RuneScape Forum Archive | The Defence of Saradomin

Nerevarine x

Posts: 5,941 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Balustan said :
Nerevarine x said :
Dethal said :
Nerevarine x said :
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.

I don't know if you've realized it but most people don't care about your interpretations.

From my observation, a lot of people's explanations (including yours) lack lore and support to make them credible, so I don't care about those interpretations myself.

However, I am willing to discuss and debate with people who back up their perspectives with lore.

I purposefully create my threads with lots of evidence so that my view is robust.

As I've mentioned several times, the quoted lore speaks for itself, my explanations are elaboration and discussion on the issues presented but the lore on its own upholds Saradomin's benevolent nature.

Back up implies it can be proven but an opinion cannot be. Providing lore as to why you have that opinion is fine but to use the term back up implies something entirely different and something that is factual.

The lore allows people to make opinions about Saradomin's nature benevolent, malevolent or otherwise. You seem unable to accept that and unable to accept that people just don't like your god.

Your view is no more robust than somebody that hates Saradomin due to the colour of robes he wears. Your reasonings for liking him are just more substantial than his for hating but it does not make a view more robust.

No lol, back up/support/reinforce/fortify/solidify/etc implies the argument can be strengthened by other pieces of evidence, it is not about proving it conclusively or suggesting it's a fact.

06-Dec-2013 11:45:57

Nerevarine x

Posts: 5,941 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

A view is more robust when a lot of evidence indicates a particular argument to be correct over another and that evidence is displayed.

I've done this in my thread, there's a large amount of evidence to support my perspectives. It does make it more robust than somebody else's view if they do not have the depth of evidence to support their views (which is the case a lot of the time).

Lastly, I'm fine with people disliking Saradomin and I've said a few times, the thread is not here to convince anyone. The thread was created to show there are very convincing, rational, evidence-based explanations for Saradomin's benevolence which people do not consider.

I encourage discussion and debate.

Whether they want to believe the arguments put forth in my thread or not doesn't interest me, it doesn't change the reality that such strong evidence exists.

06-Dec-2013 11:47:09 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 11:57:13 by Nerevarine x

Balustan

Posts: 19,291 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

I'm aware back up does not imply a firm conclusion but it implies one may be reachable which is not the case.

Also a view is no more robust than any other based on providing any evidence or reasoning. Robustness is about strength so if you found the most stubborn person every who hated Saradomin for the colour of his robes his view would be more robust than yours unless of course you are the most stubborn person ever then I guess it wouldn't be.

Also it is not evidence it is contributing factors. Evidence would prove the fact.

Edit: also the thread is not here to convince anybody? Then what is the point? You claim it is here just to display these pieces of lore? Well if it is just a display piece the thread should be locked. It is not for discussion and not to convince people but to display information that can be clearly seen in game making it redundant.

Lewis

|

Quester

|

Scottish

06-Dec-2013 11:56:09 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 11:57:58 by Balustan

Solanumtinkr

Posts: 22,240 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Saradomin is very much do as I say, don't do as I do, as is confirmed in Above the Lore Ep6. It is also said He has learnt a lesson from the Naragi incident. Now most people assume that means he is now all warm and fuzzy towards mortals, it I don't think that is the lesson he learned at all.

Take the incident at BoL, a lot of people said Saradomin attacked Zamorak in defence of Lumbridge, and that is how it is presented by his priests. Fact: Saradomin was just hitting Zamorak and was not defending Lumbridge, Above the Lore Ep6. His priests also state that Saradomin banished Zamorak to the infernal realms, in an act of mercy. When anyone with eyes to see saw Saradomin winding up for a kill shot and it was Moia who teleported Zamorak to safety, BoL cut scene.

That one incident shows that books and NPCs can be wildy wrong in their assumptions of what they saw. So while you cannot take assumptions of a book or memory as fact, you could take basic actions as a fact if it is a memory. You'd just have to identify sentence modifiers that could not be known to the memory holder.

Get six witnesses to describe the same assailant and you'll get six different descriptions. So says Law enforcement. It maybe an exaggeration but it does have some basis in fact.

So taking out the assumptions we do know a few things. Saradomin once thought that he had the right to rule all as the one true god and that he could take it through force by punishing 'heretics'.

There is no evidence that he thinks much differently now and there is evidence he does still think that way, with one critical difference. I think even Saradomin realises you cannot get people to worship and love you by force and that even if you try when you are also fighting on multiple fronts it invites certain defeat. Even a god cannot defeat an entire planet if it turns against you. Destroy it, yes. But that is not what he is after, only a necromancer can use a corpse. The purpose of adventure is to shine light into dark places,
Poke monsters with a sharp stick, Then steal anything that isn't nailed down!
To the Manor Born QFC 185-186-367-65788716

06-Dec-2013 12:05:09

Solanumtinkr

Posts: 22,240 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

And trying to convert by force also invites the population to turn to someone else for protection from the 'bad guy'.

In my personal opinion that is the lesson he took away from the Naragi homeworld. He may lie and twist facts. He may lay out a way he wants his civilians to behave so people think better of him. Then he may go about things in a differnt way from his teachings and someone in his ranks may spin the incident, even unknowingly like with BoL. I think he has learned that vaporising a city and attacking people just because they said no is a good way to turn the majority against you. And that you cannot make people love you at the barrel of a gun and if you try the moment you take the boot is off of their neck, they will rebel. And rightly so.

