blah the Prussian

FE7: Give Nergal a better motive FE8: Make Eirika less of an idiot. FE9: The big one. REMOVE BLACK KNIGHT FROM THE PREMISES! He's a terrible, personalityless Darth Vader ripoff, that only takes screen time away from the far more interesting Ashnard. Have Ashnard kill Greil and give him the Black Knight's scenes, and nothing of value will be lost. FE10: Ike had his day. I'd want Elincia's development to get more time and have her be a deuteragonist with Micaiah. FE13: Flesh out Gangrel more. Really go into detail about what makes him hate Ylisse so much, and have him be an actual popular ruler who has the support of his people to get revenge on Ylisse. FE14: Use not goo Garon, you know, the harsh but fair warrior king. A much better villain.

But... science simply isn't an ideology. There are ideologies that put science at the forefront, Fascism and Technocracy specifically, but they aren't doing anything in the name of science. This is an unfair comparison.

Ah, crap, gotta exile myself to the Himilayas, was remembering wrong.

Well, the unethical experiments people weren't the same people as the rocket scientists, and Mengele was executed, but Shiro Iishi and his people got off scot free. And you don't really do things in the name of science, but they're still scientific discoveries. That point makes no sense.

Red, Green, and Blue obviously didn't get global emtry. Hah!

But here's the thing, I never argued that religion was good when it comes to science, just that religion wasn't as anti science as often stereotyped. And, for that matter, some scientific discoveries have objectively led to bad things, for example biological warfare. And, let's just say that if there's ever nuclear war, science may well have done more harm than good.

So I'm not sure what you mean by the first thing, because it's pretty much what I said. As for the second, yeah, what Rezzy said, but also that monarchs, and thus the state, first got their legitimacy to rule from religion; without religion, you arguably don't have a state. Also, regarding religious law, does religious law ban murder? If yes, it's better than anarchy.

Didn't see this at first. I think that someone should have,to eat the animal, and am against hunting purely for trophies.

In response to Phoenix: Firstly, this topic is not about if science is superior to religion. When I made the case that religion is often not harmful to science, I was making a counter argument to the notion that religion is by nature anti science. You're right, it depends on the follower, but that still counters the argument. Secondly, religion might not be the basis for human morality, but it was the basis for human law, which in my mind was much more important. Religious law, again, might not be great, but it beats no law, and it set the foundations for civilization as we know it.

So question: if I kill an animal quickly and painlessly, is it okay? That would be the logical conclusion of that argument.

Right, going to bed now, will continue in the morning, but will outline my position here: 1. Animals are by default morally inferior to humans because they have no concept of morality. They do what they must to survive; morality doesn't enter into it. They have no malice, but they also have no compassion. 2. Animals, thus, have no rights. In order to have a right, one must respect the rights of others, which animals clearly don't. Animals are a part of nature, where their survival is clearly dependent on their strength. They should be treated as such. The exception is domesticated animals, who we expect to respect the rights of other people and animals in that if they screw up we either send them to obedience school or put them down. 3. As such, hunting is part of the natural process with humans acting as predators. Further, hunting has been shown to be needed to keep animal population under control in some cases. The idea that humans somehow have less of a right to the deer than a wolf is ludicrous. So that's all from me. Hylian, back me up due to the aforementioned going to sleep. Peace.

Want to take this into a seperate topic? Me tearing this belief apart is too off topic for this thread.

Jesus.Let's think about this for a second. Guns essentially replaced close range weaponry, and actually were used in tandem with close range weaponry up until roughly the War of the Spanish Succession. So making the assertion "guns are evil" implies that either you're one of those Samurai fetishists who think that swords are honorable, for some reason, or you oppose weapons, which were necessary for establishing human civilization, and thereby the laws that protect you from being murdered, ESPECIALLY as an LGBT person, on principle. I'm not even going to get into the idea of animals being innocent.

Dnt you think it might be a better strategy to try to convince them? I mean, you have every right to be angry, don't get me wrong, but at the same time you're hardly turning anyone to the right side like that.Edit: also, Phoenix, now is later.

