Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Manchu wrote:Why, the Tau definition of course.

Then this is completely circular and pointless. People almost always prefer to think themselves as good, and label the things they do to be good. Was there any regime ever anywhere which actually claimed to be 'evil'?

The exampes about inquisitors and imperialists were brought up exactly in order to illustrate this point.

Yes, Tau believe that they do good. I do not believe that they do. Thus I do not think they're 'good guys'.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:A criminal, by definition, does not have a sincere intention to do good.

What? No!

I'm sure many criminals have perfecty good (at least to themselves) justifications why their crime was completely justified. But they're criminals because hey broke the law.

Jefffar wrote:A criminal, by definition, is one who has committed a crime. Intention has nothing to do with it.

Look up "mens rea" on wikipedia.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crimson wrote:Then this is completely circular and pointless. People almost always prefer to think themselves as good, and label the things they do to be good.

Like I said, you want some kind objective goodness -- something outside of perception and experience -- something "authentic." But it doesn't exist.

Manchu wrote:Like I said, you want some kind objective goodness -- something outside of perception and experience -- something "authentic." But it doesn't exist.

Indeed it doesn't exist and thus I have no idea why you brought up whole 'good guys' thing.

And your logic is bizarre considering morals are relative. Why the Tau themselves thinking they're good would make them 'good guys' in my book - or yours? It is quite possible that yours, mine and the Tau's definitions of good are completely different.

Crimson wrote:Yes, Tau believe that they do good. I do not believe that they do. Thus I do not think they're 'good guys'.

The issue is how you prefer to understand the way Tau view themselves and how that self-image tests against IRL standards. In 40k, humanity indisputably views itself as the only race worthy of existence. No one would recognize this as good IRL. The Tau may take a genuine interest in the well-being of other races. In IRL terms, this is definitely good in and of itself -- whatever they do to act on that is a separate matter. Or the Tau may only be totally self-interested and care about other races only insomuch as using them as a means to some end -- which in IRL terms is certainly bad.

Crimson wrote:It is quite possible that yours, mine and the Tau's definitions of good are completely different.

You're making this too complicated. First of all the Tau do not exist. Their definitions are what we say they are. Second, even in this relativistic world there is only so much room for moral disagreement. If you say that other people are only a means to your ends then you a bad -- which is to say, all people who are good would consider you to be bad. There may be people who agree with you, but they are also bad. There is still broad agreement at this level of moral discussion even today.

Manchu wrote:Why, the Tau definition of course.

Then you shouldn't have said this.

Crimson wrote:

Manchu wrote:Why, the Tau definition of course.

Then you shouldn't have said this.

Manchu wrote:First of all the Tau do not exist. Their definitions are what we say they are.

No, I meant exactly what I said.

So their definition of good is what you say. And their definition happens to match yours. Got it.

Manchu wrote:

Jefffar wrote:A criminal, by definition, is one who has committed a crime. Intention has nothing to do with it.

Look up "mens rea" on wikipedia.

Mens rea only applies in some cases, not all. Again, you are over generalizing and erasing context to suit your own needs.

DemetriDominov wrote:Mens rea only applies in some cases, not all.

There are very few strict liability crimes and criminal negligence is not at issue, either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crimson wrote:So their definition of good is what you say. And their definition happens to match yours. Got it.

Yep. That's the point of these two broad conceptions of the Tau. You get to pick which you prefer.

Actualy Tau are Neutal , not good , not bad. they are in the midle. I think is mosly as DemetriDominov wrote.

Manchu wrote:
]Yep. That's the point of these two broad conceptions of the Tau. You get to pick which you prefer.

At this point it should be obvious to you that to many people the answer is: 'neither.' And some of those who have picked one of the options, might not agree with your conclusion that 'Greater Good' option equals the Tau being 'good guys.' (which should be obvious, as we already established that this definition was based on your subjective definition of 'good'.)

At this point, what is obvious to me is that you are just playing a word game and actually have no interest in understanding the poll as it is.

Manchu wrote:At this point, what is obvious to me is that you are just playing a word game and actually have no interest in understanding the poll as it is.

That might be a reasonable conclusion to make were I the only person to critique the poll options or your interpretation of the results.

Manchu wrote:At this point, what is obvious to me is that you are just playing a word game and actually have no interest in understanding the poll as it is.

