it hurts to hit yourself with a hammer, then don't do it!"



"A famous drummer sits down to do a drum solo, but he has to keep his solo up for five minutes. Does he do all his amazing stuff first? no! If he did that, he would loose all attention because the end would be so boring. If he were smart, he would start out with something simple, and then add to its complexity as he goes along, so that more people would be into it.

The point is, writing either a drum solo, or is like a mountain, the bigger the base, the higher it can get, and the more amazing it is. Think about it, when building a mountain of dirt or sand, you need to slowly create your huge base, then as you build towards the peak things get faster and easier to pile on. The High points are where the story is fast paced and we are reaching the climax--what we just left on the last mountain of story we had (the MU story arch), and now Greg is building a new story mountain for us."

Gallery Of Galaxies

~through the macroscope~































Sigisms

QUOTE
92% of people have moved on from Gregorian chants. If you are part of the 8% that still listens to real music, copy and paste this into your sig.


QUOTE
Least Favorite Edit Of Your Least Favorite Post On Your Most Favorite Day Of The Month?


QUOTE
Secret Info: The Red Star is Tahu's mobile space mansion, complete with servants.


QUOTE
Join the petiton for ban bad grammer toady!


QUOTE
9009 Ways To Say "I Heart Spam"


QUOTE
92% of all teenagers claim they're in the 8% that hasn't moved on to rap.
If you are part of the 0% that still uses real math, copy and paste this into your sig.


QUOTE
What Is Your Alter-Ego's Imaginary Friend's Least Favorite Pet Collar?

Certificates Of Approval

Various award imagery and suchnot:






(Above from Makaru; resized to fit.)










(Resized to fit.)


















The above earned twice.




















Certificates Of Approval

Part 2









Needs sized down



Needs sized down













/---------------!.!----------------\
/This blog has been approved by \
/--------------Saiph--------------\
/----------------------------------\
/-For demonstrating outstanding-\
/~~~~RHYME and REASON~~~~\
\----------------!.!-----------------/











_bonesquotes_i

QUOTE
Logic is the key.


QUOTE
I am insane. I know that I am insane. In fact, I know that I am so insane, that I am incapable of realizing that I am insane. Therefore, I know that I am not insane.


QUOTE
Forgetting things since.... umm....


QUOTE
Creativity should not be confused with nuclear weapons.


QUOTE
I heart logic.


QUOTE
Only dead things do not change. Much.


QUOTE
Pay attention now. Repeat after me. "Bones. Can. Be. Wrong."


QUOTE
The problem is, "Tradition for tradition's sake" is like flying blind in an airplane. It's like saying as you approach a mountain "But we've always flown in this direction before... why would we change direction? It isn't the tradition!"


QUOTE
Remember that -- clever absurdity, designed to harmonize with certain tastes, is the key to originality.


QUOTE
Ironicles.


QUOTE
People are like snowflakes. No two are the same.


QUOTE
Yes, the Toa will win somehow. But let me give you a challenge. Write a story. In which the good guys win, or the bad guys win, doesn't matter. But write it with only introducing the challenges that the winner must overcome, and avoid showing how the winner wins. Just set up the problem, then skip to the end:

"In the end, this character wins, somehow."

Now, do you think this is a successful format for a story, that anybody would really want to read? [...] Readers demand that you as writer have thought through the "how" of the story.


QUOTE
Where is this idea coming from?


QUOTE
Makutarahk


QUOTE
[L]et's not mince words here -- all LEGO products are toys. It's a toy company, in the toy business. There's nothing wrong with that.


QUOTE
[A] wise Daoist once said that a name is merely a label. If a person calls me a "nerd", then that is their label for me. If a person calls me a "human", that is a label. If they call me "bonesiii", that is a label. I would simply reply that, if "nerd" is the term they wish to apply to me, like "human", then so be it -- I would thus be proud of that label, because I am proud of who I am.


QUOTE
I'm not telepathic.


