1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Is civ 6 PC

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Kupe Navigator, Apr 6, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zaarin

    Zaarin Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,148
    Location:
    Babylon 5
    Every culture has different standards on how blunt you're allowed to be without giving offense, and there are variations even within cultures (e.g., Northern Americans are more blunt than Southern Americans). In my experience, Middle Eastern and Southern European cultures tend to be the most blunt, which is among the things I love about them. East Asian culture tends to be the least blunt as they have many restrictions on what is polite to say. Bluntness is a trait I personally appreciate.
     
  2. AriaLyric

    AriaLyric Nonbinary | Peaceful Builder Vietnam & Māori Main

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2020
    Messages:
    481
    STRONGLY agree. I think I'm in agreement with the major points of both @Zaarin's and @PhoenicianGold's posts, but I'm not that good at processing large paragraphs of text (despite how prone I am to sometimes writing them) so I'm not sure. My stance is that people should be free to say and believe whatever they want, mostly. Freedom of beliefs should be unabridgeable, whereas freedom to act on them, as well as freedom of speech, should only be abridged where it harms others. People should be free to believe I'm an immoral satanic sexual deviant for saying I'm a pansexual nonbinary person. People should not be free to force me to go to "conversion therapy" and get electrocuted until I stop saying I'm queer. (To be very clear I'm not accusing anyone here of holding these beliefs, it's just a hyperbolic example.)
    Another point - freedom of speech must not be tolerant of speech which threatens to unnecessarily abridge others' freedom of speech, or else it allows its own destruction.
    So yeah the optimist in me wants to believe we're on agreement on those points, but I will say that some of PhoenicianGold's phrasing does come off as concerningly reminiscent of certain authoritarian arguments.
     
  3. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    I didn't call anyone better. I said that we as a people--including you and I--are constantly struggling against a system that actively thwarts education. And that many, if not most, people do not encounter sufficient luxury or opportunity to overcome that.

    I'm saying beliefs are only as good as their factual accuracy. Putting a belief on a pedestal above reason is just a roundabout way of avoiding accountability in the face of contrary facts. A belief which is abjectly contrary to reality is a mistruth, no matter what apololgism is manufactured to defend it.

    See above. I, the scientific community, academia at large, and the general machine of human progress, deal in falsifiable facts. If the only way you can sustain beliefs is to raise them into a fictional realm that is untouchable by reason, then I have no reason to afford them such bizarre deference.

    Nah, the crux of neoliberalism is creating a culture where the exploited class believes that conscious consumption is either unnecessary or impossible, so much so that they shoot down any perspective that reveals how little control they actually have in this "free market."
     
  4. João III

    João III Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2021
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Império Português
    Would restrictions on freedom of religion not be harmful to society? It would seem hypocritical denounce religions as discriminatory and oppressive and then do the same. In the US Constitution, for example, rights are based on natural law and thus have no expiration date. Creating restrictions on religious freedom based on the changing whims of society would be a dangerous precedent for all freedoms.
     
  5. Zaarin

    Zaarin Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,148
    Location:
    Babylon 5
    In other words, you are making a god of Reason, and are asserting that your religion is better than everyone else's religion.
     
    Menocchio, Zegangani, Kjimmet and 2 others like this.
  6. Xur

    Xur Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Messages:
    440
    Political correctness has been on the rise over the last 10 years in all areas of media. I dont particularly see it as a problem in civ6. Civ6 seems to be a very PG game aimed at teens, which is a bit disappointing for a boomer like me. I want the dark and gritty truth of history, but civ6 presents history like a teletubby show. It’s too safe...
     
    onepurpose and BuchiTaton like this.
  7. DogeEnricoDandolo

    DogeEnricoDandolo King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Messages:
    738
    Gender:
    Male
    I find it quite funny how certain people think they are changing the world by casting people with different world view from them aside. You can find quite a few videos online about former Klan member or people who were raised in the Westboro Baptist church saw the light, changed their lives for the better and started helping others, but I can guarantee you can never find a person in such situation changed their opinion because they got cancelled on twitter or a SJW on Facebook yelled labels at them. I find it even funnier how these same people who think "Political correctness is a process everyone should be striving for and engaging in" believe that once a person gets "cancelled" by saying something controversial, that person automatically disappears and thus has no bearings on their lives anymore. Well, guess what, those who got "cancelled" on twitter are still out there living among you and once every 4 years still go to vote, and certain things that are suppressed in public will come out in the voting booth where there is no shaming and no backlash. So unless there is a way to truly get rid of a person for holding an opinion that is different from existing ones (which are dictated by you "woke" folks), you don't do the society a service by censoring people's voices.
    People ARE capable of changing, the question is whether you are forgiving enough to give them a chance for a difference.

