"She's a Witch! Burn her!"

Alright, so, given my work on the culture tab, I can say with confidence that culture is weird. Really weird. And a lot of it doesn't fall into nice neat catagories like we'd like it to. So over the next few days (Hopefully) I'm gonna make some threads about these things, piece by piece, until hopefully we can patch together the major weirdness of it into a fully fledged gameplay mechanic.

Please also note that with most of these, I don't have a specific plan to deal with them. I want your input before I start that. I have amazingly un-fresh eyes, (Ripe eyes?) so nothing I come up with will be able to completely satisfy me, and won't get posted.

That established? Good, now onto today's topic: Witches

I can already hear you: "But that's so specific and terracentric! Why would we include them?" Well, let me tell you something: Every single culture on the planet has a concept of witches, and up until the mid 1700s, virtually every single person on the planet believed in them. Even today we find witch-hysteria ravaging the occasional African village. Witches have been an amazingly central identification point at the heart of every known culture for all of history. Only now are we growing out of it.

Now that we get that, I'm going to have to ask you to put your serious business hat on. There is an ungodly (no pun intended) amount of baggage associated with the concept of Witches in modern western culture. Generally the idea is that the concept of witches is nothing more than the result of searching for a scapegoat when no one is guilty.

This. Is. Not. True.

If I had to choose any one concept more fundimentally misunderstood than any other, it would be belief in witches. And this is why: Witches exist as a way for early cultures to catagorize someone when they are fundimentally unable to connect to other people, to the point of being a danger to those around them.

For those of you who haven't, I suggest you read the Malleus Maleficarum, which is essentially a late-medieval/rennaisance "Witch Hunting 101." It's boring as all gahenna, assumes you've had a good grounding in period theology and constantly references books of which no copies remain, but it explains the concept better than any other source I've found. For those of you who don't want to read it yourself, I will oversimplify for you:

Some Catholic ponce wrote:

A Witch is someone who once stood on the edge of society. They worked with very powerful things like life and Death, existance and fundimental questions of why. They dealt with things that no person should be forced to, much less on a regular basis. They became a Witch when they fell off this edge and into a place where they can no longer connect to others, because they are alone in their experience. Such lonliness is the worst torture bearable, and they will do almost anything to end it.

By this definition, Witches exist even today. The classic definitions vary from culture to culture, but usually only changing who they sell their soul to to a more local equivalent of Satan.

A Witch is, as stated, someone who lives on the edge of society. They exist alone, as a permabachelor, widow, spinster, or widower. They do not actively engage in conversation and hide themselves away. For lack of a better word: grumpy. They don't like other people.

Most important is what they do. They need to live with things that most people see as strange or even traumatizing. If the subject brings up moral dilemma, even better. You'll find that this includes things like midwives, morticians, priests and scholars of psychology, theology, or ethics. I'm not even kidding about that last one. Present someone with an unsolvable question, demand a solution, and they will fall apart(If they don't give up). Case and point: Freud, not dangerous but certainly unable to connect.

Both of these must be present in order for someone to break down and fall into the catagory of Witch. Also important is the fact that Witches pose a danger to those around them. While the stereotype holds the fear as being one of magic, far more common are cases deal with more mundane things like fire, poison, and disease. Sometimes you'll also find murder, cannabalism, and use of hallucanagenics, both on the self and the victims. Unless there is a very real threat to the community, than the general reaction is one of pity at best, indeference at worst.

However, they real threat of Witches is not one of overt crime, but of a subvertive one. In one of Plato's dialogues he is going to court to testify that a man is guilty of "phonos." Most literally, this means something along the lines of "To stain with blood." It's saying that the crimes commited are not evil from the direct evils, but from the way it damages those who must live with them. For example, phonos would say that 9/11 was not a great evil because of all the people who died in the event, but because of all the people who had to live through the horror and fear and the world-shaking breach of trust. On a less dramatic note, phonos is what prevents society from functioning normally, like xenophobia after war. This also puts people in power at further risk, as if they are found corrupt it would mean all those under them would have been struck harder by the shock. This goes double for love-based cultures, where leaders are susposed to be seen as friends and counsilors.

So do we have a good idea of Witches themselves? That's not retorical, actually. If something doesn't make sense I need to know. Anyways, let's move on to Witch Hysteria.

Now, this is where the paranoia stereotype becomes semi-relevant. Witch Hysteria is a result of extreme anxiety within a community, especially if it presents an unncertain future. Crop failures, disolving governments, natural disastors, scandals and diseases are decent examples. When events like these pile up enough, you enter the next stage with a catalyst. If something goes very, very wrong, very quickly and dramatically, and cannot be easily explained, like a massive fire, seisure, unexplainable death, or something similer, then people will begin to look for a reason and do so quickly. Given the common knowledge nature of witches, they become perfect targets for this sort of accusation.

