Talos: Hero or Villain?

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:43 am

Pshh... thinking it's bad that the world be destroyed. It's your imperial dogmatism that refuses freethinkers like the Thalmor from positing that the destruction of the world is good. Since when has the world been any good, anyways? What's there to like about the present kalpa?


Sweetrolls.

Love.

Sunsets.

In that order.

EDIT: PRAISE THE DRAGONBORN! *Talosgasm*
User avatar
jessica robson
 
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:54 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:20 pm

I'm drunk, and would like to be a Mer.

Happens to us all
User avatar
Penny Courture
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:59 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:01 am

Pshh... thinking it's bad that the world be destroyed. It's your imperial dogmatism that refuses freethinkers like the Thalmor from positing that the destruction of the world is good. Since when has the world been any good, anyways? What's there to like about the present kalpa?


There is more to existence than simply being able to live - in the state of pre-existence they are talking about, as I said earlier, they will be unable to learn, grow, or experience any new things. Being in that status would be like being locked in a room with no windows, forever. (And I mean no Internet, at that.)
User avatar
cutiecute
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:51 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:10 pm

Lorkhan is only evil if you believe existence and sentience is evil.

If you do it likely means you're an elf, which means you're below subhuman.
User avatar
Steve Fallon
 
Posts: 3503
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 12:29 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:02 pm

If you do it likely means you're an elf, which means you're below subhuman.


Or a Breton. Or Redguard.
User avatar
Aliish Sheldonn
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:19 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 11:36 am

Like others have said, what he is depends on where you're standing, and when you're standing there.
User avatar
Anna Kyselova
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:42 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:10 am

Didn't Lorkhan create Mundus to define the lower orders that they might achieve godhead?
User avatar
Sammie LM
 
Posts: 3424
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 1:59 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:08 am

Excuse my ignorance on this, but HOW is Talos keeping the Aldmeri from destroying physical reality? I thought he ascended to godhood and just kind of chilled...
User avatar
Chloé
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:15 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:13 pm

I know this is off topic, but I could have sworn the title read "Talos: Hero or Virgin?"
User avatar
Sweets Sweets
 
Posts: 3339
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:26 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:50 pm

I know this is off topic, but I could have sworn the title read "Talos: Hero or Virgin?"

:banghead:
User avatar
Jimmie Allen
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:39 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:54 am

No evidence of what? He had an affair with Barenziah and made her have an abortion to secure his line of succession and used the soul of his buddy to power the Numidium. He's done his fair share of shady things.
Don't forget killing his general, and being promoted upon murdering him
User avatar
Monika Fiolek
 
Posts: 3472
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 6:57 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:48 pm

Didn't Lorkhan create Mundus to define the lower orders that they might achieve godhead?
It's what the Vivec and Veloth believed. Nords somewhat, but more crude. Pretty sure Tiber learned of it. As for everyone else
Mer (save for the dunmer) believe it's a prison that must be destroyed. The Yodukans also believe it to be a prison, but unlike the mer, believe one must escape by finding a way out that doesn't involve blowing up the prison. With the dwemer....I'm thinking they chose the Yokudan path with the merrish idea of going back (except to the extreme beginning, not the Dawn).

Eh carp, forgot to use the edit.
User avatar
Louise Lowe
 
Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:08 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:16 pm

It's what the Vivec and Veloth believed. Nords somewhat, but more crude. Pretty sure Tiber learned of it. As for everyone else
Mer (save for the dunmer) believe it's a prison that must be destroyed. The Yodukans also believe it to be a prison, but unlike the mer, believe one must escape by finding a way out that doesn't involve blowing up the prison. With the dwemer....I'm thinking they chose the Yokudan path with the merrish idea of going back (except to the extreme beginning, not the Dawn).

Eh carp, forgot to use the edit.



The Dwemer sought something close to CHIM, in their way.

