The Oracle Paradox

So what do you two maniacs want to do first?

 

Ask the Oracle it seems she only judges your actions in relation to quests (at least in my experience) so I was following the path of love when I gave a coin to the beggar in Ardoris, and I was following the path of truth when I gave Bentley the key to his house. Yes it's a game but it's doing its best not to send you down a predetermined path so you'll have to use your own judgement as to what makes a virtuous decision, and afterwards the Oracle will give you her own opinion.

Sometimes it will be difficult or impossible to behave in a 100% virtuous manner. Like in the (albeit somewhat contrived) scenarios presented by the gypsy right at the start where you have to pick one virtue or the other. If you knew the faun was a slave and not responsible for its own actions, it was hardly very compassionate to kill it virtue in this game is probably not something you can max out like you would a combat skill, just do your best - or ignore it completely if you want!

 

It is my belief that a huge chunk of the quests should be in-the-(virtual)-flesh gypsy questions. They should try to pit the virtues against each other, at least to some extent.

 

Agreed though it appears they are trying to do this in a relatively superficial manner. For example it is apparently "loving" to lie to somebody in order to spare their feelings about the truth.

 

That works well from a gameplay perspective, but it is also exactly what I have always hated about the traditional Ultima questions.

In real life it is very rare that doing the right thing in one virtue would need you to do the wrong thing in another virtue. Like was mentioned, the questions seem very contrived trying to make that happen. There just wont be enough believable scenarios that have that outcome without repeating the same ones over and over. Every time you are given a purse to deliver you will be waiting for the inevitable begger along the way and constantly wondering why you cant just give him some of your own gold. In a real world you could always come back and help the begger after you deliver the pouch, get him some food and a job instead of just a handout.

I prefer the idea of having many actions that add or subtract seperatley to one stat so if you spend time doing any given one of them your virtue will slowly gather points in that direction. If you spend all your time and money helping beggars your courage will be low because you put no time into it.

 

I found that one odd as well. It certainly is something people do every day though. I know any number of loving family types that would never think of lying to their children, but routinely make up child-friendly lies to explain inconvient truths like the reason why daddy sleeps on the couch now.

Personaly I feel a lie is a lie is a lie, but even famous philosopherss like Buddha have suggested a lie made with good intention is OK, like a lot of things I think the answer is less clear than people initially assume.

 

Apologies in advance for possible spoilers, BUT...

The good intentions bit is the heart of the problem. The Titans had a good intention for creating the Oracle to promote their philosophy, but the Titans themselves were a lie. They used devices that they themselves could not maintain to manipulate the perceptions of others into perceiving them as godlike beings of immense proportion and having special powers in order to rule Opalis. It is much in the manner that monarchies throughout human history perpetuated the lie that their rule is ordained by a deity in order to 'legitimize' their claim to rule. The Titans for all their good intentions of promoting the Virtues are essentially grifters, and the Oracle is their perpetual contribution to their con game along with the great statues littered across the continent. Keep in mind that the Titans want to get back to their home. What if to accomplish that, they need to convince the goody-good avatars to drink the poisoned Kool-Aid to help send them along by stating that the avatars' sacrifice will enable them to return to their home in order to right the wrongs taking place there? That would mean the Oracle is simply a means of selecting candidates to this end. [/conspiracy theory]

As to why @Time Lord wants to bang a computer...

 

Is it really a spoiler to talk about the events of Blade of the Avatar? If so, the Oracle can spank me for that as well. Jaan has little compassion for those who ignore history...

I was taken a bit by surprise by that twist as well. However, it exactly fits in with Jaan's misgivings about the Oracle.

[Sidebar: Soooo the Guardian is/was human as well?]

The Titans are not at all interdimensional superbeings... they are human beings with superior, but broken technology. They are no more "good" or "bad" than anybody else, and likely disagree amonsgt themselves as to how best to interact with the "locals".

They built the Oracle in order to try and recover lost history and find a way home. That was her initial purpose. Nothing about being the arbiter of Virtue.

And where IS Lord British anyway? Hiding out in his castle again sulking? When was the last time he was seen in character?

 

I can see a Buddha taking the philosophy that, since we exist in illusion, and even our concept of self-ness is an illusion, then there really is no Truth to be found here anyway.

However I don't get the impression that the Oracle is that nuanced.

There were a few instances of this in the Ultima series as well... the idea that telling lies to spare one from negative emotion is an act of Love. While I heartily disagree, that didn't stop me from enjoying the games!

Still... I would like to see that the philosophy has evolved since then. Certainly, the Codex of Ultimate Wisdom does not suggest in any way that one must sacrifice one virtue, in order to enable another.

The virtues are not at odds with one another.

 

There's definitely not any "hard and fast" rules, and I would guess that's intentional. Well what I mean is we as players might not know exactly what raises or lowers virtue rating- obviously somebody has to write a rule somewhere in the code. I don't think the rules are capriciously applied...

