31 replies to this topic

[ShadowMonkey71]

I read some opinions on the headmaster so I wanted to start a thread to follow people's opinion.

Here's mine:

It is a harsh sight when a pet bird no longer wishes to eat, to speak, or to fly. No matter how well fed or taken care of, a caged bird will still desire his freedom for he will know how it felt once...even men who know nothing about freedom will chase after it...

On another note, this reminds me of the FMA delema when people said alchemy is to be used for the good of the people, for the sake of humanity- but the Headmaster does not consider himself part of humanity so why "take care of them." Is it because without a steady hand humanity will bring about it's own destruction? Should humans conceded to "I Robot Vicky's" logic: "You charge us with your safekeeping, yet despite our best efforts, your countries wage wars, you toxify your Earth and pursue ever more imaginative means of self-destruction. You cannot be trusted with your own survival."
Personally I believe being human involves suffering, but the ability to overcome those sufferings make life worth living. The Headmaster is robbing humans of this human aspect.

[Lock]

So, you think that consist of trying to create an utopia a futile attempt?

But yeah whenever someone happens to have such mindset, you could say that they were "enlightened" by their social/moral duty to save the world and bring peace to everyone, just like pretty much every evangelists, religion followers and sects/cults out there.

So... this brings to a new topic: Should religion exist?

This is a really annoying topic to debate on, because it leads to so many questionnable leads which some may insult some people's respects(religion/belief). Whatever, we're just here to open up a discussion, so don't take it too personnally for what I just said(or may say in the following paragraphs)...

So you're saying that it's better to live in a savage way? To be indifferent? Or to just "acknowledge" the fact?

But that sums up as NOT DOING ANYTHING (which is better in your opinion)?

[YellowKingValley]

The Headmaster is robbing humans of this human aspect.

The Headmaster treats magicians well. How did he rob them?

Oh! You meant the animals, the gois! He fed them well. How did he rob them?

---

Real life equivalent of supporters of goi rights:

Animal right activist and vegans.

---

Hmm... even my examples are not extreme enough. Mogamett sees them as bugs. Not animals.

For bugs, you squish them everytime. With satisfaction.

In my opinion, he treats bugs as animals. Such a kind person.

[ShadowMonkey71]

The Native Americans lived in such a "savage way" where they did not worship any single being, but instead they lived in harmony with nature- using it to the fullest extent. There were cases with actual savagery (cannibalism, forced assimilation, and dangerous medical practices), but if their principles of harmony with nature persisted through...modernization (it's not good to eat people), religion- that usually promises a better life either while living or in death (usually to pray on the fear of the unknown- death-)- would not be necessary. I know in a way worshipping nature would be a kind of religion, but there are too many definitions of religion to get into each of them and generalizing them just makes it worse. Religion, in my opinion- along with a few facts-, has caused more bloodshed than any other war combined (Holy crusades, Native American slaughter, Holocaust, etc...) and is no longer necessary in at this time. Then again it is not the religion that is dangerous but the people controlling/maintaining said religion- which I'd rather not get into (conspiracies).

Dear @YellowKingValley
"Well sir, while I may not agree with what you say I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Peter Griffin / François-Marie Arouet
That is all...

I found an image that helps convey my views:
http://www.damnlol.com/imagine-by-pablo-stanley-21248.html
Kinda against my character to be so optimistic but...what if...peace truly was achieved...

[clamzoopa]

It's the individuals that are bad whether they're magicians or not. Once they get into a position of power they try to correct the flaws of generalizations, which means innocent people are brought in. It's probably the oldest recurring theme in history.

[YellowKingValley]

Comment by TetsuDan
Not recognizing those obvious physical differences is called senility, which is never a valid excuse for anyone in any position of power.

Comment by Empusa
So the Chancellor has, to put it bluntly, a few screws loose.

Basically you people are calling him names: senile, mad, evil, etc.

Comment by TetsuDan
If someone in a position of power is known to be senile, they need to be removed.

Thus advocating for his removal, which normally means WAR.

---

You may be able to destroy an apartheid state using force and power,
but you cannot remove racist beliefs and heal enmity using force and power.

Aladdin will fail hard if he uses your suggestions.

Comment by Empusa
Intelligence is one of the things that separates us.

Your classification is intelligence.

Less intelligent = no rights.
More intelligent = full rights.

[Euodiachloris]

Urgh. No matter how grand your reasons may seem... the moment you dehumanise a group of people, you're opening a very nasty door.

Intergroup bias will not be far behind. Followed by flat-out out-group persecution in any number of forms. Both lead to some very bad places, neither of which herald utopian ideals. I agree with Terry Pratchett on this one: the moment somebody starts to refer to others as "things" rather than people, it's time to pack the bags or get them out of their position of power. ASAP.

From Carpe Jugulum, a conversation between the wet-behind-the-ears Pastor Oats (well, The Quite Reverend Mightily-Praiseworthy-Are-Ye-Who-Exalteth-Om Oats, to be precise ) and Granny Weatherwax, witch, Never Mess With Granny^Trope version:-

“There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example,” said Oats.