Okay, I decided you don't need to extend it a second week on my account. That's far too much special treatment.

What, you want me to list every single religious regime that was pro-science? Fine. I'll list as many as possible within reason. Don't say I didn't warn you.Ptolemic Egypt-see above Arab Caliphates-this, incidentally, refers to the Rashiduins, Umayyads, and Abbasids. Anyway, the scientific prowess of the Caliphates is well known, and they were successful at taking the mathematical ideas of Greece and Rome and doing even more with them. Speaking of which... Rome, both Empire and Republic: super religious, and very technologically advanced for its time. Made great strides in military tactics, technology, and, oh yeah, the aqueduct. Roman roads were also arguably the best in the world. Meiji Japan: Emperor Meiji was worshipped by his subjects as a literal God. Didn't stop him from modernizing his country in probably the biggest mass scientific advancement in the history of the world. Plus, Meiji's god hood made most of his people support him instead of the reactionary Shogun, so religion here actually helped the cause of science. Plus, it was the secular Shoguns responsible for keeping Japan backwards for centuries. Mughal Empire: under Emperor Akbar the Great, the Mughals became a huge center of learning while also being Islamic. Shampoo, incidentally, was invented during this period, so there's a good quality of life invention you owe Akbar. China up to the Yuan: China was one of the most technologically advanced civilizations out there, and research suggests that the last dynasty before the Mongol conquest, the Song, were on the cusp of an industrial revolution. Unfortunately the Ming embraced isolationism, but that's still most of Chinese history. Rudolf II's HRE: from his Capitol in Prague (yes, home turf bias) Rudolf devoted his reign to supporting the cause of science by allowing astronomers into his court, including Johannes Kepler, who made great advances in our understanding of the universe, such as the laws of planetary motion. Frederick the Great and Joseph II: among the reforms of these enlightened absolutists was the promoting of science. These are what I can think of off the top of my head. Keep in mind, meanwhile, the existence of religious societies perfectly neutral to the cause of science, rather than actively impeding it. Overall, religion at least breaks even on science.

Okay, fine. The cognitive dissonance exists. There remains in the cases I mentioned no practical opposition to science, and thus no actual negative effects.

I guess you could have Stalin officially support the Chiang regime (he supported mostly Chiang for most of WWII) and in response Mao decides his best option is to go it alone now that the USSR had abandoned him.

But this isn't backed up by reality. The Ptolemies were, as stated previously, very friendly to science; it doesn't mean much in practice if the nation is faith based on the issue of the Gods if they are so friendly towards science that setting fire to their library literally set humanity back generations. Ptolemaic Egypt,was a key center of learning and science; this is historical fact.

Geographically, yes. Culturally, the ancient Thracians are from a cultural group that would eventually become Germanics. Bulgaria as we know it only came into existence when the Tengri at the time Bulgars kicked out the Eastern Romans way, way after Rome conquered Thracia.

I very much believe that religion has done more good than harm. One simple reason: laws. Religious law was essentially the first legal system, and, while it isn't ideal today, it was the first legal system, and it paved the way for civilization. I also dispute the notion that religion is anti-science: while the Catholic Church was to an extent, Ptolemaic Egypt was extremely religious and extremely friendly to science, as were the Arab Caliphates,and Song China. It really depends on the religion, and far, far too many people conflate religion entirely with Christianity.

He's already presided over the biggest shakeup in, well, forever, for the Pokemon franchise. I think even if the story is ass (which it probably won't be) Sun and Moon is still set to be the best pair of,games in the franchise.

I'll see what I can do, but I don't have my laptop with me. I completely understand, though.

Oh shit, I didn't see this! Could we get a two week extension, or something, because I'm going to DC where I won't have a computer? I really want to use this prompt!

Or option 4: he's ignoring the fact that any smartphone that tries to run a game as big as Breath of the Wild would be dead in the water. At this point the only thing I'm sad about is that no touchscreen kind of kills TWEWY 2 for the foreseeable future.