| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Tyros |
Posted - 01 Apr 2004 : 21:59:50
Hail!
I have heard it said that such deities as Ilmater and Loviator or Talos and Lathander don't get along very well, and I am curious to know if folk think this is the way we mere mortals think the gods act and inter-relate or if it is the way the gods actually relate.
Personally, I would think that Loviator and Ilmater make, errrrr, "intersting bedfellows" to say the least. But the allegedly poor relationship between Lathander and Talos would itself seem to betray the reality of the relationship between renewal and destruction. One would think that a god would realize this before a mere mortal ever would. In fact, if I were to mythologize the relationship between destruction and renewal I would say that Lathander sprung from the lions of Talos', who himself overthrew the static rule of the elder gods, and in doing so brought about the dawn of creation.
Thoughts? Comments? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Apr 2004 : 04:24:06
That's right Shadowlord, but that entry contains only brief details (and consequently was not the entry I was thinking about). He's described in at least two other tomes - one being in the ol' greybox, and the other is a tome currently being used by the Lady Kazandra. I'll get her to track the reference down to better answer your questions.
|
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 21:09:49
Rhauntides is described in the FRCS, under the Deepingdale entry, located on pages 128-129.
Enjoy...  |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 20:53:55
You got it there. At least, that's how I translate it.  I think you're trying to get back at me for "confusing" you earlier. |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 19:45:58
OOOOOHHHHH! Now that can be measured. You simply take the total weight of the clay jar and subtract the actual weight of said jar (when said jar lacks the 'space' in the centre) and vola! You now have the weight of space the space... I do like this way...
But back to this space thing and illusions, is he saying the the five mile 'Space' between the Twin Towers of the Eternal Eclipse isn't there at all? (<-Example) That Ku is pretty hard to argue against since a Jar can hold contain something, without a space to contain anything it's naught but a large paperweight... unless one says it is holding containing baked clay... Is he saying said space does not exist though?... Well basically it doesn't but that's not the point (currently)? Hmmm (all this could be very useful in disproving that Toril is round/spherical)
ALSO! This Rhauntides of Deepingdale... He deals mainly with the weave? Do you know if he has any other areas of thought? (We feel generous so We'll wait until you can get back to your books on this one though ) |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 16:16:43
Cardinal, I'm talking about the space that is in the physical world -- as Sage said, negative space. I'm pretty sure he believes in positive space, which is why his idea is so confusing.
Sage, where is Rhauntides (sounds like a Greek name ) in a source book? I'd like to look him up. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 13:43:28
It's discussions like this that remind me of my research into the Yamato cultural concept of Ku. Traditionally, Ku translates as nothingness, though it might be described as negative space that defines positive space. For example, a vase is a shape of clay with an opening in the middle: clay surrounding space. It is the empty space that defines the vase, which otherwise would be only a shape of clay.
As for Faerunian philosophers, the only one the springs to mind at the moment (since I'm away from my books) is the Sage of Deepingdale, Rhauntides. His researches into the nature of the Weave, and it's overall affect on the physical body is one of his many particular areas of study.
|
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 07:06:15
Ok are we talking about 'space' space or 'what are we going to do with all this extra space' space? We can almost see what the point is... but we have no idea. Your whole LxWxH explaination has confused us somewhat (bravo ) as how can you measure something that has neither length, width, (depth?), or height? We're not one to say it can't be done... but... how?
Also to repeat for Sage or anyother knowledgable scribes out there, Are their any non-partial philosophers in the realms out there? Again excluding us here at Candlekeep? But many would just say we're a buncha quarks  (sorry, bad and pointless pun) |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 05:45:42
No, what he meant was space, as in length, depth, and height. He insists that it's all illusion.
Yes, our sight makes an illusion of things getting smaller based on distance, even with only one eye. That's still explained by paralax. It hardly proves that space doesn't exist. |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 05:20:57
When one goes into space one really does not really see much, as there isn't alot to really see (even if one was able to see air there still wouldn't be enough to see it) so really one does not see space but the space between space... sort of. Same concept as 'nothing'. 'Nothing' cannot exists nor can 'nothing' be pictured or thought of... even an empty void when thought of is usually pictured as black and empty but the color gives something to look at thus looking at the color black (perhaps in a three dimensional way) but still something none the less.
