CurseSealofEarth
Sannin of the Scrolls 📜
- Joined
- May 16, 2012
- Messages
- 5,311
- Reaction score
- 644
This discussion stems from my recent Assassin's Creed obsession so there's a lot of themes in that game I'd like to discuss.
Since the first civilization arose thousands of years ago (or millions depending on your beliefs) mankind has been searching for the answers to true peace on Earth. Every era of peace has been preceded by an era of war. The cycle is endless. Differences have kept mankind at one another's throats to this day. Many have their own philosophies on what should be the course of action for achieving this dream; most of those boil down to Order or Freedom.
Let's define these terms in the way I mean them so there is as little confusion as possible, as well as listing the pros and cons of them:
ORDER: The idea that all people should follow a single doctrine or a single set of rules designed to keep all people on the same page. This would be considered a strict and imposing viewpoint, a very "My way or the highway" way of thinking.
PROS:
FREEDOM: Everyone is free to make their own choices, and you alone must face the consequences for it. You look out for how what you do might affect others because you wouldn't want your liberties stepped on would you?
PROS:
In the AC games we've always seen the Templars depicted as the bad guys, they want to control and manipulate the populace for their own power. We can decide for ourselves who is truly the bad guys though. The Templars desire order because they believe for the advancement of society to reach it's greatest potential there needs to be an order to things to ensure everything runs smoothly. Chaos is a very poor way to run an Order after all. However, you can see how giving a handful of people all the power and authority would be a bad thing. To have absolute power would corrupt them absolutely. In AC2 The Borgia family does this exact thing in pursuit of their personal power.
In the AC games Freedom is always portrayed as the best option, that people should choose their own destiny even if maybe means ruin for everyone else. In AC2 we see Ezio Auditore have everything work out for him in the end by keeping to his Freedom message. However, if you look to Jacob Frye of AC Syndicate you will see that even though he did free the boroughs from the Blighters control he still managed to nearly ruin the infrastructure of London simply by doing what he thought was right. The "greater good" did not benefit from his work and may have suffered even more from it.
What do you think is the best method for peace? If this seemed biased it's because I am biased towards Order. I love rules. I think the only way to eliminate strife is to eliminate our differences. That doesn't mean kill non-whites though, I see how that started to sound like the beginning to a Klan rally.
Since the first civilization arose thousands of years ago (or millions depending on your beliefs) mankind has been searching for the answers to true peace on Earth. Every era of peace has been preceded by an era of war. The cycle is endless. Differences have kept mankind at one another's throats to this day. Many have their own philosophies on what should be the course of action for achieving this dream; most of those boil down to Order or Freedom.
Let's define these terms in the way I mean them so there is as little confusion as possible, as well as listing the pros and cons of them:
ORDER: The idea that all people should follow a single doctrine or a single set of rules designed to keep all people on the same page. This would be considered a strict and imposing viewpoint, a very "My way or the highway" way of thinking.
PROS:
- Differences would be minimal in people, if all believe the same thing and hold the same morals then there would be very little to fight about.
- People would never be in a power struggle because everyone would know their place.
- If a situation were to arise that would be unexpected such as a head of state dying, there would be minimal panic or even awkward transitioning phase because everyone would know the protocol.
- Any sort of personal liberties or any decision that you make would have to be "For the greater good".
- What you want out of your life will be unimportant, it will all be for the good of everyone.
- God forbid you wanna smoke some meth. (You guys ever tried that stuff? ****s with you.) Basically free thinking and inventiveness is all but vanished,
FREEDOM: Everyone is free to make their own choices, and you alone must face the consequences for it. You look out for how what you do might affect others because you wouldn't want your liberties stepped on would you?
PROS:
- You are in control of your own destiny, you make the decisions that you desire.
- Your thoughts aren't regulated so you can explore any possibility that you want.
- You can smoke a ****ton of meth. (Seriously though don't do that. Or do, It's all about freedom!)
In the AC games we've always seen the Templars depicted as the bad guys, they want to control and manipulate the populace for their own power. We can decide for ourselves who is truly the bad guys though. The Templars desire order because they believe for the advancement of society to reach it's greatest potential there needs to be an order to things to ensure everything runs smoothly. Chaos is a very poor way to run an Order after all. However, you can see how giving a handful of people all the power and authority would be a bad thing. To have absolute power would corrupt them absolutely. In AC2 The Borgia family does this exact thing in pursuit of their personal power.
In the AC games Freedom is always portrayed as the best option, that people should choose their own destiny even if maybe means ruin for everyone else. In AC2 we see Ezio Auditore have everything work out for him in the end by keeping to his Freedom message. However, if you look to Jacob Frye of AC Syndicate you will see that even though he did free the boroughs from the Blighters control he still managed to nearly ruin the infrastructure of London simply by doing what he thought was right. The "greater good" did not benefit from his work and may have suffered even more from it.
What do you think is the best method for peace? If this seemed biased it's because I am biased towards Order. I love rules. I think the only way to eliminate strife is to eliminate our differences. That doesn't mean kill non-whites though, I see how that started to sound like the beginning to a Klan rally.