To transcend mortal boundaries set in place by immortal rulers. At its simplest, the state of chim provides an escape from all known laws of the divine worlds and the corruptions of the black sea of Oblivion. It is a return to the first brush of Anu-Padomay, where stasis and change created possibility. -http://www.imperial-library.info/content/more-psijic-endeavor

The Dwemer wanted something similar, but in a massive collective-borg-stompy-bot format (and come on, who wouldn't?).
User avatar
Joanne
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:25 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:06 pm

:banghead:

Er, problem? I misread the title and thought it was funny and I wanted to share. What's so bad about that?
User avatar
Darrell Fawcett
 
Posts: 3336
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 12:16 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:45 am

Hero and Villain.
The two are not incompatible as pretty much every Hero in the lore shows.
User avatar
Jerry Cox
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:21 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:16 pm

The Dwemer sought something close to CHIM, in their way.

To transcend mortal boundaries set in place by immortal rulers. At its simplest, the state of chim provides an escape from all known laws of the divine worlds and the corruptions of the black sea of Oblivion. It is a return to the first brush of Anu-Padomay, where stasis and change created possibility. -http://www.imperial-library.info/content/more-psijic-endeavor

The Dwemer wanted something similar, but in a massive collective-borg-stompy-bot format (and come on, who wouldn't?).
Well, yeah, when you get into the details of it, sure. Meant more in general. They wanted to go back to when Anu and Padomay first began to headbutt each other, so like with mer, they wanted to go back in time. But like the Yokudans, the destruction of Mundus seemed unnecessary.
User avatar
Amelia Pritchard
 
Posts: 3445
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:40 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:50 am

I am sure Talos has his fair share of skeleton's in the closet so to speak, but it just seems that in the end there is more good than bad with him.
User avatar
Alisia Lisha
 
Posts: 3480
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:52 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:32 pm

Talos is heroic. Not good or bad, just... great.
User avatar
David Chambers
 
Posts: 3333
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 4:30 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:37 pm

I am sure Talos has his fair share of skeleton's in the closet so to speak, but it just seems that in the end there is more good than bad with him.


How so? Is it worth keeping Mer-dom in prison so his own people can, selfishly, exist as they see fit?

As Vivec said to the Hortator, the temporal myth is man. Reach heaven by violence. Three cheers for the Thalmor.
User avatar
Agnieszka Bak
 
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 4:15 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:30 pm

How so? Is it worth keeping Mer-dom in prison so his own people can, selfishly, exist as they see fit?

As Vivec said to the Hortator, the temporal myth is man. Reach heaven by violence. Three cheers for the Thalmor.


So your saying that the will of the few (The Altmer) should take presidence over the will of the majority? I'd say if anyones being selfish, it'd be the Thalmor.
User avatar
Averielle Garcia
 
Posts: 3491
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:41 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:14 pm

The Dwemer sought something close to CHIM, in their way.

To transcend mortal boundaries set in place by immortal rulers. At its simplest, the state of chim provides an escape from all known laws of the divine worlds and the corruptions of the black sea of Oblivion. It is a return to the first brush of Anu-Padomay, where stasis and change created possibility. -http://www.imperial-library.info/content/more-psijic-endeavor

The Dwemer wanted something similar, but in a massive collective-borg-stompy-bot format (and come on, who wouldn't?).


The way I understand this is through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms.

The theory of forms is an old and completely discredited derivation of an ancient sophistry that nevertheless had its ripples felt in every corner of Western philosophy.

It is related to Gnosticism, because it is basically the foundation upon which Gnosticism had to be built, but it is older than Gnosticism itself.

======

To start with, we have to look at one of the most ancient of philosophical [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heracletus]statements[/url] that still remains with us - that the universe changes. This isn't much of a statement, I know, but all things have to start small. The statement of this idea was that nothing in the world was eternal, that everything was in flux.

The metaphor was that of a river - the river may appear to be the same river in the same place, but in actuality, the river is nothing more than a collection of water drops, and those water drops are moving away from you. If you were to walk into the river today, it would not be the river you would have stood in yesterday, for the water in it yesterday has all long since gone by, and "river" is just a name we give for a pattern of water because we cannot perceive the every drop of water.