    In times like this I'm so grateful I'm centrist. Not leftist enough to brainlessly call "racism" if I happen to count fewer skin colors than I expect, not conservative enough to immediately call into question "merits" when I see a diverse group of people.

    In terms of Civ6 as a game, I love it and its choices, some more than others. Never had any issues with leader's gender quota. The only time I may be disappointed with a female leader was with Ba Trieu, because as a Vietnamese I have the culture and knowledge capital in my history to be emotionally invested in how it is portrayed, but I have to say, before getting called out for "sexism" by a white woman like I got on the Vietnam discussion thread, I love it and forget about it after a few playthroughs.
     
  8. Henri Christophe

    Henri Christophe King

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2018
    Messages:
    906
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, K11 (Kwanza)
    One thing I consider very PC is don't be able to sell population of a city, as was made in slavery time.
    It can be at least an special hability of Dahomey
     
    BuchiTaton likes this.
  9. Alexander's Hetaroi

    Alexander's Hetaroi Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    7,163
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    That argument is saying that religion and academia/science is incompatible, which is something that I don't necessarily believe is the case, even today.
     
  10. DogeEnricoDandolo

    DogeEnricoDandolo King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Messages:
    738
    Gender:
    Male
    There are 2 people on this forum that I consider "special," which are you and GenyaWhatever, that I always avoid directly replying, but seriously, like WTF.
     
  11. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    Strawman. Just because you may think in the context of dogma and religion doesn't mean everyone does. :)

    Such restrictions already exist in America. Regardless of whatever any religion says about things like, for example, whether African Americans are people or can participate in interracial marriage or engage in commerce or own property...any belief which discriminates based on ethnicity is immoral and not protected by freedom of religion. Same for other forms of discrimination such as sex and age. Same for public statements that incite violence.

    What people raving about religious freedom being taken away don't seem to understand are two very basic things:

    1) The human experience is a continual process of discovery, i.e. effectively scientific in essence. We discover some ideas were wrong along the way, even among religious belief systems. And some of those were either always harmful or harmful to the direction we want our society collectively to be progressing in light of new and better ideas.

    2) American jurisprudence has always been extremely deferent to religion even in spite of all of that. It largely retains people's right to believe the vast majority of things. It just carves out a very narrow, very specific sliver here and there of things which are just factually and morally reprehensible and says "no more, that's outdated and it's hurting people so stop it." And yes, while I personally see no use in all the other fictions people concoct for themselves and think they could all stand to be tested more rigorously by reason, they actually are still fully entitled to whatever belief system gets them out of bed in the morning.

    Don't misrepresent me please. I said nothing about cancelling (also, if cancel culture is something you even feel the need to bring up or complain about, religion and other strong ideologies haver been doing that to murderous ends for milennia).

    I am not even advocating for some weird totalitarian ban on speech.

    What I am saying is that blanket freedom of speech defenses are utter bullcrap, people need to display more conscientiousness and social responsibility behind the political opinions they publish, and that absent that there should be something in the broader social consciousness regulating that to some reasonable and minimally invasive extent. Because what we have in place now across the internet is just a culture that accepts reflexive indignation as a substitute for introspection and accountability.
     
    PiR and AriaLyric like this.
  12. Duke William of Normandy

    Duke William of Normandy King of England & Unofficial Welcoming Committee

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2020
    Messages:
    3,228
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rouen, Normandy
    Very true. Many of the greatest Scientists were religious scholars. Look at all the Great Scientists in Civ 6, most of them followed a Religion. :p

    As Sean Bean said in the Civ 6 intro of Saladin: The marriage of science and religion is a delicate balancing act.
     