QUOTE
I don't know if this is just the way I'm wired, but I don't really think like "hey, wanna be my friend?" I just be myself, treat others with respect and friendliness, and those who would make good friends just sorta show up. And I really don't think like "well, you're not my friend, you are, you aren't" etc. Anybody can be my friend.


QUOTE
*revives topic, only to kill it seconds later*


QUOTE
My two pieces of eight.


QUOTE
Ha ha! Voriki myth still isn't dead? It's been so long since the constant flow of these topics stopped I guess I thought Voriki had finally kicked the bucket. Well, I hate to put another nail in the old guy's coffin, but...

Topic closed.

I Heart Logic

_bonesquotes_ii

QUOTE
Ahhhhh, the sweet smell of complaint topics in July!


QUOTE
I think Evil Lord Survurlode is out to get me.


QUOTE
Bionicle doesn't revolve around ANY one fan. Not even you.


QUOTE
Bionicle does NOT age with its fans.


QUOTE
If something absolutely has to be done for the greater good, it is by definition NOT evil.


QUOTE
Think, guys, think! You have brains! Use them!


QUOTE
Logic is not some meaningless buzzword you can throw around like pie, at least not as long as I, an actual logician, am here.


QUOTE
Common myth. The answer is: "Yes, if you are an ancient Greek."


QUOTE
Last I checked, most of us aren't ancient Greeks. tongue.gif Some of us are ancient Geeks, but...


QUOTE
Besides, show me a brown rock, and I'll use your logic on you. "That's not a rock, it's hardened lava."


QUOTE
The best symbol of stone would be gray. But it would probably sell almost as bad as brown -- LEGO needed a "flashy" color, more like what Ta, Ga, and Le Toa have.


QUOTE
Do not insult cheese.


QUOTE
Omi's right.


QUOTE
Forty-two.

(Four eight fifteen sixteen twenty-three... *ahem*)


QUOTE
Logic! Why don't they teach logic in these schools?


QUOTE
Can you imagine MNOG ending with the Turaga and Matoran executing Ahkmou?


QUOTE
So here's the question: If LEGO working harder by listening to fans is "lazy", then wouldn't they be "lazy" if they listened to you -- a fan?


QUOTE
You don't need to hate to say it.


QUOTE
Four extra letters. "Bionicle sets." How hard is that?

Actually, three extra letters since the s just moves.


QUOTE
If they are "Bionicles", then you are "History".


QUOTE
BZPers are often the exception, not the rule.

::celestial_drink::

_bonesquotes_iii

QUOTE
Of course it's cruel -- did you think bad guys were Mother Teresa?


QUOTE
It isn't like I hide it, but it also isn't like I go up to random students at college at say "Hey, I like Bionicle, isn't that something?!"


QUOTE
One man's junk is another man's treasure.


QUOTE
I had the same theory in ages past, and Greg personally disproved it.


QUOTE
The thing can destroy time, man. You guard those kinda things.


QUOTE
Brevity is the soul.


QUOTE
Which I suppose is a fancy way of saying, "I have no idea."


QUOTE
I attack my own theories. I'm weird like that.


QUOTE
If only books could be updated like web pages.


QUOTE
Bionicle was supposedly a betrayal of everything LEGO stands for, its pieces far too clunky, a horrible turn away from the more "intelligent" Technic and a total stabbing in the back of the good old brick, an insult to AFOLS, evidence of a mythical trend away from the construction toy, far too violent, etc.


QUOTE
It's really pretty simple:

Gadunka is one of the "coolest" sets ever. Most inventive, most unusual, most striking. Thus, he is horrible.


QUOTE
Of course they're weird. All Bionicle names are supposed to be weird. Show me the Bionicle name that is "normal".


QUOTE
You just completely contradicted yourself. If Mata Nui was working out great, then wouldn't Metru Nui have made less money?