“And what do they think? Against it, are they?” said Granny Weatherwax.

“It’s not as simple as that. It’s not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of grey.”

“Nope.”

“Pardon?”

“There’s no greys, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.

“It’s a lot more complicated than that –”

“No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”

“Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes –”

“But they starts with thinking about people as things …”

Terry Pratchett: distilling philosophy, sociology and psychology with liberal applications of humour on the Discworld since 1983.

Edited by Euodiachloris, 18 November 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[clamzoopa]

Urgh. No matter how grand your reasons may seem... the moment you dehumanise a group of people, you're opening a very nasty door. Intergroup bias will not be far behind. Followed by flat-out out-group persecution in any number of forms. Both lead to some very bad places, neither of which herald utopian ideals. I agree with Terry Pratchett on this one: the moment somebody starts to refer to others as "things" rather than people, it's time to pack the bags or get them out of their position of power. ASAP. From Carpe Jugulum, a conversation between the wet-behind-the-ears Pastor Oats (well, The Quite Reverend Mightily-Praiseworthy-Are-Ye-Who-Exalteth-Om Oats, to be precise ) and Granny Weatherwax, witch, Never Mess With Granny^Trope version:- Terry Pratchett: distilling philosophy, sociology and psychology with liberal applications of humour on the Discworld since 1983.

What I see from that is somewhat an argument in semantics coupled with a person who feels as though they know everything. Just because she says it doesn't make it correct. Yes, indeed when you treat people like objects it's a recipe for disaster, but to say all sins are from treating people as things sounds a little myopic. Lust is deemed a sin, does that mean I want to have sex with a 'thing'? Oh, I know, it's objectifying the women, right? Wrong. I love the way certain cars look, but it doesn't mean I want to have sex with it.

[Euodiachloris]

What I see from that is somewhat an argument in semantics coupled with a person who feels as though they know everything. Just because she says it doesn't make it correct. Yes, indeed when you treat people like objects it's a recipe for disaster, but to say all sins are from treating people as things sounds a little myopic. Lust is deemed a sin, does that mean I want to have sex with a 'thing'? Oh, I know, it's objectifying the women, right? Wrong. I love the way certain cars look, but it doesn't mean I want to have sex with it.

OK. That's certainly a viewpoint you're entitled to hold. Though, I was boiling it down and trying to stick to KISS. Do you want all my Sociology and Anthropology notes, mate, let alone my primary interest of Psychology? And, if I preach a bit... big whoop: deal with it. I don't mean to be sound as if I'm superior to anybody: heck... I'm currently unemployed due to long-term illness and few long-term prospects. <shrugs> I'm by no means in any superior boat of any description. <shrugs>

But, thanks for prejudging me by your own experience of patterns and, thus, limiting me to only the patterns you care to recognise. You proved my point nicely.

Edited by Euodiachloris, 19 November 2012 - 07:20 PM.

[ShadowMonkey71]

Just thougth I'd bring this up, but is it possible to come up with a proper ending (peace btw magicians and nonmagicians) as Aladinn has foreseen?
Zettai Karen Children- they're killed by a nuclear strike (at least that's what's been foretold)
X-men - human/mutant extermination campaigns
Halo - Covenant vs. Humanity (the story is still ongoing) but this one has a complex answer to working together

The only possible solution I can think of is if there's an overwellming common enemy in which all would be destroyed if they didn't cooperate.

[Hououin Kyouma]

I simply don't think there will be a good ending, but we'll know soon.
All depends from Aladdin and if he can find a solution.

[Pillamelai]

I think his starting premise, that is, the belief that magicians are a different species, is wrong. If magicians are capable of interbreeding with humans and producing fertile offspring, then they are the same species. Therefore, even if some of the conclusions reached from such thinking aren't wrong (for instance, the need for an independent magician union/country), one cannot be sure.
I don't think a happy ending could be reached, nonetheless. The Headmaster's beliefs steam from hatred and trauma; he's the kind of character that will go mad before seeing all he has build crumbling before his eyes.
My guess would be that, after a long and hard battle, he will acknowledge his errors, but he'll think it's too late for him, and so he will let himself die while shedding tears, smiling, muttering something along the lines of "the future is all yours"; then, his rukh, in the form of his younger self, would depart for the horizon, holding hands with the rukh of his late sister.

[Shinikage]

you are missing half of the point, the chancellor is seeing the goi the same way as we see animals. but he is not forcing em to stay there they have decided to stay there on their own they don't have to worry about anything in order to survive so it means they could use their time to improve themselves and their environment but instead of that they only drink eat fornicate and sleep, both sides are wrong but after all humans always tend to want to have their problems solved by some higher entity ( Government, God, etc)
be honest and answer this to yourself: have you have wished at least once to be able to live without having to work?