While I hope no one here has ever gone through Witch Hysteria, it's important to understand that it isn't a sign of ignorance or stupidity. People really do believe what they come up with, to the point that their bodies will sometimes actually take over as a subconcious attempt at giving proof, reacting to stimuli in a way they subconciously see as convincing. They have no choice in the matter. It's temporary insanity.

As whispers grow louder and people start to die, then either the Hysteria ends, or it grows stronger if things keep getting worse. As people who actually fit the definition of Witch grow thinner, people begin to look closer toward the center of society. This usually stops the Hysteria in it's tracks, as anyone still excemt from the temporary insanity notices the shift away from probable suspects to scapegoating.

Witches as an official concept serve as a way to make a clean and systematic way of dealing with Hysteria. The medieval Inquisitor, far from the "Spanish variant," acted as something between an investigative reporter, a policeman, and a census taker, quickly dispatching any "real" cases of witchcraft, and calmly reasuring anyone false accusations. This would usually be followed by a report given to the clergy on what had happened and suggestions on what to do to heal any remaining wounds. Cases of actual executions of someone as a Witch during this period are almost nil.

Alright, that's all I can think of. Now tell me, how do we encorperate this?

We could have a slider for how accepting a culture is of those who differ from the norm. This would become more distrustful during and shortly after war, political instability, and if in a particularly religious society, other religions or denominations. It would become more trusting during times of peace, if a culture constantly has to deal with outside cultures (like Europe has had to), in a secular govornment, etc.

What do you think? Good, or does it need to be more complex?

EDIT: Or maybe we could have an extreme end of the how xenophobic a society is where it even distrusts itself.

Poisson wrote:

We could have a slider for how accepting a culture is of those who differ from the norm. This would become more distrustful during and shortly after war, political instability, and if in a particularly religious society, other religions or denominations. It would become more trusting during times of peace, if a culture constantly has to deal with outside cultures (like Europe has had to), in a secular govornment, etc.

What do you think? Good, or does it need to be more complex?

EDIT: Or maybe we could have an extreme end of the how xenophobic a society is where it even distrusts itself.

That is dealing with xenophobia, not Witches.

If a witch is just a hermit who breaks ethical laws, then shouldn't this be more about how the nation handles crimes? I mean, isn't that what the whole "burn her!" thing was? A way to weed out those who were breaking the rules?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

If a witch is just a hermit who breaks ethical laws, then shouldn't this be more about how the nation handles crimes? I mean, isn't that what the whole "burn her!" thing was? A way to weed out those who were breaking the rules?

Hrm... I think I might have worded that worse than I thought I did... Although I knew someone would mention hermit. I should have avoided that. Witches don't flee people, they just barely tolerate them.

The biggest part of Witches is being able to identify someone who simply cannot live normally, and refuses to seek help. The crime that is inherent is usually one of a breech of trust, as often they will try and pretend they are fine, (Someone suicidal does not walk and crying every day to work.) meaning they are harder to pick out. Very often you'll see people in power as Witches, thus the most dangerous form.

There is a degree of Crime and punishment here. Burning actually never occured in Europe until the 1600s. It was concidered inhumane until people started figuring out how to use gunpowder to speed it up. The biggest issue I see is one of having a very specific, professional way to deal with phonos and hysteria. It's something we lack and have suffered for. Modern hysteria being for terrorists, of course.

How to begin on this question...

First off, I want to drag you to my heritage class so we can have a philosophical debate instead of listening to the dude next to me spout about what he did this weekend.

Forgoing philosophy for now, I think we need to start by defining what would be universally traumatic to society for any culture. My votes are
a)death (the more violent/bloody/drawn out the better)
b)Disease. Especially disease with highly visible markers
c)A change in the natural order. This covers drought, flood, famine, meteors, and anything else you could think of.
d)The perception of otherness. Xenophobia in it's most literal sense does not mean the fear of foreigners. It means the fear of the other. Any individual within a society who acts in ways inexplicable to others is always going to be treated with a degree of fear.

In this scenario, a community would be attempting to regain control, especially by getting rid of the "other" (The witch.)

Speaking outside the game for a moment, I'd like to point out that the isolation thing goes both ways. The isolatee can't relate to people as well because of the experience which they don't understand. However, it is still possible (check out those returning from war, those who survive abuse, and those who survive natural disasters such as plagues,) for them to connect with others given the chance. It's when the majority of society refuses to connect with them, since they don't want to deal with whatever it is that's happened, that the "witch" is truly isolates.