To whom are you directing this, three people in the past 5 mins have flat out said that neither option is suitable for the Tau on its own.. including what seems to be an actual tau player.

Crimson wrote:That might be a reasonable conclusion to make were I the only person to critique the poll options or your interpretation of the results.

I think the poll options have stood up very well to critique. As for my interpretation of the results, it's just an opinion among others that could be drawn from the numbers so far.

yes none of them is suitable on its own.....we can only choose which is the most percent of the Tau.
as tau themselfs do it for the Greater Good, Kroot do it for theirselfs

DemetriDominov wrote:three people in the past 5 mins have flat out said

No one who has participated in this discussion in the five minutes preceding your post is new to this thread.

Pada wrote:we can only choose which is the most percent of the Tau

That's exactly right. This is why the OP begins with the word "generally."

SPHESS COMMIES

Manchu wrote:

DemetriDominov wrote:three people in the past 5 mins have flat out said

No one who has participated in this discussion in the five minutes preceding your post is new to this thread.

How is that even a relevant point? I'm not new. Crimson isn't new either. Pada isn't new. And wayyyy back when Melissia made her comment, she disagreed with you too. We all disagree with your poll and it only took 5 mins for us to individually disagree with you.

"Perhaps unsurprisingly (or not, for the tau) few races are willing to surrender unreservedly, and so the Fire caste has gone to war on numerous occasions. Those worlds that will not willingly join are dragged to the negotiation table under the threat of annihilation. Those that remain openly defiant face obliteration under the orbital guns of the Air caste fleet."

-The tau codex, page ten.

"T'AU- FIRST AMONGST EQUALS"

-The tau codex, page ten.

"the tau lande a vast invasion force on Nimbosa. Commander Brightsword, the leader of the tau forces, set about the systematic extermination of the populace.

-Cities of Death, page fifty six.

I will take the second option.

@Crimson, Manchu and DemetriDominov

Ever hear the phrases, "too smart for their own good" and "can't see the forest for the trees".

The reason that I say this is that all of you have polluted the thread and the poll with absolutely meaningless bickering. While I am a big fan of philosophy, you guys should step back and actually read again what you are debating.

You are debating good vs evil or if there is even such a thing as something being "true"-ly good.
Thing is that that is not what is asked in the poll

The poll mentions the Greater Good,... ya know, that thing put into the codex by the writers so that players would know the base motivation of the Tau.
Now good/=greater good and vise-versa.

The Greater Good is a reference to a philosophical or ideological concept that is a defining precept of certain styles of government.

For those not familiar with this concept , It is like combining Vulcan logic with Machiavellis' advice to his prince. Here, it goes something like this:

A nation/state is a populace with a unique cultural identity
There is no state without a populace and a populace will lose its cultural identity with out nationhood/statehood
So
"The populace="The body of the State"
and
"The state" without "The body" will not/ cannot survive
Also
"The State defines the populace/culture"
so
"The populace cannot/will not survive without the state"

Then
The primary function of the State is to survive and to grow.



Now when it comes to the state, there is no morality, no good or evil or right and wrong....other than for the state to endure.
By endure, it is meant that the state does not diminish or lose standing in reference to the other existing nations/states.

This means that the government of the state shall always seek to maintain or improve the State, by any of the following:
Population Growth, Economic Growth, Treaty/Alliances, Expansion and many other ways that go up to and include diminishing another state to ensure the growth of their own.

When deciding how to maintain or to grow the state, the government has to follow certain precepts, such as:

Basically, The needs of "the many" outweigh the needs of "the few" or "the one".
This means that the needs of the state outweigh the needs of the individual.

The Tau are taught/raised "That it is only right and noble for the individual to set their own personal desires aside to work together for the greater good of the empire".(Pg 2 Tau Empire Codex)
This is the Greater Good.

Does this make the Tau good? No
Does it make them unselfish? Yes, incredibly so.


The only area that the Tau can possibly be judged as good or not is how they deal with other races.

To other states/nations/empires,"Are the Tau good? It is a matter of perspective.
If your Empire is large and being diminished by the Tau then, absolutely not. They would be viewed as Jackals, attacking the weak edges of the body.
If your Empire is smaller and they will allow your State/Nation/Empire to exist as part of their own? Maybe, depending on whether you view your state/empire being diminished or not.
If your Empire will be destroyed otherwise and the Tau not only guarantee that your State/Empire will survive but will also grow, Then they are good.