QUOTE
If that's greedy, then you are greedy for driving in a car to get somewhere far away fast, for wearing shoes so you can walk at a reasonable pace without cutting your feet, using silverware to better eat your food, using a telephone to avoid having to make a trip and speak, using a computer to type a forum post when you could walk personally to everybody's house and speak what you just said over and over and over again.... At least 2000 times to account for all the possible active BZP members, and preferably about five million times -- and you'd have to go door to door throughout the whole world to even figure out which people were Bionicle fans anyways before you started confusing monks in Tibet with strange words like "Kongu" and "Cordak". All within your own lifetime, regardless of whatever else you had wanted to do in your life.

And forget speech. You have to scratch out the message with your fingernails in stone. Then maybe you wouldn't be greedy. Maybe.



QUOTE
Nobody would surprise me, so it's probably Makuta. But I went with Hydraxon, because he's a weapons master and it would make sense, no?


QUOTE
Why didn't I think of that earlier?


QUOTE
I don't just ask rhetorical questions -- I answer them.


QUOTE
I knew you'd say that.


QUOTE
You're a body with a head. So what?


QUOTE
A simple conversion is not a business plan to actually get two radically different markets to behave as if they were the same.


QUOTE
Um, hello? Are my posts invisible?


QUOTE
Universe go poof.

We All Live In An

_bonesquotes_iiii

QUOTE
I hate typing Roman numerals above three.


QUOTE
I always find these topics funny -- everybody goes in circles, pointing to the exact same aspect of the set and going "See that? So it's obvious it's horrible! How can you not see that?", and then someone else saying, "See that? It's obvious it's awesome! How can you not see that?"


QUOTE
Obviously, not everybody sees I to I.


QUOTE
They have their uses -- like if you're making a MOC that's supposed to be a light green faceless humanoid.


QUOTE
I hate it when I can't tell if someone's joking.


QUOTE
Yes, that's an excuse to be lazy.


QUOTE
Hold on just a second. I think you have things backwards. Mata Nui was not paradise -- it was a place of horror and war for a thousand years!


QUOTE
Lol.


QUOTE
I'm a logician. I can tell you that your argument does not merely sound illogical. It is.


QUOTE
Yeah, that'd be bad. Next question?


QUOTE
We'd still have wooden ducks, no plastic bricks, and definately no LEGO if change was prevented. Really, we wouldn't even have that.


QUOTE
It is unfortunate that it's this way (at least for us). But it is. We might as well come to grips with it.


QUOTE
And I walk away in peace.


QUOTE
You have no idea how many times I've read this style of opening to this kind of topic, man. I must admit I am very very tired of it.

*deeeeep breath*

*shakes head madly*

Okay, I'm good.


QUOTE
My memory doesn't go back that far.


QUOTE
If I didn't agree with something, I'd try to find out the reasons for it before doing anything else, which is something I think some people forget to do and instead they dig themselves a hole for no reason.


QUOTE
Lol, I think you missed the point -- BR isn't going to think your forum deserves approval if he has to be told it exists.


QUOTE
I'm a coolomaniac.


QUOTE
But I like spam!
Wait...


QUOTE
This is not a country. This is a website. Countries are led by governments. Websites are owned by owners. Countries are places you physically exist in, and may have difficulty leaving. Websites are places YOU choose to go. Countries are places you may be born in, or grow up in, etc.

BZPower is a place YOU sign an agreement in order to join. Blame cannot be placed on us when a member violates that agreement. And if a member chooses not to like that agreement anymore, they are free to leave at will. If a member violates the agreement they made with us, we are justified in punishing the member as agreed.


QUOTE
I'm a logician -- I think in terms of what makes sense all the time. I don't just agree -- I know why I agree, and I think my reasons are pretty sound.


QUOTE
If I'm breaking a rule, it's because I gave myself permission to allow myself an exception, thus I am not technically breaking it.


QUOTE
[A]lthough Evil Lord Survurlode does seem to be making a bit of a comeback, just like Sauron, so we might have an epic war that will spawn a novel and three giant books of a trilogy soon... but yeah...


QUOTE
I object to the wording of this question.


QUOTE
Huzzah?