I'm still having trouble seeing how we are going to incorporate any of this into the game, and why we need to. I'm not saying it shouldn't be in, i just want someone to convince me that it should be.

Tenebrarum wrote:

Poisson wrote:

We could have a slider for how accepting a culture is of those who differ from the norm. This would become more distrustful during and shortly after war, political instability, and if in a particularly religious society, other religions or denominations. It would become more trusting during times of peace, if a culture constantly has to deal with outside cultures (like Europe has had to), in a secular govornment, etc.

What do you think? Good, or does it need to be more complex?

EDIT: Or maybe we could have an extreme end of the how xenophobic a society is where it even distrusts itself.

That is dealing with xenophobia, not Witches.

I thought this part dealt with that rather well.

Poisson wrote:

We could have a slider for how accepting a culture is of those who differ from the norm. This would become more distrustful during and shortly after war, political instability, and if in a particularly religious society, other religions or denominations. It would become more trusting during times of peace, if a culture constantly has to deal with outside cultures (like Europe has had to), in a secular govornment (or in a religious govornment that preaches tollerance and acceptence), etc.

What about this was about xenophobia?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

I'm still having trouble seeing how we are going to incorporate any of this into the game, and why we need to. I'm not saying it shouldn't be in, i just want someone to convince me that it should be.

It needs to be encorperated because of the very central part this holds in culture. The concept of Witches gives people a way of handling with the trauma and pain they suffer after tradgedy, specifically the sudden and unexpected breaches of trust that are inevitable. It puts these things into a concept they can handle. Cultures without the concept (As in, have not yet developed it) suffer from trauma far more. Even we have suffered from lacking a formal, systematic way of dealing with phonos. Ex.: 9/11 happens, and we go to war with a nation, evening making lies to come up with an excuse.

This could be shown fairly easily with increases in brashness, and having periods of trauma on various scales that change the way leaders/people/nations/towns/etc act after phonos-inducing events.

Witch Hysteria is definately something to include. Still happens today. Ex.: McCarthyism (Terrible misspelling.)

We do need to define how a society deals with excessive trauma, but I think we might need to start a little more general with the scenarios than this.

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

We do need to define how a society deals with excessive trauma, but I think we might need to start a little more general with the scenarios than this.

Exactly. I think that this should be a thread about trauma and how to deal with it, not a thread on witches. I can easily see "witch-hunt" or "scapegoat" as an option for trauma or hysteria, though.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

We do need to define how a society deals with excessive trauma, but I think we might need to start a little more general with the scenarios than this.

Exactly. I think that this should be a thread about trauma and how to deal with it, not a thread on witches. I can easily see "witch-hunt" or "scapegoat" as an option for trauma or hysteria, though.

Perfect. This is exactly why I love posting the overly specific things. They reveal what major issues we've missed.

Now before I move on: Alaska, "Witch Hunt" and "Scapegoat" sound an awful lot like the modern stereotype and very little like what I've been trying to say about the legitimacy of Witches.

Tenebrarum wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

We do need to define how a society deals with excessive trauma, but I think we might need to start a little more general with the scenarios than this.

Exactly. I think that this should be a thread about trauma and how to deal with it, not a thread on witches. I can easily see "witch-hunt" or "scapegoat" as an option for trauma or hysteria, though.

Perfect. This is exactly why I love posting the overly specific things. They reveal what major issues we've missed.

Now before I move on: Alaska, "Witch Hunt" and "Scapegoat" sound an awful lot like the modern stereotype and very little like what I've been trying to say about the legitimacy of Witches.

Well i figured that killing the witch would be a way of dealing with trauma, hopefully killing the one who caused it. Is that not correct?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Well i figured that killing the witch would be a way of dealing with trauma, hopefully killing the one who caused it. Is that not correct?

Killing was very rare. Usually the person would undergo penance and would be put in a monastary or similer situation.

More important though is that they aknowledge Witch Hysteria as taking place, refering to it as bewitchment. Those suffering from it would receive psychological treatment and counciling due to them, as opposed to modern society where we largely ignore the innocence/need of these persons, and require them seek help on their own if at all. Witch Hysteria is no longer a legitimate excuse in modern courts.

Tenebrarum wrote:

Killing was very rare. Usually the person would undergo penance and would be put in a monastary or similer situation.

More important though is that they aknowledge Witch Hysteria as taking place, refering to it as bewitchment. Those suffering from it would receive psychological treatment and counciling due to them, as opposed to modern society where we largely ignore the innocence/need of these persons, and require them seek help on their own if at all. Witch Hysteria is no longer a legitimate excuse in modern courts.