Seeing as the Tau empire is the only race that will do such in the year 40,000 then they are the only faction that has the possibility of being viewed from the outside as good.

TLDR; With all of this in mind, then reread the poll and you will find that the question truly being asked is do you view the Tau from the large empire(Imperiums) or do you view it from the small empire (Kroot, Demi-Urg, Vespids,ect...) point of view.
This is because tyhe Greater Good has nothing to do with the basic principle of right or wrong. It is about maintaining the life of the state.

Vychor wrote:"Perhaps unsurprisingly (or not, for the tau) few races are willing to surrender unreservedly, and so the Fire caste has gone to war on numerous occasions. Those worlds that will not willingly join are dragged to the negotiation table under the threat of annihilation. Those that remain openly defiant face obliteration under the orbital guns of the Air caste fleet."

-The tau codex, page ten.

"T'AU- FIRST AMONGST EQUALS"

-The tau codex, page ten.

"the tau lande a vast invasion force on Nimbosa. Commander Brightsword, the leader of the tau forces, set about the systematic extermination of the populace.

-Cities of Death, page fifty six.

I will take the second option.

You misunderstood the Heading on page ten

T'AU is the name of the Tau homeworld. When ever you see the apostrophe it means that it is referencing the planet. Seeing as it is the Tau homeworld and where the government is centralized, it makes sense that it is referred to as the "First".
The meaning of the statement is that the homeworld T'AU is the first out of many other equal Tau worlds....First as in it came first/ before the other worlds. The section is just giving a description of the Tau homeworld, nothing more.

Cities of Death is an expansion to 40K written from the Imperiums perspective. It should be treated as Anti-Tau propoganda, nothing more.

IIRC, The Nimbosa colony set up in a contested portion of space between the Tau and the Imperium after the Damocles Gulf Crusade.
When asked to leave or submit to Tau rule, The Nimbosans fought to the last man.

In the Tau codex, The purging/extermination of the Nimbosan forces/colonists was viewed as unnecessary and Commander Brightsword was recalled from the front-lines after the campaign to be, what many considered, censured for his actions.

Sounds like the actions of a commander who stepped out of line, not those of the Empire as a whole.


Edit to correct typo in the Tau being veiwed by outside states/empires section.

Very colorful but I don't think this:

reread the poll and you will find that the question truly being asked is do you view the Tau from the large empire(Imperiums) or do you view it from the small empire (Kroot, Demi-Urg, Vespids,ect...) point of view

is necessarily the question at all. The idea is painfully simple: Greater Good means the best possible outcome for everyone on each of their own terms or the Greater Good is just an ideological justification for the conquest and oppression of all non-Tau (and including, from the perspective of the Ethereals, all non-Ethereals).

@focusedfire: I actually agree wholeheartly with you, the Tau are good in the eyes of a violent universe, but I also believe that the Tau ethos exists in between the two options, not upon one in a vacuum.

Manchu wrote:Very colorful but I don't think this:

reread the poll and you will find that the question truly being asked is do you view the Tau from the large empire(Imperiums) or do you view it from the small empire (Kroot, Demi-Urg, Vespids,ect...) point of view

is necessarily the question at all. The idea is painfully simple: Greater Good means the best possible outcome for everyone on each of their own terms or the Greater Good is just an ideological justification for the conquest and oppression of all non-Tau (and including, from the perspective of the Ethereals, all non-Ethereals).

Your not getting it.
It comes down to you trying to apply the term Greater Good to something that it has no connection to.

The Greater Good is a Machiavellian principle of government. It is for this reason that I have never understood why people think that the Tau are not Grim Dark enough. While the Greater Good in and of itself is a benign logical concept of how a nation should be run, it can eventually be(and often is) taken too far.
By too far, I mean "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions".

While the Tau are a small empire, they will tend to behave in a manner considered as good by many outside nations/empires. But as the Empire gets larger, the needs of the state/nation/empire will require actions that will be increasingly viewed as going from less good to downright evil/bad by those outside of the Empire. There is nothing intriniscally wrong here, just the natural life cycle of empires.
What will determine the ultimate "Goodness" or "Badness" of the Tau Empire is how the Tau themselves handle power and how hard they fight powers tendency to corrupt.