I'm A Doctor, Not A Great Being

_bonesquotes #whatever

QUOTE
Ever had one of those moments where you think you just passed into an alternate timeline? This is one. ()_o


QUOTE
Rants are based on pompous egos and desire to pick a fight. Not intelligence.


QUOTE
The Monster on LOST is Makuta.


QUOTE
Cynics are some of the most naive people on the planet. They hear someone claim things are bad, and they accept it without question.


QUOTE
I'm a realist with an imagination.


QUOTE
I blame Survurlode.


QUOTE
You see a flamer, your response should not be to just flame him back -- you lower yourself to his level if you do.


QUOTE
Let's open that can of worms, as unpleasant as it might be. [...] *I'm not afraid of you, worms!*


QUOTE
"Transformation" can be as simple as a bomb rearranging a building into a debris field.


QUOTE
Far better to be proven wrong than to be wrong without knowing it.


QUOTE
I remember when I was a kid, and I was just playing around, I didn't know this stuff, so I said gas prices were five dollars at my play gas station.

My dad laughed, said gas would never be that expensive.


QUOTE
Toa carrying rifles... as they ride their space shuttles into... Klingon territory...


QUOTE
Kazi [ha]s Rahkshi staffs. (Oooh, Kazi=evil??)


QUOTE
Take an election between two candidates. Obviously, both candidates will get votes. However, one will get more votes, and one will get less. You would be, in this example, voting for the one with less votes (Mr. Olderfanson). You see why the fact that you, one person, did vote for that guy, doesn't prove that he won the election? [...] "Mr. Newerfanson" won the election.


QUOTE
o_O


QUOTE
In general, I do enjoy debates--but I don't enjoy being flamed, no. Nor do I enjoy wasting time when I have tons of PMs I need to reply to and top secret reference projects to work on and all that responding to things that could have been cleared up with more thought before posting, heh. Debates can still get tedious when it seems (please note "seems"!) that a few people refuse to approach them with an open mind.


QUOTE
<_<
>_>
<_>


QUOTE
I didn't even spell "the" right.


QUOTE
Lol. I never said I'm always right! Yeesh, what do I have to do to convince you guys I don't think that? Purposefully take wrong positions or something?


QUOTE
Guess what? I could draw before I learned to write, but does that mean I should get all huffy and insulted at the fact that not everybody shares my particular talent? This is just absurd, isn't it? Did you honestly think that everybody has the same talents and gains proficiency at the same time?



QUOTE
When someone much older than you was a kid, LEGO was wooden toys. [fogie teeth voice]"These newfangled plastic things are insulting! As if there isn't money to be made in good old fashioned woodblock toys!"[/fogie teeth voice]


QUOTE
Can we sing kumbaya yet? Sing it! Koooooooo----oom---bah-----yaaaaaaaaahhhhhh.

Or something... Sing it! You don't even have to agree with me! Just sing it anyways, maaan!

Sing!


QUOTE
Your mistake is that you are thinking in terms of a simplistic "formula" of strength, and thinking that can be used to predict everything. It can't--every situation is different, and sometimes a weak Matoran might catch a glimpse of a passing Rahkshi while a powerful "Toa Ultimaultrasuper" might get blasted to bits when the same Rahkshi actually attacks. You need to be realistic--think in terms of the situation. Stories are based on that--they are a "game of seconds and inches" where dangers both big and small can occur to both powerful and weak people, and how you perform depends on your brains and the time you have to prepare more than your actual power level.


QUOTE
Why did the entirely robotic Bohrok need teeth? Someone explain how that is okay but teeth in Piraka isn't?


QUOTE
Phew. Now, to post, and see if I maxed the text limit out.

Yabo! Hahaha!

_bonesquotes #whatever.2

QUOTE
Thanks X. Thanks D. Thanks X and D. XD


QUOTE
I lazy.


QUOTE
You can make any innovation look bad if you point to the non-innovative ways (the old "normal" ways) and claim they must be followed blindly.


QUOTE
But what I don't get about it is -- why the apparent desire to kill characters off for no reason? In real life you meet tons of people who you will never meet again, and they're not dead. Is that to you a problem? I don't get it -- you'd go insane if you tried to stay in touch with every random old lady that said hi when you were walking the dog...