We're not sure it was Hume We were thinking of though. The school of thought we were following was... need and example for this one... Ok Our kitchen. Right now it does not exist becuase we are not in the kitchen to know if it is truly there. And if we left to find out this would cease to exist until we return. It is a belief that all else is a creation of one's mind and none really exists.... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 05 Apr 2004 : 04:52:25
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
You could be talking about David Hume
Or, you could be talking about an art professor at my college. He claims that space doesn't exist, and bases this assumption on the visual illusion that objects are smaller the farther away they are. This is of course better explained by the simple principles of parallax, but he didn't want to listen to me . . . . |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 04 Apr 2004 : 17:26:37
Now this raises the question, Are there any philosophers of note in Faerun (and we don't mean the various old men who have imbued a bit too much in this or that tavern). For all it's mighty ideals and thoughts it seems that there is a place lacking where there is such gatherings of thinking minds in Faerun (excepting Candlekeep, unofficially) and if there are such gatherings then under what God (if any) would they fall unde? Oghma? Some other? And are Monks, by description more or less, the major philosophers of the Realms? What would be the Gods' take on philosophy? It seems it mostly deals with things other than the divine, so is it a hinderence or a mild amusement? Thoughts? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 04 Apr 2004 : 10:26:27
quote:
Originally posted by Cardinal Deimos
SO! Shall we recap? All thoughts entailing Faerun (thus the present case of one Jack Archer of Earth) should be disscussed without bias without any reflection on any 'real world' people, beliefs or ideas (get into philosophy and you'll find that there are many ideas that reject the fact that the world actually exists, No this was not an Idea first proposed by 'The Matrix' merely popularized by it in a way, we do however forget the philosopher of that theory).
You could be talking about David Hume, a Scottish philosopher who was considered one of the greatest skeptics in the history of philosophy. Hume thought that one can know nothing outside of experience, and experience-based on one's subjective perceptions-never provides true knowledge of reality. Even the law of cause and effect was, for Hume, an unjustified belief: If one drops a ball, one cannot be certain it will fall to the ground. Rather, it is only possible to recognize through past experience that certain pairs of events (dropping a ball, the ball striking the ground) have always accompanied one another.
Of course there are others, but then Hume has always fascinated me...
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 04 Apr 2004 : 07:15:51
Having not come here since that last post on this scroll, I must confess to some confusion as to what exactly everyone is so upset about. I suppose it must have to do with the scrolls Alaundo's burned -- and considering his ideas on the imcompatibility of scrolls and flames, I suppose it had to deserve its fate, whatever it was.
All I can say is I did not mean to spark anything here, though I seem to have done so anyway. |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 18:42:54
* Shakes his head*
Such a shame. All avenues should be able to be discussed freely and without bias. The only one who seems to break this is you Tyros. You have gone and got all offended by a mere passing comment and then rise to attack other scribes here. Perhaps Gods do exist, perhaps they do not but that matters little, the point is that upon Faerun the Gods seem to truely exists and to Jack Archer (We are just making a guesstimate here), who has had any reall options for faith on Earth (there are few real Accepted religions and many that still seem to be frowned upon) he is able to judge my his own stantdards, where most other gods or magic is usually attributed to the Fallen one. This usually would mean anyone as faithful as Jack would have some pretty serious questions and thoughts about the new world around him. If we look at my Character 'Cardinal Deimos' He is a persona (and various attributed personas) that I have brought from Sanctuary, (The world/plane of Diablo 1&2) While he sometimes respects various powers (Lolth most particularly) he is not above spitting upon them in a breath after a prayer to them. He is used to dealing with Celestials from the Celestial Kingdoms and fiends (Demons rather than the plane's definition of Devils) from the pits of the Hells, not Deities that take notice.
