They[The family] volunteered willingly.

Weak in death? We have no sources on Vampires being punished in the afterlife. We do know that they exist on Nirn as undead. We also know little on Molag Bal's mortal champions whom never become vampires, but still undertake his "training" regime.

Molag Bal teaches us to never be prideful and arrogant. That in the end, we are all flesh. And in this understanding of our weakness, we can still become powerful. Mehrunes Dagon teaches us to be proud of whom we are. To relish in what little power we do have, and to use it without fear. No matter how weak we are, we can bring change, and destruction. That we should aspire to our egotistical desires.

Worship both at once, and you're a well-balanced don't-want-to-mess-with-this-guy guy/girl.

Pretty much lol I know I might be murdered but during the TESO voice actor reveal Molag bal's voice actor says this line it seems this line is referring to the player. "Your black heart pleases me mortal, I will leave you with a gift and one day you will repay me with your soul."

This action makes the PC immortal pretty much molag bal has crazy ideas in terms of gifts lol this line makes me quite interested in the story personally.

indeed. I point to the worship of him when people say things like "people these days.."

Exactly. Every nasty thing under the sun has existed since men first walked the Earth.

Honestly, this perfectly encapsulates my point about good and evil. We have no real context for the child sacrifices of Moloch, except for the texts passed down to us from the people who considered themselves Moloch's enemies; of course we will be taught that this god is "evil," without even considering the reasons or logic behind the actions of his worshipers. Yet at the same time in a different place, the ancient Greeks were exposing children they didn't want to keep, and we often don't bother to remember it because (in general) we love our cultural ancestors and don't want to think badly of them. Considering that the one kind of child-murder was meant to keep a god happy and the other was simply a means of economic expediency, who should we really be criticizing here?

Why not both? Killing your baby is always bad all the time for any reason.

But that ignores the people can just plain be wrong about things. There's a reality outside our perceptions (some philosophy nerds might disagree here, depending on their favourite school of philosophy, but that's most intuitive view of the world). Is Moloch (or let's say Moloch's followers - I think most people, regardless of their modern day religious affiliation would agree Moloch doesn't actually exist) actually more evil just because people say so? Are the ancient Greeks actually less evil just because people say so?

Maybe it's just a mis-wording on your part, but it sounds as though you're trying to justify child-sacrifice.

This is why denying the existence of evil is very controversial.

Good and evil are points of view.

As for the topic, I don't think any daedric prince is evil.

We need you incharge of the government Harry. So if in my point of view murder is good, I can head out of my hut with Crossbow in hand and murder a student can I? Because Hagrid thinks it's good?

Aren't all et'Ada different aspects of the same Dreamer? If you change your dream when lucid dreaming, are you evil?

No, laws would stop you from doing so.

Lemme give ya an example.

If a man thinks by killing people he is saving them from some evil is he right in his cause? To you and I he is crazy but to him he is doing good.

So in this case, what is good and what is evil? As we see it, he is evil, as he sees it, he is good.

In the end, none of us are right because these are opinions however, He IS a law breaker and he will go to jail.

To top it off, I ask you, what is good?

I'm no lore master so..I have no clue what a Et'ada is yet.

Good is anything that benefits humanity and life. Happiness, health, helping those in need. Evil is anything that goes against humanity and life. Murder and what have you..

I'm not religious personally, but there are those who believe that we are all born with an understanding of moral good.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I trying to say that you were right.

Et'Ada are entities who came about from the interplay of Anu and Padomay. They are the Aerda and Daedra.

But the man in my post thinks he is doing good.

What makes him evil besides our opinion?

Law and order are what is "good" imo however, lets look at in game uses of a "evil" daedric prince in skyrim.

The stormcloaks want to free skyrim right? they want change and with change comes destruction right? Guess who's realm is all about change.

Ah I see (I'm not to good with lore yet as I'm still reading the imperial library )

The man in your post is deluded, what he's doing is going against humanity and life. Thus he's evil in my opinion.