QUOTE
Yes, my post in this topic is product placement. So sue me.


QUOTE
In addition, high gravity affects spacetime on a fundamental level, slowing time down and bending the spatial brane. Not to be confused with the spacious brain.


QUOTE
It would create a field of electrogravimetry that would pull all nearby matter in and then make it explode. The explosion cloud would take the form of an anchovy.


QUOTE
There's only a slim chance that we exist.


QUOTE
I love taking myself out of context.


QUOTE
I think it's admirable to be careful not to offend people where it makes sense. But at some point, you have to be willing to stand up for yourself and be confident enough that if someone comes at you with an unreasonable accusation, you don't take it.


QUOTE
I think aliens invaded already and have fooled us into thinking they are mere animals who "meow".


QUOTE
Good stories aren't puppet shows. They are tales of life, with realistic characters -- people -- living out their lives, with really minimal "guiding" by the author.


QUOTE
Oh goody, a complainer to blast to oblivion.


QUOTE
To begin with, I disagree strongly with pretending it is "killing off", rather than a serious story being told, with serious themes and life in the story. Characters aren't "killed off". They die.

I find this term somewhat offensive, because it implies the writer kills the character like a TV show host telling a contestant to leave. This is not a game show. It is the events of the storyline that kill the character. That term is merely a psychological shield to avoid the emotion of the moment in the story. IMO, that's a kind of immaturity.


QUOTE
Um.


QUOTE
You can't always get what you want "now now now". Your logic makes no sense -- if you want to know what's in the books, that means you support the books' existence. Yet you apparently want spoilers to go up the day it's out, so in the countries where it is bought, people could just read the spoilers and not buy the book, risking its sales going down and the books ending, and thus no more spoilers for you to read!


QUOTE
Truth = Truth. And nothing else.


QUOTE
I had spammed ten thousand times.


QUOTE
A good comedy is a development, like a story, not a punchline. You start with a situation, and it goes in unexpected, funny ways, which leads into other twists, to a conclusion that often can be more serious than funny, avoiding random cliches and developing enough logic that it doesn't feel like you slapped random nonsense down. Comedies Forum has this bad rap of having a lot of Unfunny Stuff -- I think it's the temptation to write short punchlines drawing on typical one-liner cliches that causes this. The 300 word rule is a good basic start to avoiding that problem.


QUOTE
Dude. My voting precint is a "23". ph34r.gif


QUOTE
And what people are saying about randomosity is true -- I hope that it's not surprising that as a logician, I understand how to be funny (though I won't try in this post ). Logic isn't for Spock who refuses to smile -- you actually need logic in your comedy to make it funny. In my experience, a balance of logic and random nonsense helps -- even logic OF the random nonsense.


QUOTE
I highly recommendate it.


QUOTE
Another mistake a lot of people make is thinking a comedy must be 100% funny -- reality is that that tends to just overwhelm the reader and come off more as spam. If you look at my Survurlode interviews, for example, there is always at least one serious theme that the whole work revolves around. The serious aspects support the humorous, and vice versa.


QUOTE
*strongly approves of the use of the term "bionical"*


QUOTE
Well, my observation has always been the opposite -- more established official facts inspires MORE fan imagination -- at least with imaginative official facts. It was really only once the "gappists" starting complaining, in my observation as a 2003+ member here, about "tons of official facts" that I saw the fanfiction community here really explode with creativity.

Think about it -- imagination feuls imagination. Less imagination doesn't -- it starves imagination.

Search My Blog

_bonesquotes #whatever.3

QUOTE
How much wood would a woodwood wood if a woodwood would would wood?


QUOTE
But my point related to that isn't that I literally think it should be FULLY sun-sized. I'm just saying, there's a whole range, from a little larger than Earth, to a LOT larger, to a TONTONZILLION larger, and it's all possible if the story team just feels like it.