And yes, just play the game. Not everybody needs to become the Avatar, right?

 

Fair enough I guess, you do make a good case and I certainly couldnt explain it better than you have.
Still, I could justify all types of lies under that premise. As long as you died without finding out I was lying your illusion of life would have been better for my lie.
I dont like it, knowing how easily I could abuse that if I had ill will... but then if I had ill will it would be a lie for my benefit not to improve their illusion of life and wouldnt be correct anyway.

 

Indeed. Because obviousley that only applied to the original rulers our creator left in place. When he died, or at longest when his line ended, that legitimacy died with them and it was anybodys game. Unless we have an heir to the original Emperor of china or similar floating around somewhere there is most likeley nobody alive legitimatley able to make claim of divine right to rule.

 

Haha I believe that situation very quickly devolved into feudal wars over who "really" had the "divine right" to rule. Not to mention the dubiosity over who exactly is authorized to "grant" such a right in the first place.

 

https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/lord-britishs-open-challenge.52798/

This is an assumption that states that there is only one "truth" and that it manifests from "you" (or the " I " ). You feel (from this perspective) that you know best what truth is, yet more importantly, "that love is more important than truth", because you chose it above displaying the other. This is also a "sinister behavior", because you have chosen to deceive the one you state needs love. This is a control issue at this point where "you in your control are more important than they are". Perspectives of an " I " person over what a "we" person is within themselves, to themselves is at play here within the choice you have made for the other person. This is a "I know best" situation where a person may wish to "parent the world" because of the importance one places on themselves rather than ever believing that in that instance "you may not know what's best for that person receiving the parenting".

Virtues are by their own laws separate and can only combine with other virtues to address any issue. Even a person knowing them all able to apply will find a difficulty in utilizing each to come up with a single answer. If one takes the Ultima 8 virtues or even adding Ultima's red and blue lens (human + gargoyle=16+the linking virtue of infinity=19), by looking at these provides a map and not an "all in one thing". These types of virtue maps cannot be stepped on without traversing a trail which leads through a virtue journey. Virtues create quests, because of being a map and not a singular thing. Each virtue is separate thing. Yes we can combine some, yet when they are combined, it's only following a pathway. The combining is the creation of the quest through questions in virtues. This means that not all quests will be able to answer other virtue questions until other virtues along that trail reach it. This is one of Lord British's trademarks where one may have been seemingly (to the observer... the I) doing the right thing, until the seeker reaches that point within the virtue map where the final virtue question can then be more properly answered.
A prime example is within the Satyrs relationship to the Fawns.... The seeker assumes that the Fawns are nice, yet this could be another assumption (assumptions are bad) where without such control by the Satyrs, they may be the most evil thing in the world if left to being freed from their subjugating or parental oversight.

I agree with you here, because again... we find some people assume their own superiority within any subject of love vs truth issue.

A very healthy way of thinking.... everything in the world is a romance. Romance itself is the laws of attraction or enticement which draws us to the conclusions we all have or will have.

Lord British is a character/player just as we all are within the game. Yes he is an important character, yet as a story driver he could be a very false assumption. "Am I the Time Lord or Nystal TimeLord a story driver character as well?" How would I fall into that assumption?

Assuming that virtue is a "single thing" is a false assumption and they are at odds with each other at many points depending on the situations that they are addressing.

Lineage is something that is cultivated. A single person who has been raised from childhood to think of themselves as the embodiment of the best thoughts or intentions of the whole. Yes this sometimes leads to a self importance in expression by "the one" yet it's been one way where humans have been able to guide themselves out of chaos to evolve into something more civilized. Even with seemingly evil rulers, the entire civilization thus learns from their King's follies or triumphs.

How do I effect my world or you your world or how should the oracle do it?
"By the feelings they intend without the " I " as we know it....
(Doesn't this guy look like Lord British? ... He has something to say about how things react to each other and how things can change by excluding the " I " as we know it...


What we see as the embodiment of virtue (like that of the codex) should be seen as that of a map and a thing of singular things which cannot all apply to any one thing, yet only a few things can apply to any one thing. The larger question is within our estimate of what virtues are more important to us (us as the I) and then apply those to the situation. Truth is illusive because it's not something any "one person" can see because we must all see "it" together.
Or that's my take on it...
~Time Lord~

 

yep

 

I do love that perspective.
At risk of moving entireley away from anything oracle related.....

My rasterfari friends go further. Even the concept of 'we' seperates people into an us vs them situation when they encounter people not within the group.

They prefer to call it 'I and I'.

Among other things, it suggested to me the idea that when you decide you know best for a situation you have to assume every other person also feels they know what is best for themselves in the situation and that their decision is equally valid as their 'I'.