It may not sound like much of a lesson, but it was a very important one. The purpose of adventure is to shine light into dark places,
Poke monsters with a sharp stick, Then steal anything that isn't nailed down!
To the Manor Born QFC 185-186-367-65788716

06-Dec-2013 12:05:16 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 12:06:30 by Solanumtinkr

Nerevarine x

Posts: 5,941 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Balustan said :
I'm aware back up does not imply a firm conclusion but it implies one may be reachable which is not the case.

Also a view is no more robust than any other based on providing any evidence or reasoning. Robustness is about strength so if you found the most stubborn person every who hated Saradomin for the colour of his robes his view would be more robust than yours unless of course you are the most stubborn person ever then I guess it wouldn't be.

Also it is not evidence it is contributing factors. Evidence would prove the fact.

Your explanations are astoundingly wrong, lol.

When someone "backs up" their argument or "supports" it, they use evidence to strengthen their view. The more evidence that is used, the stronger that view becomes.

Whether a firm conclusion can be reached or not depends on the degree of evidence, so yes, to "support" an argument would be to make it more reliable and closer to firmly concluding it is likely.

Notice the word fact is never used, likely is used.
_________________

A view is more robust when a lot of evidence indicates a particular argument to be correct over another and that evidence is displayed.

I've done this in my thread, there's a large amount of evidence to support my perspectives. It does make it more robust than somebody else's view if they do not have the depth of evidence to support their views (which is the case a lot of the time).
__________________

Evidence doesn't prove facts, that was hilarious. Evidence is used to "support" views, to ensure such views are most likely to be correct. If one view or theory has greater evidence than another, it is seen as more powerful.

Evidence is never used to establish 100% causality or undeniable proof as you claim.

That's the final thing I will say on this matter.

06-Dec-2013 12:07:14 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 12:09:41 by Nerevarine x

Jul

2012

Dethal

Posts: 7,786 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

The key word is interpretation. I'll take one of your first points.

"The key information here is that Nakigi and his Naragi followers believed Saradomin was not solely responsible for the war - both the Naragi and Saradomin were to be held accountable."

And to me this shows Nakigi was a spineless coward, ready to bow before Saradomin to stay alive. He even managed to convince other cowards.

And the wonderful thing is that you can't prove me wrong. Nakigi shows me the evidence that Saradomin was someone to be afraid of, and other lore supports my view. Such as them believing Tuska could save them.

Now I could make a thread about stuff like this but obviously I don't want to push my interpretations and opinions on people forcefully like you do. I'm pretty cool

06-Dec-2013 12:09:32

[#QUDSWSOIF]

Posts: 1,418 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Dethal said :
The key word is interpretation. I'll take one of your first points.

"The key information here is that Nakigi and his Naragi followers believed Saradomin was not solely responsible for the war - both the Naragi and Saradomin were to be held accountable."

And to me this shows Nakigi was a spineless coward, ready to bow before Saradomin to stay alive. He even managed to convince other cowards.

And the wonderful thing is that you can't prove me wrong. Nakigi shows me the evidence that Saradomin was someone to be afraid of, and other lore supports my view. Such as them believing Tuska could save them.

Now I could make a thread about stuff like this but obviously I don't want to push my interpretations and opinions on people forcefully like you do.

That's true, and you have evidence to back that up, but that is the view of one person, there is also evidence to back up that it wasn't just saradomins fault, that is the view of some of the other Naragi, so it comes down to what/ who you believe ^_^

06-Dec-2013 12:13:20 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 12:16:08 by [#QUDSWSOIF]

Nerevarine x

Posts: 5,941 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Dethal said :
The key word is interpretation. I'll take one of your first points.

"The key information here is that Nakigi and his Naragi followers believed Saradomin was not solely responsible for the war - both the Naragi and Saradomin were to be held accountable."

And to me this shows Nakigi was a spineless coward, ready to bow before Saradomin to stay alive. He even managed to convince other cowards.

And the wonderful thing is that you can't prove me wrong. Nakigi shows me the evidence that Saradomin was someone to be afraid of, and other lore supports my view. Such as them believing Tuska could save them.

Now I could make a thread about stuff like this but obviously I don't want to push my interpretations and opinions on people forcefully like you do.

Of course I can't prove you're wrong, but neither can you prove your own point that Nakigi was a coward and convinced naragi to bow before Saradomin to spare their lives.

The only evidence you cite is that Nakigi "wanted to make a compromise with Saradomin", but this doesn't support your view that he was a coward, you are speculating based on that.

06-Dec-2013 12:14:45 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 12:18:07 by Nerevarine x

Jul

2012

Dethal

Posts: 7,786 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

[#QUDSWSOIF] said :
so it comes down to what/ who you believe ^_^

Exactly! Nerevarine believes everyone who makes Saradomin look better, I believe everyone who makes him look worse.

It's pretty much what you want to focus on, and what you want to see.

Nerevarine x said :
You have no sources or evidence to support that, it's not alluded to in Kaigi's Journal anywhere so it's just speculation.

I know many of them feared Saradomin, and I see it being most obvious that Nakigi did too. This of course is something I want to see and you don't want to see.
And it's the main reason this kind of threads are dumb as hell. I'm pretty cool

06-Dec-2013 12:15:29 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2013 12:17:37 by Dethal

Forums

The Defence of Saradomin