As for ourselves we have not made our true beliefs known, oh true we research some of our native beliefs true enough but as for any real belief this is neither a place for such talk nor the place to say (as it is not generally... smiled upon more or less). But noone here is debating whether the God(s) on this side of the Net and Faeun exist (Excepting perhaps us, but we're what most would say is insane, and this a learning lesson for some). Rather than take up arms in automatic defense of some thoughts or beliefs, can we not sit an talk like civilized beings as we hope we all are?
SO! Shall we recap? All thoughts entailing Faerun (thus the present case of one Jack Archer of Earth) should be disscussed without bias without any reflection on any 'real world' people, beliefs or ideas (get into philosophy and you'll find that there are many ideas that reject the fact that the world actually exists, No this was not an Idea first proposed by 'The Matrix' merely popularized by it in a way, we do however forget the philosopher of that theory). People are welcome to their opinions yes, however we do not feel these opinions can be kept in the dark but frankly talked about (when pertaining to realmslore) Noted that all opinions will cause disagreements, but such should be talked over not fought and bled over... That is the mistake the Crusades (in general) made.
Treat all with kindess and bequeath words of constuction when disagreements arise. Be true to self but strike not thy fellows. Prey not thy neighbor but on the fine food and Drink at the Inn. Let thy opinions be heard when they are relevant but be prepared to speak them over when they are either misunderstood or countered with another opinion. Never strike at thy fellows. (always worthy of another note). Well, there it tis. The Cardinal's Code (subject to change in the persuit of good RPing but not ever in Malice). |
| Sarta |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 17:58:51
I've known quite a few wiccans that believe in and pray to the Celtic pantheon. However, Tyros, you are the first I've seen to carry such a huge chip on your shoulder when the oft misused term mythology is brought up. Here's the first definition of mythology from dictionary.com:
quote:
A body or collection of myths belonging to a people and addressing their origin, history, deities, ancestors, and heroes.
and for myth:
quote:
A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
As such, it is equally as applicable to the tales of Gilgamesh from the Sumerian culture (I chose this one because to my knowledge nobody today follows it) as it is to the Judeo-Christian body of work in the bible and various apocraphia.
It does not mean that this body of work is untrue, it simply means one is discussing the stories that relate to these personalities and events.
Personally, I feel apologies should abound about now for people losing their cool and this thread should be locked down or made to disappear.
Sarta |
| Alaundo |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 09:38:39
Well met 
Well, well, what a mess I had to clean up upon my return! 
Certain writings within this scroll have been removed.
Tyros, further outbursts will not be tolerated herein, lest you feel my wrath! ::taps his 'staff of the irritated moderator +5' in his palm:: |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 04:54:42
Tis getting rather violent in here no? Still, We have a hard time following the nature of the arguement at hand. Most are willing to admit that various mythological beliefs are just that, be they Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Norse, Celtic, etc (although we have heard that some still offer prayers to such things since that is where the belief sprung from IE. Pray to say Aphrodite for love in greece, although this could be more Superstition or perhap all merely rumor). Point being the fact that it is universally (more or less) accepted as myth. This reminds us of saying the 'Lucifer' is evil, this is universally accepted (again, more or less) but such would be very offending the Free Masons who do not believe that 'Lucifer' is evil but the Lightbearer and Bearer of knowledge and wisdom. This is their thoughts, but still it is universally accepted that 'Lucifer' is evil as well as the Free Masons being evil as well. Who knows though, perhaps we all all wrong and they all actually exist... wouldn't we all look like fools then?
DDH_101, We believe Tyros was posting 'in character' more or less. The Bard reference was for that of Author, just a simple misunderstanding there. As for the Journal excerpt, that is from A character named Jack Archer ( Copyright Bookwyrm... we guess) Jack is a Christian (more or less)...let's try again... here Jack is a person from earth ( thus has a knowledge of christianity and it's beliefs, we really don't know if Jack is a true christian, only Bookwyrm does) who was mysteriously transported to Faerun. Now any person from earth would be a little skeptical (whether a believer here or not) about there being very 'real' gods who take an active part in the world, let alone more than one. Thus perhaps not Book's own beliefs but the beliefs of the Character Jack Archer.
