(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote: For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
...
I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:03 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: That is an interesting path for superman to solve Earth problems. But the problem is (and that is the point I want to get for debate) would humans accept it freely? Superman can force human kind to use those rules in a non-democratic way and this would make us see him as a villain or a bad guy. But for him, he would be doing the right thing since he has the power to do it.
I am trying to imagine how a writer could possible write this. This is very hard to write a story that is likeable. I think that is why we ended up having story arcs like the one you talked about (the one about Clark and the strong man). I mean superman is a semi god. The writers need to show him in some level as a human (at least in his feelings) so superman has some weakness and we can feel connected with the character in some level.

I think I see your point (or maybe I missed it). I have sometimes wondered about this. We often confer human-like values on non-human characters like Superman to judge their actions for what is good or bad. For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
My point being that I also think it would be hard to make Superman likable to a lot of people if writer's have him change the rules on earth to create a very different (Krytoninan) style rule, if those rules are contrary to what we humans think are good or just. I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

(05-09-2017, 10:30 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:03 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: That is an interesting path for superman to solve Earth problems. But the problem is (and that is the point I want to get for debate) would humans accept it freely? Superman can force human kind to use those rules in a non-democratic way and this would make us see him as a villain or a bad guy. But for him, he would be doing the right thing since he has the power to do it.
I am trying to imagine how a writer could possible write this. This is very hard to write a story that is likeable. I think that is why we ended up having story arcs like the one you talked about (the one about Clark and the strong man). I mean superman is a semi god. The writers need to show him in some level as a human (at least in his feelings) so superman has some weakness and we can feel connected with the character in some level.

I think I see your point (or maybe I missed it). I have sometimes wondered about this. We often confer human-like values on non-human characters like Superman to judge their actions for what is good or bad. For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
My point being that I also think it would be hard to make Superman likable to a lot of people if writer's have him change the rules on earth to create a very different (Krytoninan) style rule, if those rules are contrary to what we humans think are good or just. I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

I wasn’t thinking exactly that. But you ended up explaining what I was trying to saying better than I was thinking it myself.
Since superman is not human, why should we consider that he must follow human values?
But as this is a grimm forum, do you think we can make the same questions about the characters in the show? I mean the show is based on the fact that wesen and grimm are not exactly normal humans. This means that they probably had a different evolution process? Don’t you think?

(05-09-2017, 10:30 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:03 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: That is an interesting path for superman to solve Earth problems. But the problem is (and that is the point I want to get for debate) would humans accept it freely? Superman can force human kind to use those rules in a non-democratic way and this would make us see him as a villain or a bad guy. But for him, he would be doing the right thing since he has the power to do it.
I am trying to imagine how a writer could possible write this. This is very hard to write a story that is likeable. I think that is why we ended up having story arcs like the one you talked about (the one about Clark and the strong man). I mean superman is a semi god. The writers need to show him in some level as a human (at least in his feelings) so superman has some weakness and we can feel connected with the character in some level.

I think I see your point (or maybe I missed it). I have sometimes wondered about this. We often confer human-like values on non-human characters like Superman to judge their actions for what is good or bad. For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
My point being that I also think it would be hard to make Superman likable to a lot of people if writer's have him change the rules on earth to create a very different (Krytoninan) style rule, if those rules are contrary to what we humans think are good or just. I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

I wasn’t thinking exactly that. But you ended up explaining what I was trying to saying better than I was thinking it myself.
Since superman is not human, why should we consider that he must follow human values?
But as this is a grimm forum, do you think we can make the same questions about the characters in the show? I mean the show is based on the fact that wesen and grimm are not exactly normal humans. This means that they probably had a different evolution process? Don’t you think?