QUOTE
*imagines massive asteriod pulling out a pirate's telescope lol*


QUOTE
GD is NOT for storyline-only discussion. That discussion belongs in S&T.


QUOTE
S&T policies are designed for good reasons, tried, tested, and they work.


QUOTE
Sure I'm sure -- it's Bionicle. Anything's possible.


QUOTE
I never understand these claims -- how do you know what "proportionate" is for that character? He's a fictional character, made out of plastic LEGO parts.

So why get annoyed at it? When you look at a giraffe, do you get annoyed? It makes no sense to me to do so.

Besides, you're setting yourself up for it. Nobody ever told you these characters were supposed to be exactly human.

If you look at an ape, would you say it's done wrong, just because it resembles a human?


QUOTE
I plan not to, but I guess if the site shut down I'd kinda have to, wouldn't I?


QUOTE
...they usually give their jokes when they have the upper hand at the moment, though, or when they've just run into a frustrating difficulty that's not immediately dangerous, which are realistic IMO. When they're in immediate danger, I am not aware that they pause to crack jokes.


QUOTE
I strongly disagree -- everybody capitalizes their name. It's cliche.

(I do not capitalize because 1) I hate being cliche, and 2) it is symbolic of humility.)


QUOTE
I knew you'd say that.


QUOTE
Seriously though, obviously the focus groups like silver, guys -- there's no mystery, those of you portraying it as odd that LEGO keeps using the color. This is how personal taste works -- it differs, and you're gonna find yourself in the minority sometimes. Best get used to it -- that's life.


QUOTE
*lets self dp*


QUOTE
I'm not a soldier, but I know that keeping your sense of humor alive even in dangerous or serious situations can be a huge boon to keeping your sanity.

He who forgets how to laugh forgets how to live.


QUOTE
I heart silver. My favorite metallic. If I had my way, gold would be considered lesser than silver.


QUOTE
The red eye thing is the closest thing you have to evidence, but I could argue that Berix is the traitor for spending time away from the villages, or Ackar is the traitor because his name sounds like Admiral Ackbar and there was a traitor in Star Wars called Darth Vader.


QUOTE
Ultimately it comes down to this for me -- YOU choose to dissapointed or miserable.

If you expected the universe to be perfect, that was your choice, and really not very sensible of you.


QUOTE
If I as a writer were to try to appeal to the attitude you express in your post, I would feel like I am constantly walking on eggshells. Everytime I had a cool idea how to use a character, or more importantly logic told me the character naturally would be involved in something, I would have to worry about whether I shouldn't do it as it might offend someone.

That's a miserable way to write, and I wouldn't wish that on the story team, myself, or anyone.


QUOTE
QUOTE
But one thing. Everyone expects something when they do something.


Very true. For example, when I posted the above post, I expected somebody to reward me with this point, giving me an excuse to discuss it in a separate post so as to give it better focus.


QUOTE
Therefore, the more "things to expect" from a "donation or whatever the heck you want to call it", the more likely we get mooooolaaaaaaaa. Therefore good.

QUOTE
I don't see what the anology has to do with this. "Chevys" (or "Chevies") makes sense. Like "Keets" or Morby or my personal favorite for Makuta -- Terry Mack. "Biological Chronicles" referring to beings makes no sense. And as I typed this, a Chevy ad came on TV. They called it "Chevy." Seriously, exact same time.


QUOTE
QUOTE
Oh my, you're completely irrelevant metaphor makes you look sooo intelligent.


This is obviously getting out of hand, so I guess I have to close it. Also, you failed to answer my question. When a moderator asks you a question, answer it. Capisce? wink.gif

Please do not attack people like that. That is flaming, or at best trolling, both of which are not allowed.


QUOTE
What does a premier member buy?

1) YOUR right to be on here for free.

2) Their right to be on here.

3) PM perks, like poll-making, blogs, etc.

4) Proto.

No matter how you slice it, sending in that money is NOT just buying proto. Even if proto is all they want, they're still buying YOUR right to be on here for free. Yall should be grateful.

Banner

IPB Image