By extension, the you of today is not the you of yesterday, much less the you of 10 years ago. In that time, you have changed. You have changed for in ten years, you have eaten, you have drunk, you have bleed, you have grown, but these are only the physical things, you have also learned and you have grown as a mind. The You you are now will not be in the future. You will forget. The pride and pain of the now-you will be gone, lost to the will-be-you who cannot recall. Then, you will die.

It was the furthest extension of this that most terrified people, however, for it claimed that existence was subjective. That is, because we are trapped in the prison of our own minds and our own mindset, capable of seeing only the shadows of the world through the peep-holes of our five senses, and the play-acting of our own imagination, internal dialogue of reason, and memory, our world is warped both through the deficiencies of our senses, the shortcomings of our imagination, the fallacies of our logic, but worst of all, the fading and the distortion of our memory. Everything we are and everything we sense will be lost to us through the ravages of time.

This is the philosophy of Change.

======

Against this, then, rose the great sophistry by those who rejected this horrifying realization. They made their case through metaphor, as well. It is called "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes", and it goes like this:
Achilles is in a race with a tortoise. Achilles is, of course, a most athletic man, and can easily outrun a tortoise, but the tortoise has a head-start, being several meters ahead of Achilles at the start of this race. As such, Achilles must run to catch up to where the tortoise is. However, when Achilles gets there, the tortoise will have moved. So, Achilles must run some more to reach the point where the tortoise now is. However, when he gets there, the tortoise has moved some more. This repeats forever, and therefore, no change has actually taken place - the tortoise will forever be in the lead.

This was, for some reason, impossible for ancient philosophers to properly refute, causing them to believe it.

This claim was that there was no time because there was no change.

I will refute it now:
In that metaphor, what was actually happening is something you could graph out with basic algebra - draw two lines on an X/Y graph of different slopes, and somewhere down the line, they will intersect. In order to achieve the sophistry they achieved, however, they talked about how each interval of reaching the point where the tortoise is now would require time, but by the time that Achilles got there, the tortoise would have moved. However, this interval of time would grow shorter, because movement is distance over time. The period of time between when Achilles would finally overtake the tortoise, then, would be growing infinitely shorter until it infinitely approached the limit of zero.

In other words, they were claiming that there was no time because there was no change if we assume there is no time.

To shorten this even further, the claim is: "If there is no time, then there is no time."

This is a tautological, and hence meaningless claim.

However, this claim that time was a falsehood was used as a way to try to destroy all of the other claims of the philosophy of change.

To quote Wikipedia on this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmenides divided up reality into two things based upon this "time does not exist" idea:
In "the way of truth" (a part of the poem), he explains how reality (coined as "what-is") is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging. In "the way of opinion," he explains the world of appearances, in which one's sensory faculties lead to conceptions which are false and deceitful.

Or, in other words, there is a perfect theoretical world without time, and then there is the corruption of that perfect that exists only because you have senses and a perception of time's existence.

On top of this was added the theory of "recollection", that we, in fact, do not learn. We are born with all knowledge, we just don't remember having it. Learning is, in fact, just remembering something we always knew, because we could not perceive we always knew it because of that awful corrupting time perception.

Because it started from a false assumption, however, everything from this school of thought is total bunk, and cannot possibly be, at least, as long as Time exists, as the entirety of the philosophy is predicated upon time not existing.

Because it can only exist as long as there is no time, it is the philosophy of Stasis.

======

Plato, then, came about to try to weave these two diametric opposites into a synthesis. This synthesis would, of course, http://www.othieves.com/art_plato.html, because Zeno's Paradoxes were founded upon a fallacy, but nevertheless, Plato became the bedrock of Western Philosophy because between him and Aristotle (who basically was a student of his work), he introduced not just the notion of souls and the split between mortal and divine that Christianity adopted, but basically was declared THE way in which the world worked by the Roman Catholic church in such a way that it was responsible for stunting philosophical and scientific discovery until the time of the Protestant Reformation and Galileo completely broke science off from philosophy.