    Zegangani, Zaarin, Kjimmet and 3 others like this.
  13. Guynemer

    Guynemer King

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    817
    I'm sorry, I see this all the time, and I feel that I must say this: Criticism is not censorship, and conflating the two is silly.
     
    j51, Kjimmet, AriaLyric and 1 other person like this.
  14. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,670
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    And who decides if it is uninformed, or misrepresentative, or "gibberish"? You? Me? Firaxis? 2K? CFC? The Central Committee of National Wokeness?

    No thank you.

    Of course, the answer should be each of us. You, me and everyone else decides what we want to listen to or not, of our own free will, with the sole requirement that we are mature enough to know that words cannot harm us, only if we let them.

    So yes, I should be able and allowed to judge if the presence of a Hitler or a Stalin in a civ game is relevant, useful and of taste to me, and no one else. If someone cannot deal with history, maybe they are in the wrong genre?

    (and yes, I know, big part of it is marketability, but that also falls within the PC BS trap... why is not Hitler in the game? Because the Germans, representing a big market, banished Hitler from their public display of anything, as if that would erase history itself... or maybe it will, until we repeat it)
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
  15. AriaLyric

    AriaLyric Nonbinary | Peaceful Builder Vietnam & Māori Main

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2020
    Messages:
    481
    Just wanted to ask a clarifying question here - my interpretation of this was "some speech is harmful to society, and so should be opposed by other people". Others seem to have interpreted it to mean "some speech is harmful to society, and so the government should have the right to strip away legal protections from speech that it decides is detrimental to society." Genuinely curious what your actual opinion is, I've reread this and your other posts and I'm not sure.
     
  16. DogeEnricoDandolo

    DogeEnricoDandolo King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Messages:
    738
    Gender:
    Male
    When you are criticized, you get a chance to rethink your decision and make a change accordingly.When that same criticism is elevated to a level that will put an end to your career and your life as you know them, and thus discourages other people with the same opinion to make their voices heard, if that is not censorship, I don't know what is. Because if you truly, naively believe these sorts of "criticism" are to make people better, there won't be people whose day jobs are to dig out what a person tweeted 5, 10 years ago to ruin them now, regardless of what kind of person they have become. So yeah, sit there and teach me the difference between criticism and censorship please.
     
    Zaarin, Aristos, Kjimmet and 2 others like this.
  17. Guynemer

    Guynemer King

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    817
    I honestly don't even understand what you are asking here.
     
    j51 and AriaLyric like this.
  18. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    Just because you have decided to throw your hands up at trying to discern facts doesn't mean there is no factual truth. Nor that there aren't other, less defeatist individuals who got a lot further at reaching decisions because they continued being receptive and curious and actually put the work in.

    (and as for the addendum regarding "each of us," I'm not going to take a hard stance on that because individual discovery is important, as is the public consensus in some respects. But I will add a soft counterbalance and note that I don't ascribe to New Criticism and the notion that the consumer's interpretation takes primacy over other things like the author's intent and the social consequences of the work.)

    I find that argument fallacious. If you want a hardline approach, of course the further you go back the less scientific (from the latin "scio", "to know") truth people had access to. It stands to reason that what we were unable to explain through reason, we made up stories for, and in fact that's all religious cosmology has ever been. And in every instance where a new scientific discovery has come up against a religious belief, the religious belief was abandoned because it revealed for what it always was: a comfortable place-holding fiction.

    But if you want a softer line approach, it's unfair to expect people living in less unenlightened times to be as scientifically advanced and less dependent on religion than in the present day. Science is built on the shoulders of giants, but really its each of us standing on each others' shoulders and seeing just a bit further each generation. So, again, if you look at the trends, of course people in older times were more religious, but that became increasingly less common and is now fairly infrequent among hard sciences. The whole timeline reveals itself to be a trend away from storytelling and toward science-based worldviews.
     
  19. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,670
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    True. But nobody is talking about criticism.

    Cancelling IS silencing.

    How is being receptive and curious consistent with the principles of PC? Sounds like a very strong contradiction.
     
    Zegangani, Zaarin and Depravo like this.
  20. Guynemer

    Guynemer King

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    817
    According to whom?

    Who is silenced?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page