SO! Shall we recap? Somethings are universally accepted as fiction, Myth or superstition (more or less), The bard thing was a simple misunderstanding, and don't hate the author nor think that the views or acts of any character is the beliefs or thoughts of said author. Never believe anything of base value and simple fact nor on blind faith alone (things always have a habit of surprising one on either side). The Free Masons are not evil..... And Santa Claus DOES exist. That is all for todays lecture, tomorrow the Inter-personal relationships between Deities ( AS IT SHOULD BE, before Alaundo shows up...). |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 04:14:12
Tyros, I would suggest that you edit your last post. Such personal attacks are regarded here at Candlekeep, in much the same way as negative conduct, or the use of offensive language... If you have something to say (of a personal nature) to anyone here at Candlekeep, please use the private ethereal mail service...
Now, the Bookwyrm's claim - quote:
What? "Real"? The only thing that separates "fantasy" gods from "mythological" gods is that people used to believe in the latter. That doesn't make them real.
is completely justified, and well supported by both historical, and archeological evidence.
Now granted, the mythological beliefs from many of the ancient peoples throughout the earlier periods of world history were greatly important in shaping the human view of the cosmos, his place in it, and his relation to all things non-human, but that doesn't make it anymore real than a child's belief in the notion of Father Christmas.
|
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 04:02:46
Tyros, first of all, I don't even know why you are having a tantrum from such a simple discussion. Second of all, don't snap back at me because you weren't being clear, okay?
You said "bard", when you should have said "author" since you are trying to talk about the author of the book, James Lowder. Also, don't even try to get technical on me. James Lowder wrote the book, but Mystra a character IN the book, unless you want me to expand on that.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 03:07:54
quote:
Originally posted by Tyros
Only that we should be discussing fantasy gods, not bashing real ones ... which might very much offend someone.
What? "Real"? The only thing that separates "fantasy" gods from "mythological" gods is that people used to believe in the latter. That doesn't make them real. |
| Sarta |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 02:52:25
quote:
Originally posted by DDH_101
People worship gods and not the other way around is because gods grant them power, riches, and fame.
I wouldn't say that this is actually a very strong argument. After all, people give gifts to the gods as well. Those who are faithful will explain that their power is their god's power, they will sacrifice riches back to their god, and claim that their actions were done in the name of their god. In this way they gift the gods with power, riches, and fame. As their glory waxes, so too does their god's. Furthermore, the vast number of worshippers of various deities never receive any of these gifts. Many never see a divine spell performed in their lives.
A stronger attack on the argument that perhaps gods worship their followers would be to look closely at the relationship between gods and humans. The gods of faerun require worship to sustain their places as deities. Humans do not require worship, nor even divine intervention, in order to remain true to their chosen god, they only require faith. Gods, being fairly intelligent, must surely understand the nature of this relationship. Therefore, it seems very unlikely that they would actually worship their followers, but instead merely provide opportunities to sustain their worshippers faith.
Sarta |
| Sarta |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 02:35:51
Bookwyrm: I liked your little Jack Archer bit. Before I got to the part about Christianity, I thought you might have been channeling Xenophanes for the Forgotten Realms.
Sarta |
| Tyros |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 00:42:47
quote:
Originally posted by DDH_101
Tyros, what bard are you talking about? Prince of Lies is a novel written by James Lowder, okay? He created the storyline and I don't even know why you are mentioning some "bard".
Oh. Pardon my ignorance. The "story-teller". Is that clear enough? Or should I break it down to something even more rudimentary?
And the quote comes from Mystra's observation, another god, NOT a mortal.
Excuse me?!?! You mean James Lowder right? The person who wrote the book. |
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 03 Apr 2004 : 00:33:21
quote:
Originally posted by Tyros
Hail!
quote:
Talos and Lanthander can never agree and always end up nearly fighting. Tempus will always try to solve every problem with war and violence, no matter how minor it is. It is because of all this that the gods, no matter how powerful they are, won't be able to adapt with the others.