(05-09-2017, 10:30 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:03 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: That is an interesting path for superman to solve Earth problems. But the problem is (and that is the point I want to get for debate) would humans accept it freely? Superman can force human kind to use those rules in a non-democratic way and this would make us see him as a villain or a bad guy. But for him, he would be doing the right thing since he has the power to do it.
I am trying to imagine how a writer could possible write this. This is very hard to write a story that is likeable. I think that is why we ended up having story arcs like the one you talked about (the one about Clark and the strong man). I mean superman is a semi god. The writers need to show him in some level as a human (at least in his feelings) so superman has some weakness and we can feel connected with the character in some level.

I think I see your point (or maybe I missed it). I have sometimes wondered about this. We often confer human-like values on non-human characters like Superman to judge their actions for what is good or bad. For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
My point being that I also think it would be hard to make Superman likable to a lot of people if writer's have him change the rules on earth to create a very different (Krytoninan) style rule, if those rules are contrary to what we humans think are good or just. I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

I wasn’t thinking exactly that. But you ended up explaining what I was trying to saying better than I was thinking it myself.
Since superman is not human, why should we consider that he must follow human values?
But as this is a grimm forum, do you think we can make the same questions about the characters in the show? I mean the show is based on the fact that wesen and grimm are not exactly normal humans. This means that they probably had a different evolution process? Don’t you think?

(05-09-2017, 04:30 PM)Devegs Wrote: Nick often faces the the dilemma of being a grimm or a cop/normal human first. I think he chose to compromise. To be grimm when he has to and to be human when he needs to. Whenever he responds as a grimm (a part of himself) using grimm/wesen world logic to resolve wesen cases that filter into his grimm/human life... can we blame him? I don't.

(05-09-2017, 04:34 PM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 04:30 PM)Devegs Wrote: Nick often faces the the dilemma of being a grimm or a cop/normal human first. I think he chose to compromise. To be grimm when he has to and to be human when he needs to. Whenever he responds as a grimm (a part of himself) using grimm/wesen world logic to resolve wesen cases that filter into his grimm/human life... can we blame him? I don't.

IMO Nick is always on duty as a grimm first when he is not wearing sunglasses. Once the wesen knows he is a grimm they can react right away.

(05-09-2017, 10:24 AM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 09:36 AM)Devegs Wrote: For the non-human creatures though, what would be innate to them would have been whatever evolution to their species has conferred upon them, regardless of if they grow up among humans and learn human values. Darwin's theory would (should ?) have applied to their species as well. Meaning their instincts would never be the same as humans. They only adapt and conform to us, for peace and also since they have learned to.
...
I think we don't realize that we are typically assuming our own superiority over non-human creatures since we believe that they should conform to our values in order for us to consider them them good or just.

Devegs, do you own a cat? If so, did you adapt to the cat?

(05-09-2017, 04:38 PM)Devegs Wrote: We could then argue that he prefers it that way. Maybe he doesn't feel the need to hide any part of who he is.

(05-09-2017, 05:37 PM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 04:38 PM)Devegs Wrote: We could then argue that he prefers it that way. Maybe he doesn't feel the need to hide any part of who he is.

When Nick takes the kids to the amusement park by himself, do you think he is putting the kids at risk by not wearing sunglasses?

(05-09-2017, 05:55 PM)Devegs Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 05:37 PM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 04:38 PM)Devegs Wrote: We could then argue that he prefers it that way. Maybe he doesn't feel the need to hide any part of who he is.

When Nick takes the kids to the amusement park by himself, do you think he is putting the kids at risk by not wearing sunglasses?

I don't think so. I seem to remember that wesen don't see that Nick is a grimm unless they woge and then he too can see them. Also, by wesen code they shouldn't be woging and revealing themselves to humans. I know they show their hidden woge when agitated or excited. The wesen at the park are probably trying to get some quality time with their kids too. All they'll see is a human (Nick) playing with his kids. Same for Nick. He'll see other humans (or wesen in human state) with their kids. If any wesen is woging at the park, they would probably be showing the hidden woge. If they see Nick, he'll go the usual route of I'm not trying to kill you. If they go full woge then that wesen is rogue and up to no good. Even the other wesens at the park would be on Nick's side if he has to grimm up to restore order, I think.