Tide 005

Apr 28, 2010 04:21

It's strange. On the midst of plenty, the basic desire is to cry out that there isn't enough: neither food nor water, neither shelter nor security, nor enough wealth. In the midst of security the feeling of danger is sharpened and in the midst of wealth the fear of poverty is near-overwhelming ( Read more... )

priestly business

Leave a comment

notwhatiwas April 28 2010, 15:54:30 UTC
...

[There's a long silence.]

I disagree.

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 02:05:57 UTC
Oh? In what manner?

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 02:10:46 UTC
Security is created by familiarity, not love and goodness. If you're familiar with a world of death and pain, suddenly having it change will leave you insecure, even if that change is for the better.

[His voice is smooth, low, and he speaks very quickly.]

Rightness doesn't endure; power does. Unfortunate, but true.

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 02:53:28 UTC
If one assumes that an unchanging environment, even a bad one, is secure, then they are mistaken. There is no such thing as an environment that does not change--this life is in constant flux and motion. All political and social institutions, all creations of the gods are born, age and die. Nothing is static, everything evolves or devolves save the good and moral order of the gods.

[He breathes out a smile.]

Power belongs only to the gods. Temporal power is transitory and unsatisfying.

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 03:04:43 UTC
You're quite an idealist.

[Vincent is static, by that definition. At least physically.]

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 03:06:03 UTC
Not really. I'm a realist. Many people mistake being negative and cynical for being wise.

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 03:09:07 UTC
The assumption that rightness prevails is idealistic. Not every wrong can be undone.

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 03:09:52 UTC
Rightness always prevails--not in the short term, of course, but I think many people have very funny ideas of what is right and what is wrong.

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 03:15:12 UTC
A person's idea of right and wrong doesn't matter. Sometimes what's truly right just never happens, and they carry the wrong with them forever.

Not all sins can be forgiven.

[Not that he's ever tried, really, he's quite comfortable wallowing. It's kind of his shtick.]

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 03:16:23 UTC
A person's ideas of right and wrong don't matter? I'm a little confused, then, because if what we think of as right or wrong doesn't matter, then how can you say with any kind of certainty what's right or wrong?

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 03:20:11 UTC
There's usually a difference between what's genuinely wrong and what a person thinks is wrong, but they aren't mutually exclusive. Some things are so solidly wrong it's clear no matter what your ideas are.

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 05:19:59 UTC
[Glaukir thinks this man's morality isn't very coherent, but, well, he'll try to tease some meaning out of it.]

So how would one know what's genuinely wrong or not?

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 05:56:12 UTC
[Former desk worker assassin. Turks don't really have morals as most people know them, and Vincent's are particularly convoluted.]

The gravity of the issue can usually explain it. The number of people it effects adversely compared to the number it helps, and the ways it helps.

[...He should probably provide examples, huh. Just to make it clear.]

Killing a man to save the world isn't inherently wrong, because there greater things were at stake than one life. Providing for your people at the expense of the world they live on is, because the wellbeing of the planet directly effects the wellbeing of those living on it, so your efforts would do more harm than good in the long-term.

[He hasn't spoken that much at one time to someone he doesn't explicitly know in a very, very long time. Glaukir's idealism gets under his skin or something.]

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 06:07:13 UTC
[Glaukir listens.]

That's very utilitarian. So what if I could feed ten thousand by killing sixty babies? Would that be evil? Or good?

Reply

notwhatiwas April 29 2010, 06:12:56 UTC
[There's a hint of fervor in his voice.]

Toying with infants is unforgivable.

[Oh my does someone have some experience with that? The fire goes out just as quickly as it lit, however, and once again Vincent is back to his low, serious-but-aloof tone in a heartbeat.]

If those who had to die were adults, it would depend on what kind of adults they were.

[Feeding ten thousand people by killing the entire group of Shin-Ra scientists responsible for work on the JENOVA Project and all its sickening subdivisions sounds like a good plan.]

Reply

kaikou_tide April 29 2010, 07:10:29 UTC
[Glaukir notes that fervor.]

So how do you know if an adult is a good kind or a bad kind?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up