Indeed. So says the bard who penned the Prince of Lies. But that bard could be wrong, no? Humans often project their preconceived notions off onto the unknown or poorly known. Spoiled aristocrats are notorious for it.
But if said bard was indeed actual factual, then it raises another question ... why do we humans worship the gods instead of the gods worshipping us? I have come across master smiths for instance, nearly godlike in their skill, WHO COULD ALSO see things form many, many other points of view and had skills far beyond smithing. For me, if a god does not present or respresent a higher standard to strive for, if he/she is incapable of wisdom any greater than than a child, if he/she is less than me in terms of basic awareness and understanding, smaller than life and less than human, then worshipping a god would definitely seem to be a retrograde step.
Hold on. Maybe thats why I curse in the name of Talos, and thats about the extent of my worship of any god.
Anyway, beyond power alone, what do these beings of limited understanding really have to offer us "mere" mortals? No wonder we have Cults of the Dragon and the like ... men are starving for guidence.
Frith!
Tyros, what bard are you talking about? Prince of Lies is a novel written by James Lowder, okay? He created the storyline and I don't even know why you are mentioning some "bard". And the quote comes from Mystra's observation, another god, NOT a mortal.
People worship gods and not the other way around is because gods grant them power, riches, and fame. |
| Tyros |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 20:35:19
Hail!
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
I'm sorry -- perhaps it's all the god's names you placed in that (which I wouldn't put in as equivalent in most respects)
Fair enough, and I can see the reasons why, but the fact of the matter is that each of those god-names along with such words as deus, dios, theos, tir, tivar, diar, etc. all sprang from a common Indo-European root; which means both "heavenly radiance" and "god".
>
>but I fail to see your point. Was there something you wished to >discuss?
>
Only that we should be discussing fantasy gods, not bashing real ones ... which might very much offend someone.
Frith! |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 19:47:24
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Very possibly. I can see him getting into a fatal argument if he ever meets a stereotypical paladin.
More likely, he'll get arrested in Waterdeep under the "blasphamy against the gods" law. That's assuming, of course, that he's still there after he makes his conclusion about the gods.
Maybe not... If he stuck to the Plinth, and didn't bother anyone, he'd prolly not break any laws. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 19:20:33
I'm sorry -- perhaps it's all the god's names you placed in that (which I wouldn't put in as equivalent in most respects), but I fail to see your point. Was there something you wished to discuss?
(Note that this isn't a challenge, I simply don't know what you meant to say.) |
| Tyros |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 18:39:58
Hail!
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Even if their magic is, fundamentally, different from mine, I can find little in these gods than power and pettiness. They are so similar, in that respect, to the pagan gods of my world. Indeed, many seem to have been transfered with humans from my world, such as Oghma, Tyr, Lovitar, and others. Their "duties," if one can call them that, also seem to fall along the same basic track.
I am familiar with TyR's place amongst the folk of this world called Earth, and obviously with Earth itself. He is admirable and wise as they know him, willingly giving up his hand and perhaps even his honour to save his pantheon ... a pantheon that was itself united of supportative of its own ... and the friends of mortals as well.
I find little in common between the Tyr of Faerun and the TyR/Tiw/Tig/Tio/Tiu/Ziu/Zio/Jiu-pitar/Zeus/Tiwaz/Dyaus/Sius of Earth ... unless of course we look to those known as Greeks and their concept of the God. But it is not the gods of other world's that is at question here ...
Frith! |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 18:32:47
Very possibly. I can see him getting into a fatal argument if he ever meets a stereotypical paladin.
More likely, he'll get arrested in Waterdeep under the "blasphamy against the gods" law. That's assuming, of course, that he's still there after he makes his conclusion about the gods. |
| lowtech |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 18:07:08
Jack Archers' going to get himself killed one of these days... |
|
|
