Stand up for what is right

Gadje

It is upsetting when I, of all people, have to remind you that this conversation was ordered to end by a noble. Why do people continue to argue at this point?

Signed,
Dr. Solvei

P.S. I am not claiming to be a noble, but if someone with the authority to do so could take this mess down so that we can focus on more important tasks at hand, such as rebuilding, that would be wonderful.

Have I failed to make myself clear?! Perhaps I need to make an example out of some people?!!
I am here issuing a warrant for the arrest of Jack Dimms.

Guards apprehend him. fine him. and toss him in the dungeon. A few days in there should give him time to reflect on my authority and whether I am joking when I close a discussion.

How quick we are to throw around our personal definitions of "good" and "evil" , "right" and "wrong" immediately forgetting said concepts are etirely qualitative. There is no finite definition you can use to quantify these terms and in so have no meaning beyond what you the individual gives them.

Thus I reccommend providing a precise definition of your morality before stating it is correct, without a finite value these terms are quite meaningless and are a poor choice to back up your points with. In addition it helps the rest of us mutilate the appropriate belief when its given finite value rather than butchering every comment that's made.......

I am truly beside myself. Can one man be so simple?

I am here by issuing a warrant for the arrest of Lucics Knight.
Guards apprehend him. Triple his fine and toss him in the dungeon for a week.

I expect you to present yourself before me at the next feast.
Do not make me hunt you down!

(OOG - the text below has been hastily scribbled out)

[strike]Wotcher,

For what it's worth, Mister Knight: a qualitative measurement is not to be considered any less valid or useful than one that is quantitative. It's simply a question of context.

Were I to flip a coin, say. A qualitative measurement of the result would be either "heads" or "tails." Is it possible to provide a quantitative result in this case? Likely not - for what is the "heads-ness" of the outcome? The "tails-ness," perhaps? Both are meaningless, and in this situation, we see that we are far better equipped to describe our observations by categorizing them qualitatively.

I believe the ethical classification system used by the native Travancians belongs to a similar category of problems. While they have loose definitions for something that is "good" or "evil," these definitions are, by category, qualitative - it would be meaningless to extend them to a quantitative scale. For what, after all, is this scale? What is the standard to which their measurements are relative?

Very good Mister Knight. I've a few more thoughts on this, but for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that for now.

[/strike]

Wotcher,

Mister McDermitt has requested that I write a public apology for the above note: To those who happened to read it, I am sincerely apologetic. My comments on the categorisation of observations were not intended to cause offence of any kind, and I humbly request that you find it in your person to forgive my words.

I can offer no explanation other than my own lack of understanding of the very systems of "good" and "evil" to which my comments pertained. Commentary on such abstract concepts as these is normally considered acceptable - moreover, is strongly encouraged - in my homelands, and in my eagerness to share the same, I overlooked the fact that prevailing opinions on the discussion of rational discourse may not map directly to those held by our sort.

I hope that you may be able to appreciate that adjusting to a new set of cultural conventions is a nontrivial exercise, and one that will seldom be free of discontinuities, however much one strives to avoid them. Thankyou for your continued understanding during this transitional period.

As a final addendum, I would ask that the courtesies of free speech and open discussion that have recently been extended to those locals who identify with the ethical classification of "Dark" be further extended to those of us who identify as "Rational" - or, as I believe it is referred to in the local dialect, "Neutral."