For the present, Tau are both greater good and good.
In a couple of thousand years(if the empire survives) then the Tau will still be "Greater Good" and could very well still be viewed as "good" but could just as easily be viewed as "bad" (The villians).

DemetriDominov wrote:@focusedfire: I actually agree wholeheartly with you, the Tau are good in the eyes of a violent universe, but I also believe that the Tau ethos exists in between the two options, not upon one in a vacuum.

The point that I was making is that the Tau are absolutely Greater Good as in they follow this governing principle, but that Greater Good /= Good.

Now if you look at the poll and the question being asked, while Manchu has misapplied the lable of Greater Good, The poll itself can be answered by what I pointed out as the real underlying question.

Basically, you must decide from which perspective you view the Tau. While they would be nice, there is no real need for other options on the poll. Just decide if you have a large Empire looking at an upstart pov or do you identify with the smaller Empires and can see the Tau as a protector race.

I don't view the outside empire that is the same size as the Tau and chooses to fight rather than cooperate as being intrisically necessary to the poll. This is due to the fact that the Tau is willing to work co-operatively. Any nation that chooses to diminish itself through war when they could maintain and possibly proper through co-operation, is a prideful nation that is in the wrong(strictly from the pov of the "Greater Good").

focusedfire wrote:
The point that I was making is that the Tau are absolutely Greater Good as in they follow this governing principle, but that Greater Good /= Good.

Well yes, and my main complaint was that Manchu was baselessly equating the sincere support of the Greater Good with the Tau being 'good guys'.

I don't know. If we're only going by belief and not actions then I guess the Tau are fighting for the "greater good of the galaxy" as much as The Imperium is.

focusedfire wrote:Your not getting it. It comes down to you trying to apply the term Greater Good to something that it has no connection to. The Greater Good is a Machiavellian principle of government.

No, not necessarily. That is one interpretation. In this poll, it would fall into the "Lesser Evil" category (unless you are misusing the term "Machiavellian").


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I don't know. If we're only going by belief and not actions then I guess the Tau are fighting for the "greater good of the galaxy" as much as The Imperium is.

Yeah, under that standard, it's all just fighting. Not very interesting.

Manchu wrote:

focusedfire wrote:Your not getting it. It comes down to you trying to apply the term Greater Good to something that it has no connection to. The Greater Good is a Machiavellian principle of government.

No, not necessarily. That is one interpretation. In this poll, it would fall into the "Lesser Evil" category (unless you are misusing the term "Machiavellian").

Not misused, rather, appropriately used.

There are several correct uses for the term Machiavellian.
Some of the uses have negative connotations while others do not. The non-perjorative use of the term "Mavhiavellian Political Concept" is simply a reference to his advocating that politics be emancipated from theology and moral philosophy.

As a matter of fact, just as many individuals erroniously believe that Machiavelli = evil, There are many who believe that he both hated and had no use for religion.
This couldn't be farther from the truth, he believed that religion has an important role in maintaining "order" within the populace.

Now, in modern times, people have come believe that the necessity of religion iss no longer applicable. Yet, when religion is removed from these populaces/nations, they end up having to establish an artificial construct that performs the same job.

Even now, with the pacifying comforts of modern daily life as supplied by the electrical grid, utility companies and corporate food suppliers, modern nations still have to establish tradition based organizations to maintain help order and control of their citizens.
In the case of the Tau(Much like the modern U.S.A. and many other nations), they have made their political system into the "New Religion".

The Tau are a race that have a machiavellian based republican political system that also serves as an ersatz religion. Machiavellian systems does not preclude a populace from being in and of themselves good.


So, to answer the poll, The Tau are Greater Good personified as per the term and how it is described in the codex.

If we are to use what you are calling the greater good as an answer then by your description we need to ignore the Greater Good moniker and view the Tau solely by how they relate to their peers(Other Empires and races outside of their own)


IMO, the Tau are good, "for now".

Very hard to decide, to me they seem like space communists so how can they not be good but then again unless of course you see their feet which are hooves and since tyranids, beastmen, horses and unicorns (the 4 most evil things ever) have hooves as well they must be evil.

I choose C
They are only evil if you look at their feet/hooves, so as long as you don't stare they are good

focusedfire wrote:So, to answer the poll, The Tau are Greater Good personified as per the term and how it is described in the codex.

Begs the question.