[Pillamelai]

you are missing half of the point, the chancellor is seeing the goi the same way as we see animals. but he is not forcing em to stay there they have decided to stay there on their own they don't have to worry about anything in order to survive so it means they could use their time to improve themselves and their environment but instead of that they only drink eat fornicate and sleep, both sides are wrong but after all humans always tend to want to have their problems solved by some higher entity ( Government, God, etc)
be honest and answer this to yourself: have you have wished at least once to be able to live without having to work?

I believe he is, in fact, forcing them to stay. Every goi that can't pay his/her debts, of that has committed crimes, end up in the camps. Maybe they fool themselves into thinking they are content with not having the need to work, but I'll bet they would leave the hell out of there were they given the chance.

[clamzoopa]

But, thanks for prejudging me by your own experience of patterns and, thus, limiting me to only the patterns you care to recognise. You proved my point nicely.

Not really sure how I proved your point or prejudged you. I said I agreed with your point, but that was it. Not to mention if you had read more carefully you would see I never said you were making your self sound superior, I was referring to the old woman. You can give me all the notes and research you want to, but it's just people's opinions.

be honest and answer this to yourself: have you have wished at least once to be able to live without having to work?

Absoutely, but what conclusion are you trying to get to with that question? There are many different ways to be able to live without working. Winning the lottery would be great. I could just live off the land, but I have no interest in that. I would not want a rich relative to die so I could get an inheritance, nor would I want to live without working if it means someone else has to do my share or I have to give up certain freedoms.

Edited by clamzoopa, 26 November 2012 - 05:57 PM.

[Shiroux]

Well, in my opinion, the chancellor is just another normal "human" being as any other. His action can't be call savage in regarding to sector 5. The goi make the choice to stay there as they will have an easy life so it's their choice. As for his view on the goi as nothing but livestock, it's the same as us viewing pig or chick to be livestock. Why do we view other human to be of the same species as us? Because they have the same shape. The chancellor now only see them as a pile of mud and their only worth is to produce goi so his action can't be consider evil or savage. If I would describe him, I would say he is kind....very kind. Even after what he experience, he still give his livestock the choices. Do us human even give those animal we kill, the chance to refuse? Nah...

Edited by Shiroux, 02 December 2012 - 03:04 AM.

[YellowKingValley]

Live without working?

Slave was the answer.

[Euodiachloris]

Well, in my opinion, the chancellor is just another normal "human" being as any other. His action can't be call savage in regarding to sector 5. The goi make the choice to stay there as they will have an easy life so it's their choice. As for his view on the goi as nothing but livestock, it's the same as us viewing pig or chick to be livestock. Why do we view other human to be of the same species as us? Because they have the same shape. The chancellor now only see them as a pile of mud and their only worth is to produce goi so his action can't be consider evil or savage. If I would describe him, I would say he is kind....very kind. Even after what he experience, he still give his livestock the choices. Do us human even give those animal we kill, the chance to refuse? Nah...

Sooo... you're only human insofar as you have a "useful purpose" towards society, the energy, health, physical and mental capacity to carry it out, and otherwise have to meet criteria others lay down the nature of which you have no say in, let alone a say in the various yardsticks applied? And, tough if you didn't win the genetic/ life lottery, but, otherwise, still have the capacity for human emotion and thought? And, treating others like they have to prove their worth every three seconds or they remain beneath notice is "kind"?

After all, what that amounts to is "be lucky to be born with magic and/or pull at the heartstrings of somebody who is, as you don't count as 'human'".

Wow: Social Darwinism at its finest. Might I point out, at risk of being accused of crimes pertinent to Godwin's Law, where this kind of attitude winds up when taken to "logical" extremes? We be seeing such immoral apartheid in this here manga...

Edited by Euodiachloris, 02 December 2012 - 08:29 AM.

[YellowKingValley]

Sooo... you're only human insofar as you have a...

Nothing much to do with being a human. More of seeing another being as your equal, may it be another human or animal.

Can I say that you see other beings as your equal as long as they are human? I will say that it is just as wrong as seeing other beings as our equal just because they are magicians.

Too bad doggy. Rue the day you are born not a human, and fail to get the attention of a human. *sends a kick*

[Euodiachloris]

I was talking about other people: but, you can extend that to other beings, if you wish. The moment you accord none with the ability to suffer (and, so, do not have to worry about how you are making them suffer on a number of levels)... you are no longer "kind", however much you cheat yourself by truly believing you are and coming over superficially as such. By defining "useful" and "not useful", you can act to do anything you wish to those you deem "lesser" with a clean conscience and pass your own choice along down the line, no matter how others would deem your ethics. <shrugs>

If you're going to kill to eat; don't cheat yourself as to what you're doing. If you're going to discriminate and denigrate, know that that is exactly that that is what you are doing. In short, walking into actions blind to the consequences and broader aspect ain't good, no matter how comfortable it might be.

Edited by Euodiachloris, 02 December 2012 - 01:36 PM.