 

You should definately know the answer to this riddle Maybe you should think differently not who but how as time lord says

 

The Oracle as a vehicle for us examining our humanity (warts and all) vis-a-vis the quality of virtue is good; however, I think it would be far more interesting and entertaining if we had the Oracle as a foil with a character like Q from Star Trek: TNG to goad us into really exploring the prevalent problems that exist in New Britannia with consequential outcomes in which there are no good answers would be interesting. If the Oracle eventually develops into such a character that mocks, taunts, and summarizes for us for our flailing at trying to be virtuous heroes, it would be an excellent way to make quests interesting. We need a Guardian 2.0 that has personality that doesn't have to necessarily be evil -- just maddeningly difficult and provocative. Hopefully, the entity which steps out from behind the confirmatory can be just that.



When we come to situations like what occurred with the tell the truth and break one's heart or lie to spare one's feeling out of compassion, I think we need additional commentary from the Oracle on the outcome with a consequence such as:

Truth Outcome

Oracle: It seems you hold the virtue of Truth to be important, Avatar. You informed a woman in Soltown that her lover was indeed a coward who deserted his post. Pity that she soon left town to be abducted by bandits who have subjected her to the most craven cruelty. She now lies forgotten in a forest glade as carrion for the creatures inhabiting the glade. Who knows? She might find everlasting life as one of the Undead. Here's your 500 gold to ease the bite of that bitter truth.

You: ...

Love Outcome

Oracle: It seems you hold the virtue of Love to be important, Avatar. You held back the truth from a woman whose lover deserted his post in order to spare her feelings. Pity that while visiting a nearby village, she espied her lover in a market with his wife and children. Distraught, the poor maid tied a large stone to her feet and threw herself into the Solace River -- ironically from Solace Bridge. Here's your 500 gold. Be sure to check with me soon, love.

You: ...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, you're not responsible for those outcomes directly. You're just trying to do the right thing through your own affinity to a particular virtue.

 

Yes.

 

This is the interesting change and the point where a gaming mechanic could thus change the quest's line. It's an echo of the French philosopher Michel Foucault's famed quotes, "Do not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same.", "He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes, he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever".




In so many ways, reasons as Michel Foucault's do enter into good game play, where such things as assumptions can then have positive outcome through knocking down assumption's stranglehold to say that one has "a class of being or skills and therefore must chose a pathway this way or that as a set assumed outcome because of them".



This is where romance meets all there is, where each dose not have a set pathway because of the one, yet evolves to incorporate the two. Even within adversarial relationships there lay a romance between them within the power struggle which leads the self into a self preservation mode because of the intrusion of the other in the war between the I and the we.

Whether or not we wish to "F" someone, or "F" with someone, or "F" someone up, is all a romance in the wars of I and a we. It is only when a we and a them evolve, where a concept of opposing truths can exist so a more evolved group of truths can become known. Yet the "I" is always a free interdependent radical where a more evolved truth or anti-truth can be cultivated away from the group or groups. Therefore revolution is always in play when truth is known by an all, because a truth known to all is never an absolute truth to the one. When the one's truth or anti-truth can be seen as truth, this causes the revolution to evolve truth, or reinforce the truth that was or is known by the group or groups. This is where if all were not indoctrinated or learned into the truth that the group or groups see as truths, the fever arises that force is the answer rather than the history which came before in the search for truth.

We have an Oracle who serves us in much the same way as a learned king or cultivated one which should know all pathways. Yet this is an assumption that our Oracle is a good king or learned one. Kings and Oracles also learn from those they govern, or are an "I" which has not truth of all in mind, but their own which could be a truth, or insane anti-truth, or a hider of the truth and therefore sinister.

Yet these above stated comments do not address the allure, enticement or attraction which needs to be exhibited by our Oracle who still treats us as mercenary whores with payments due for our attentions to her quests. This is where the archetypes of such attractions should come into play, where it's not just a Virgo or Aquarian intellectual relationship that's needed, because such relationships only compel those interested in acquiring knowledge, which by itself is boring to the rest. This is where other romantic behavioral relationships need to differ with each individual inquirer. Some wish an adversarial and therefore their attraction to the Oracle is based on continuing that contention, just as the hunter's satisfaction only comes with the head mounted on their wall (right by might is therefore sought-after.... and as @Kambrius points out, this leads to the possibility leading to a change to a more courage based quest rather than the path the seeker may be on). The sexual relationship is not far from this, as within it's meaning, "it is to co-create" something together between Oracle and Seeker. The wish to "bang the Oracle, bang with the Oracle or bang up the Oracle" can then be achieved through such changes depending on the ways the seeker and Oracle interact with each other.


Lovingly dancing, intellectually stimulating, or angered to contend, should be choices we cause the relationship to evolve into or out of ...
Yet all very enticingly Thunderstruck!'
~Time Lord~