What makes him evil is that he's deluded. For some reason he thinks that murder is good, when it isn't.

Yes, but people can be wrong. People believed for centuries that the Sun revolves around the Earth. That doesn't make it true. Now granted, which body revolves around which is a fact that can simply be checked once one has the right instruments, whereas good and evil is an estimation. But it nonetheless holds true: People can be wrong; that doesn't mean their wrongness forms reality. There is a factual reality outside our sensory perceptions.

Deluded or not, he still thinks he's right just like we think he's wrong.

In the end, no one is right and he is just a law breaker.

It all comes from point of view "His vs Ours" none are right because we all have different opinions.

In the end, what is right is that he broke the law and will be going to jail.

I never said people couldn't be wrong, I even wrote that I think the man I used as an example is wrong however, this is our opinion.

"He thinks he's right" "We know he's wrong" <-- these are our opinions

"He's a law breaker" <-- that is a fact.

And before anyone asks me, Hell no and I'm siding with the crazy dude in my example.

No, that's the thing. Some of those "opinions" (estimations, really) are right, others are wrong. Just because some are wrong does not mean it's all "just a matter of opinion".

Both are facts, and in both cases people could be wrong. Who knows, there might be a most arcane law somewhere that allows exactly that kind of murder. Now, since there is only a finite amount of laws that is doubtful, but... take gravity for example. Is gravity a fact? Well, best as we know. But it might be an entirely different force masquerading as gravity. This would mean all our physics is wrong, but that's possible (if very, very improbable).

Just because there is a risk we are wrong in stating a fact does not make it less of a fact!

That's the thing though, can you prove for a fact that someone is evil without using Your idea of evil? (Do we all see the same things as evil?)

If we we're to go by opinions there'd be no need for a law system. Innocent, until proven guilty in the court of law not we all think he is evil hang em.

And at the end of the day, Good and evil are points of view, show me proof they aren't.

It's not nearly as hard a concept as people make it. People have value or they don't. If they do you have to explain where they got it from.

If you want to be pedantic you cannot prove anything. You can only falsify statements, only disprove them; you can never truly prove anything. Basic philosophy of science according to Popper. And yet, on a pragmatical, practical, every-day level we do hold things to be proven, even though strictly speaking that's impossible. Basically, de facto we give them leeway to standards of evidence. It's the same with good and evil, really. Yes, our judgements of good and evil can never truly be proven, but so what, the same is true of science. And just as scientific statements are nevertheless good enough for every day life, ethic statements about good and evil are good enough for every day life. And just as we keep to the rules of the scientific process (at least ideally) to avoid error as much as possible, we use the law system to avoid error as much as possible. Because error is of course always possible... but so what?

Again my point in this all is that Good and Evil are points of view meaning they are opinions.

I've got nothing else to say as we have derailed this thread far enough.

The question still remains. If you change your dream, when lucid dreaming are you evil? Are you evil if you know that your not taking a life, only altering a dream? We know that Molag Bal knows about CHIM. Is Molag Bal "evil" when he is only changing things of the Dream? What he does to everyone else he does to himself.

Yeah, you already told your position. You only failed to provide sufficient arguments for it.


But "altering a dream" and "taking a life" are not mutually exclusive here. Okay, so you and me know the TES world is just a dream. But imagine you don't, and then go through the games, or through the (mundane) lore and the books and all that. They depict a society that is not very different from our own - a real society, not a dreamlike image of a society. The people in that "dream" clearly live. In fact, CHIM would be impossible if there were not egos, hence people, in that dream. CHIM is after all maintaining the own ego while realizing the truth of the world - but that only works if there are egos in the first place, that is, if the inhabitants of the dream have an own consciousness. And they do. Hence they are alive.

Really, if you consist of atoms or of dreams makes no difference. "Cogito ergo sum" holds.