His synthesis went like this:
There was such a thing called the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_forms". This was done through the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ.

Basically, he claimed that there was change, and there was a physical world, and there was time, but that they were all "corruptions" of the true Forms.

Forms are the perfect, eternal archetypes upon which all physical reality was created as mere corrupt distortions of the shadows of the true Forms. So all chairs, for example, are derived from the One Perfect Chair. All varieties of chairs are just different corruptions of the One Perfect Chair's perfect chairness. Physical chairs are bound by time and break because they are corrupt, but the One Perfect Chair is eternal and unchanging.

Again, Plato held up the Theory of Recollection - we have a perfect, eternal soul, but that is corrupted by our physicalness and having a body and having wants and desires and emotions and pleasure and individualism and freedom.

=========

So, then, we come to Gnosticism.

Gnostics believed that they were once a part of an eternal perfect realm of immortal souls that existed without physicality or time. Then, a jealous under-god of the True God called The Demiurge created physical reality behind the True God's back. However, the Demiurge was imperfect, and what the Demiurge created was corrupted by imperfection, and so too were the perfect immortal souls that were caught up in the Demiurge's creation.

Physical reality, then, is a prison to Gnostics, and all life and all physical reality is made of pure corruption upon their perfect eternal selves. The overarching goal of Gnosticism is to abandon all flesh and live entirely for re-connecting with this perfect eternal divine through the act of denial of the flesh. (It's worth pointing out that they were entirely against having children, because life is the corruption of a living being's soul, and therefore, creating life was evil. They were also against having six or having fun in any way through physical means, because those were all corruptions of your own soul, as well. Needless to say, they weren't quite capable of "spreading the word" fast enough to replace their own mortality rate, and would have died out even if the early Christians hadn't thought they were heretics and had them all rounded up. With that said, Gnosticism had an unmistakable impact upon Christianity, along with Sassanid Zoroastrianism's dualism of cosmic Good and Evil.)

=======

The Dwemer and to an extent, the Thalmor, then, are viewing creation through radically different lenses than humanity, and even we, as players, are viewing it.

Talos views the world, and the ability to learn and grow as good.

Lorkhan created the world so that mortals would have the potential for growth, because only mortals are capable of growing and exceeding what they were originally created to be.

This is why you have a repeating cycle of worlds being created - to create mortals that can exceed the gods, and therefore, create a better world the next world around. These then create mortals that can exceed those gods that were once mortals, and create a better world, still. It is evolution on the scale of gods and reality.

Conversely, however, the Thalmor and Dwemer viewed all growth and learning as corruption of their original divine spark, and want to "go back into the mother's womb" as it was put so nicely by Minotaur. They want to bask in their eternal perfect forms.

In fact, they not only viewed existence or learning as corrupting, but the Dwemer actually viewed individuality as corruption. They adopted a theory like that of the Theory of Forms, where they are all descended from corruptions of the One True Dwarf. Therefore, their existence, their individuality, their ability to say "I", is a profanity made upon their One True Dwarf-ness. They see the unformed eternal ether of Aetherius as "The Sacred", and all of physical reality, time, and even existing at all, as "The Profane". To them, magic was turning "The Sacred into the Profane", by turning Aetherius into a force on the physical plane, bound by time and physical laws. They wanted the reverse: "Turning the Profane into the Sacred", that is, un-creating themselves back through time into never having even existed in the first place, so that they never would have had to have been born or had to have individuality from one another.

The Thalmor may not go to quite this extreme, but they do want to go back to a point before physical reality, before they had to learn or grow or experience time. They want to stay locked up in that "prison cell with no windows or door" forever, with the only mercy being that they do not have the sentience to even go insane. They want a non-existence without meaning. They are basically the ultimate omnicidal nihilists - they literally just want to destroy the world so that nobody can live, because just committing suicide is not enough in a world with reincarnation, so they have to blow up the world while they are at it.

