If Amakusa really wanted people to get the third, he should have just forgotten about the grail war and made things Extra.
If Amakusa really wanted people to get the third, he should have just forgotten about the grail war and made things Extra.
That's not getting the third, that's literally losing it
Localizationing stuff
That's a rather absolutist position. Suppose I could snap my fingers and cure all cancer in the world instantly, without any negative side-effects. Would it to be wrong to do so without getting "consent" first?Originally Posted by Mcjon01
Not a great comparison
We're not talking about curing cancer with a snap of the fingers, though.
We're talking about changing the fundamental meaning of "humanity."
Imagine if you could cure cancer, but it required turning everyone into a race of bizarre, plant-like creatures who couldn't take vacations to exotic locales like Paris and had to reproduce by spreading pollen instead of getting down. I can guarantee a not insignificant portion of the population would hate, hate, hate it.
Spoiler:
The "it's not rape because she had an orgasm" argument, and here I thought you were woke
Mcjon's argument was generalized to "forcing your will" on all humanity in any way, without regard for how great or trivial the consequences might be. I was intending to refute that, not give an exact parallel to Amakusa's own plan.
- - - Updated - - -
Saying that making people immortal (or curing cancer, as your original post could apply to either) is exactly the same as rape is completely inane and a perfect example of the worst argument in the world.
Yes, I do remember the Ruler permanently hanging around a half-servant blank-brained Master and his comic relief Servant constantly telling him about how good humanity is, as if she truly had no idea that doing so could and would influence Sieg to do exactly otherwise.
That's not a great comparison either. Up until Justeaze gave the whole "but servants making that wish will make it all buggy haha" the wish was simply immortality. Immortal people can still do plenty of things for enjoyment; they just don't have to worry about stuff like starving, pain, etc.
I mean, there are some philosophical questions you could bring up about giving the whole world immortality all of a sudden, like if such a thing really would remove all drive and motivation, or if it really would end all conflict. But you know, instead of that, why not just have a spiel about how humanity is good even though that doesn't really go against "let's make everyone immortal."
maybe things are only meaningful if humanity work towards it and gained it themselves
smtg2 journey before destination and stuffs
Humans should die
You're violating someone's body without any concern for what they think or feel and your only justification is that you've deemed the outcome to be good. What would you call it?
That's one of the points brought up yeah.
Okay, I'll admit snapping your fingers to cure cancer was far too abstract an example. How about vaccinating an infant? You're violating someone's body (and even causing them pain) for a benefit that's completely incomprehensible to them, only on the faith that they'll agree it was worth it later on. Now, would you seriously argue that vaccinating a young child is the same as raping them?
Last edited by RoydGolden; January 14th, 2018 at 01:18 AM.
What are you even talking about? That's not what Justeaze said at all.
It's immortality yeah but it's more than that, your not simply making people imaging, making them live longer won't make them better people as seen with Zouken, it's changing the structure of humanity to it's most basic level, it's essentially the final state of evolution for the human race. The problem with Amakusa doing it tho it's to early, essentially cutting off any future humans will have because he has already skipped to the end.
Also Sieg's views on humanity came from his own conclusion after dwelling on the matter after the Jack incident with him consulting as many people he could I'm their views. And Jeanne did try to get Sieg out of the war alot of times but he sticked to it because of his sense of responsibility.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah I have no idea what's that's about either.
"Only in my company, will you not be a monster"
anywhere than here
Unethical medical practice?
But Sieg's belief was that humanity is inherently good, so making them immortal shouldn't make things any worse than they might already be. They'd just live forever while being good. Ironically, it would be the belief that humanity is inherently evil, and that even the removal of death would still have humans be evil, that immortality would be bad.
Maybe the subs from where I watched the last episode were horribly translated, but the exact transcript I read was:
Sieg: Isn't immortality too early for mankind?
Justeaze: It might be. Also, as they get it through a miracle by a deceased, a Servant, they might lose their spirituality along the way.
Astolfo: What will happen to mankind then?
Justeaze: They will likely lose their drive to explore the unknown, and become creatures bound to the land.
Complacency can be as bad as or worse than suffering.
Way i see it
Hardships produce evil but overcoming it produce good
Turn everybody immortal = remove hardships
Now is that a good thing
Are we also ignoring the fact that using the Third wouldn't change anything else about people? You essentially remove the ability for people to suffer consequences for their actions and you think that's the way to a utopia?
The subs I read was this.
Justeave: Maybe
Justeave: just like the miracle that the envoys called Servants obtain, there's a high risk of humanity discarding their spiritual nature.
Also it's not that Sieg's views are opposed to Amakusa, it's that Jeanne took his views that humanity still could be believed in, that taking this large and drastic shortcut wasn't needed. Sieg and Jeanne believing that humanity is inherently good means that in the end of the day that will be the side that comes on top through all those tragedies, which is opposed to Amakusa's thinking that humanity has already completely rotted thus this measure is absoluting needed in saving mankind.
- - - Updated - - -
Does the Third really not change anything? It's basically turns people into anthropomorphic and physical souls. In that kind of state what is there to feel? You won't feel hunger or just, no one can hurt you but at the same time you can't hurt anyone. Whatever you thought made you special doesn't exist anymore, since everyone's the same as you so hierarchies are pointless. You would be free from death so any impulses of living in the moment is gone, because you now have eternity. That seems plenty of change to me.
"Only in my company, will you not be a monster"
anywhere than here
Reply With Quote