Okay, so is it more about people with psychological disorders then hysteria? You're really confusing me now.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, so is it more about people with psychological disorders then hysteria? You're really confusing me now.

Hysteria is a psychological state, much like PTSD. And as with PTSD, without treatment the person can lose sanity. Am I making sense now?

Tenebrarum wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, so is it more about people with psychological disorders then hysteria? You're really confusing me now.

Hysteria is a psychological state, much like PTSD. And as with PTSD, without treatment the person can lose sanity. Am I making sense now?

Yes. I get it now. I thought we were talking about mass hysteria, as in people being terrified of something happening in their society and rioting and trying to kill everyone and Belgium. Nevermind. So you're saying that witches are the old equivalent of mentally ill people in modern times?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Tenebrarum wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, so is it more about people with psychological disorders then hysteria? You're really confusing me now.

Hysteria is a psychological state, much like PTSD. And as with PTSD, without treatment the person can lose sanity. Am I making sense now?

Yes. I get it now. I thought we were talking about mass hysteria, as in people being terrified of something happening in their society and rioting and trying to kill everyone and Belgium. Nevermind. So you're saying that witches are the old equivalent of mentally ill people in modern times?

Yup, usually mentally ill to the point of dangerous. The Malleus makes the point that you'll find harmlessly crazy people all over, but that they shouldn't be concidered witches.

I'm also saying that the people who experience witch hysteria (Ex.: The accusers during the Salem Witch trials) also suffer psychologically, and it's this that most resembles PTSD. They would be given treatment.

Lastly, the society as a whole suffers through phonos, acting like a sudden and dangerous breach of trust. This leads to plenty of complications and ridiculous accusations when the phonos is not recognized and treated on a broad scale. Think of the Orange County protests and 9/11. Or the bigotry against Asians after pearl harbor. Unless recognized and treated, the doubt spawned from a catalyst event festers into hatred and bigotry. This is phonos.

Tenebrarum wrote:

Yup, usually mentally ill to the point of dangerous. The Malleus makes the point that you'll find harmlessly crazy people all over, but that they shouldn't be concidered witches.

I'm also saying that the people who experience witch hysteria (Ex.: The accusers during the Salem Witch trials) also suffer psychologically, and it's this that most resembles PTSD. They would be given treatment.

Lastly, the society as a whole suffers through phonos, acting like a sudden and dangerous breach of trust. This leads to plenty of complications and ridiculous accusations when the phonos is not recognized and treated on a broad scale. Think of the Orange County protests and 9/11. Or the bigotry against Asians after pearl harbor. Unless recognized and treated, the doubt spawned from a catalyst event festers into hatred and bigotry. This is phonos.

And... i'm confused again. So, we aren't just showing how the culture deals with the dangerously mentally ill, but also how they are affected by it? And how is there any difference in phonos from culture to culture? Or are you suggesting having a section dedicated to the racial or nation prejudices that are present in the culture. Actually, that's a good idea.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

And... i'm confused again. So, we aren't just showing how the culture deals with the dangerously mentally ill, but also how they are affected by it? And how is there any difference in phonos from culture to culture? Or are you suggesting having a section dedicated to the racial or nation prejudices that are present in the culture. Actually, that's a good idea.

*Frustrated face*

Phonos is the breach of trust. A breach of trust creates doubt, that when untreated, grows into hatred. Hatred becomes bigotry. Is that clear?

Now, a nation that does not recognize this and deal with it is more likely to become bigoted after a tradgedy or sommit of the like. Is that clear?

Ignore the mentally ill part for now, just focus on that.

Hey, at least he's able to follow you, unlike me.

Tenebrarum wrote:

*Frustrated face*

Phonos is the breach of trust. A breach of trust creates doubt, that when untreated, grows into hatred. Hatred becomes bigotry. Is that clear?

Now, a nation that does not recognize this and deal with it is more likely to become bigoted after a tradgedy or sommit of the like. Is that clear?

Ignore the mentally ill part for now, just focus on that.

*Trying not to laugh face*

So we're just talking about implementing a system for prejudices?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Tenebrarum wrote:

*Frustrated face*

Phonos is the breach of trust. A breach of trust creates doubt, that when untreated, grows into hatred. Hatred becomes bigotry. Is that clear?

Now, a nation that does not recognize this and deal with it is more likely to become bigoted after a tradgedy or sommit of the like. Is that clear?

Ignore the mentally ill part for now, just focus on that.

*Trying not to laugh face*

So we're just talking about implementing a system for prejudices?

Nevermind. I'm gonna bail on this tread for now.