Talos stands in the way of this, and so, they must destroy Talos.

========

Sweet ****ing Jeebus, that took a long time to write....
User avatar
maddison
 
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:22 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:46 pm

So your saying that the will of the few (The Altmer) should take presidence over the will of the majority? I'd say if anyones being selfish, it'd be the Thalmor.


I'm not saying that the Thalmor are not being selfish. They're being as self-interested as Talos was. It seems odd to say that either one is anything other than Gray-Maybe.

And, as far as Wraith_Magus's post is concerned, the philosophical arguments are pretty weak. No disrespect intended-- talking about your arguments, not you.

The theory of forms is an old and completely discredited derivation of an ancient sophistry...


That's an uncalled for and, honestly, ridiculous statement. The theory of forms has been completely discredited? It's a mere derivation of an ancient sophistry? Seriously?

This was, for some reason, impossible for ancient philosophers to properly refute, causing them to believe it.


Right. Anything that ancient philosophers couldn't refute (and there weren't any refutations of Zeno's paradoxes), they believed. Totally.

This is a tautological, and hence meaningless claim.


Tautologies are meaningless? [NUMINUT] just got real... 2+2=4 is now meaningless.

Because it started from a false assumption, however, everything from this school of thought is total bunk...


That's a terrible argument-- if an argument starts with a false assumption, everything from its school of thought is bunk?

(Plato was) basically was declared THE way in which the world worked by the Roman Catholic church in such a way that it was responsible for stunting philosophical and scientific discovery until the time of the Protestant Reformation and Galileo completely broke science off from philosophy...


I think you are confusing Plato with Aristotle. And a bunch of other stuff. You may want to check out Aquinas, sometime, who even referenced Aristotle (not Plato) as "The Philosopher".

I have no particular interest into getting in a philosophical debate, but felt like I should express my concerns, so others know that what you stated isn't necessarily historically or philosophically accurate.
User avatar
vanuza
 
Posts: 3522
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:14 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:24 am

I'm not saying that the Thalmor are not being selfish. They're being as self-interested as Talos was. It seems odd to say that either one is anything other than Gray-Maybe.



Except Talos is being selfish in the way that all members of Nirn can live freely, do as they wish and even have the opportunity to achieve something that is greater than being a floating spirit in an endless nothingness. The Thalmor are stuck living in the past and instead of working for something greater, they seek to whip out creation and all the good (and bad) it offers. I'm inclined to lean towards Talos' brand of selfishness (both in reality and the mystical) than the Thalmor who would see creation never happen.
User avatar
Queen of Spades
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:06 pm

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:09 pm

"Simply put, as the Gods cannot know joy as mortals, their creation, so mortals may only understand the joy of Liberty by becoming the progenitors of the models that can make the jump past mortal death." - Loveletter
User avatar
Antony Holdsworth
 
Posts: 3387
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 4:50 am

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:06 pm

Except Talos is being selfish in the way that all members of Nirn can live freely, do as they wish and even have the opportunity to achieve something that is greater than being a floating spirit in an endless nothingness. The Thalmor are stuck living in the past and instead of working for something greater, they seek to whip out creation and all the good (and bad) it offers. I'm inclined to lean towards Talos' brand of selfishness (both in reality and the mystical) than the Thalmor who would see creation never happen.


What you said seems both accurate and fair. Here's the question: is there a reason to say that one approach is better than another? Talos would probably say that freedom/etc is good and worth the sacrifice. The Thalmor would disagree-- they would say that the ascended existence is far superior to the current domain. I'm not convinced that we have anything, in the context of TES universe, to say that one approach is "better" than the other. We can use our own moral systems to evaluate it, but I'm not sure that's what you're proposing.

If you could somehow reason with the Thalmor (assuming they really existed, of course), and they were being reasonable, do you think you could show them the error in their ways, or is it simply a matter of preference?
User avatar
Cat Haines
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:27 am

PreviousNext

Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion