I Agree

[Ari]

So it's okay to mess with Wax's life and force him to kill someone he loves twice? 

 

In terms of how he's treating Wax? It's not even okay to make him do it once. I'm pretty sure it's not conclusive he's made him do it twice though.

 

But, it may have been the least terrible move Harmony had at the time.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Ari

[Oudeis]

I'm not willing to jump to solid conclusions without any evidence. Speculate? Sure, but assert things as fact? Nope.

 

...then what on earth are you doing on this site? =P Just kidding.

 

...

 

Mostly.

[Kaymyth]

  Kill her, clean, no desecration of the will, let her go to the afterlife we know this setting has.  The act itself is unforgivable, whether for a second, an hour or a lifetime. 

 

OK, two major problems with this:

 

1)  How?  As stated earlier, the kandra are functionally immortal.  Killing her wasn't option simply because it wasn't possible.

 

2)  She was not in possession of her sanity, and almost certainly under the influence of another Shard.  Her will was already compromised by the alien Shardspikes.  If your family member is mentally ill and in a state where they are a danger to themselves and others, do you just kill them?  Or do you restrain them and try and get them the help they so desperately need?

[Oudeis]

Why are people still engaging Archon?

[ArchonTremaine]

OK, two major problems with this:

 

1)  How?  As stated earlier, the kandra are functionally immortal.  Killing her wasn't option simply because it wasn't possible.

 

2)  She was not in possession of her sanity, and almost certainly under the influence of another Shard.  Her will was already compromised by the alien Shardspikes.  If your family member is mentally ill and in a state where they are a danger to themselves and others, do you just kill them?  Or do you restrain them and try and get them the help they so desperately need?

 

 

1) They have been killed before, so it is possible.

 

2) No indication of that, she had rebelled, and done what was needed for that rebellion to work, and found a way to evade Harmony while she was at it, oh and to keep her sentience. She was perfectly sane and rational and carrying out a plan, 'sane' does not mean 'nice' or even 'good' but she isn't the one claiming moral authority due to divinity, Harmony is, and he is breaking his own rules to do it.

Edited October 19, 2015 by ArchonTremaine

[Kaymyth]

Why are people still engaging Archon?

 

I swear it seemed like a good idea at the time.  Famous last words, I know.

 

1) They have been killed before, so it is possible.

 

2) No indication of that, she had rebelled, and done what was needed for that rebellion to work, and found a way to evade Harmony while she was at it, oh and to keep her sentience. She was perfectly sane and rational and carrying out a plan, 'sane' does not mean 'nice' or even 'good' but she isn't the one claiming moral authority due to divinity, Harmony is, and he is breaking his own rules to do it.

 

She was not sane.  She was running around with only one spike, and two are expressly required for a kandra to maintain full sanity/sentience.

 

At this point, I think I'm just going to saunter off, because I believe that you are completely wrong and find your thought processes slightly disturbing.

[Kairos]

I disagree with one caveat.

Don't be evil. The greatest possible good is something to be desired, but you can't do something obviously wrong to get to it.

Has anyone brought up the trolley problem yet?

[A Joe in the Bush]

I don't think so. But if anyone does, I'll derail that conversation by linking to xkcd's version of it.

And archon, killing a kandra reauires lots and lots of acid. High untransportable, dangerous acid. They didn't know where Paalm was or really what she would do, so there wouldn't be a way to kill her unless they first restrained her.

[natc]

I'm still dealing with Archon, it seems, because some part of me is apparently still in denial that such logic can be physically constructed in a brain in spite of completely baseless accusations at its foundations and unwilling death of hundreds to thousands being preferable to the degree of corruption that exists in every government in the history of governments. Humans on average are rusting terrible people, having power usually worsens that. We'd literally have to cause self-extinction to achieve dissatisfaction-free paradise.

I disagree with one caveat.

Don't be evil. The greatest possible good is something to be desired, but you can't do something obviously wrong to get to it.

Has anyone brought up the trolley problem yet?

The issue of bringing up the trolley and other moral problems is that they don't actually have an answer.

Let's be honest, Archon, the most reliable kill method is dunking them in acid, and that's hard to set up in combat without simply controlling them to hold them still.

Besides, Harmony would not know if Paalm wanted to die. That she hasn't triggered her death functions implies she didn't, not until he paralyzed her. Would killing someone who did not wish to die be less of a denial of will? You did not give them a choice.

Edited October 20, 2015 by natc

[Landis963]

I don't know about you guys, but engaging Archon got me 20+ rep, so I'm OK with it.  

 

BTW, Thanks, Archon.  

[ParadoxicalZen]

I'm with Saze. His logic is fair and he understands his limitations.

[ArchonTremaine]

I'm still dealing with Archon, it seems, because some part of me is apparently still in denial that such logic can be physically constructed in a brain in spite of completely baseless accusations at its foundations and unwilling death of hundreds to thousands being preferable to the degree of corruption that exists in every government in the history of governments. Humans on average are rusting terrible people, having power usually worsens that. We'd literally have to cause self-extinction to achieve dissatisfaction-free paradise.

The issue of bringing up the trolley and other moral problems is that they don't actually have an answer.

Let's be honest, Archon, the most reliable kill method is dunking them in acid, and that's hard to set up in combat without simply controlling them to hold them still.

Besides, Harmony would not know if Paalm wanted to die. That she hasn't triggered her death functions implies she didn't, not until he paralyzed her. Would killing someone who did not wish to die be less of a denial of will? You did not give them a choice.

 

 

yes, especially in a universe with an afterlife, death is a lesser evil than slavery.  On the two spikes issue: I took it from the book that Paalm had one spike people knew about and the 'mystery spike'.  Paralysing her with drugs would have been lesser than the direct intrusion of a foreign mind into her brain and the usurpation of her nervous system.  (I also don't like what Jedi do, for the same reason) or a poison that worked on Kandra for example, unpleasant, but better than the mind control

Edited October 21, 2015 by ArchonTremaine

[natc]

So, the perfectly irreversible crime against free will is apparently a lesser evil than paralyzing someone for maybe all of the 30-60 seconds it would take to take her spikes put (which would free her immediately, mind) so they can swap her blessings back in and cure her insanity as it seems the plan was.

I can't even

[Oudeis]

...See, when I disagree with obvious trolls, I get downvoted. This isn't fair.

[A Joe in the Bush]

...See, when I disagree with obvious trolls, I get downvoted. This isn't fair.

I'm not seeing any downvotes anywhere?

 

And it was probably the troll.

[Kaymyth]

...See, when I disagree with obvious trolls, I get downvoted. This isn't fair.

 

Well then, have an upvote to try and offset some of that.

[Oudeis]

I'm not seeing any downvotes anywhere?

 

And it was probably the troll.

 

Not in this thread, in others. I've learned over the years to keep quiet rather than engage with trolls; the few times I break with this plan, I attract downvotes. Multiple ones, so it's not just one person.

[ArchonTremaine]

Not down voted anyone, done one upvote because someone had downvoted by mistake and asked for it to be fixed, not going to downvote someone who disagrees with me about a fictional universe that is open to interpretation for having a different view from me.  Also not going to bring real religion or politics in, this is fiction, I prefer to keep it that way.

Edited October 22, 2015 by ArchonTremaine

[Malim]

*unintentional double post*

Edited October 23, 2015 by Malim

[Malim]

The way I see it, there are two questions to be answered here.  The first is whether or not Harmony was right in his course of action, the second is whether or not the actions he took were justified.  On the surface, this seems like the same thing, but there are some distinctions.

 

Right means that the actions taken were the best possible actions to take.  In other words, they were the actions that would cause the least amount of pain and suffering while at the same time maximizing the good.  Justifed actions are those that are correctly taken as the situation develops.  Lets look at both points.

 

Was Harmony Right?

 

We know that Harmony has future sight.  It is logical, then, to assume that he was able to look all possible future outcomes and determine the best course of action.  If this is the case, that that's the end of the discussion.  We don't know the other possible outcomes, Harmony does, and that's that.  This is the 17th Shard, though.  Where is the fun in that?

 

What we have to remember is that though Harmony is god, he is not GOD.  He is at best a piece of a larger whole, and he is not infallible.  By his own admission, he has made mistakes such as over fertilizing the Elendel Basin.  He admits that he will make more.  His mistake in this case was in the choice of who to send to guard Wax.  He either didn't foresee that Paalm/Lessie would fall in love with him, or he didn't take that possibility into account.  He therefore was wrong.  He made a poor choice.  This, however is only part of the question. 

 

Was Harmony Justified?

 

To examine this question, we have to look at each action as it was taken, starting with the decision to send a guardian to Wax.  Lets be honest: when Wax began his lawman career, he was a walking target.  He did not have the experience or knowledge to be anything else.  His first bounty was won only by catching his target unawares on the toilet.  Not the best start.  When we see him in the prologue, he walks into enemy territory, boldly proclaims who he is and what he is after, and generally holds a spotlight over himself for any two bit criminal to see.  Without Paalm/Lessie, he would have patiently waited for the barkeep to get the "guy" with the "information" until someone put a crossbow bolt into him.  Harmony was completely justified in sending a guardian to protect him until he gained experience.

 

The next step was when he needed to get Wax back to city.  It is important to remember that Paalm/Lessie knew that this was the end goal.  This was the whole point of her mission.  Think of her as a soldier on assignment.  She freely chose to protect Wax and bring him to Elendel.  Instead she decided to not complete her mission.  Note he didn't simply walk away, instead she actively worked to derail the entire mission.  She broke her contract with Harmony, a contract she willingly chose to follow.  She was the soldier who disregarded orders.  Harmony was once again completely justified in "putting pressure" on her to complete the assigned task.  Note he did not take control of her to do so.

 

Now the present.  Paalm has gone rogue.  She has decided to bring down Harmony.  Whether this was a result of insanity, rage, feelings of betrayal, or what have you doesn't matter.  Her method does.  Let us not forget that she was a Kandra.  She was a demigod, and had all the force of that authority behind her.  She quite easily could have openly spoken out against Harmony.  She could have told her story, preached against him, and many people would have listened.  Instead she chose to go on a rampage.  She killed criminals, priests, innocents, basically anyone she felt she needed to.  In essence she destroyed their free choice completely in order to further her own goals.  By any objective interpretation of law, she had willing chosen to become a dangerous criminal.  harmony, or indeed any upholder of the law, had a duty to stop her.  harmony was not only justified in sending Wax and others after her, he had to do so.  When Wax shot her, Harmony used the flaw to take control of her body in order to contain her violence.  Note that even then he did not take control of her mind as evidenced by her choice to kill herself.

 

To conclude, Harmony in all likelihood was not right in his course of action, but each action was justified. 

Edited October 23, 2015 by Malim

[ArchonTremaine]

The way I see it, there are two questions to be answered here.  The first is whether or not Harmony was right in his course of action, the second is whether or not the actions he took were justified.  On the surface, this seems like the same thing, but there are some distinctions.

 

Right means that the actions taken were the best possible actions to take.  In other words, they were the actions that would cause the least amount of pain and suffering while at the same time maximizing the good.  Justifed actions are those that are correctly taken as the situation develops.  Lets look at both points.

 

Was Harmony Right?

 

We know that Harmony has future sight.  It is logical, then, to assume that he was able to look all possible future outcomes and determine the best course of action.  If this is the case, that that's the end of the discussion.  We don't know the other possible outcomes, Harmony does, and that's that.  This is the 17th Shard, though.  Where is the fun in that?

 

What we have to remember is that though Harmony is god, he is not GOD.  He is at best a piece of a larger whole, and he is not infallible.  By his own admission, he has made mistakes such as over fertilizing the Elendel Basin.  He admits that he will make more.  His mistake in this case was in the choice of who to send to guard Wax.  He either didn't foresee that Paalm/Lessie would fall in love with him, or he didn't take that possibility into account.  He therefore was wrong.  He made a poor choice.  This, however is only part of the question. 

 

Was Harmony Justified?

 

To examine this question, we have to look at each action as it was taken, starting with the decision to send a guardian to Wax.  Lets be honest: when Wax began his lawman career, he was a walking target.  He did not have the experience or knowledge to be anything else.  His first bounty was won only by catching his target unawares on the toilet.  Not the best start.  When we see him in the prologue, he walks into enemy territory, boldly proclaims who he is and what he is after, and generally holds a spotlight over himself for any two bit criminal to see.  Without Paalm/Lessie, he would have patiently waited for the barkeep to get the "guy" with the "information" until someone put a crossbow bolt into him.  Harmony was completely justified in sending a guardian to protect him until he gained experience.

 

The next step was when he needed to get Wax back to city.  It is important to remember that Paalm/Lessie knew that this was the end goal.  This was the whole point of her mission.  Think of her as a soldier on assignment.  She freely chose to protect Wax and bring him to Elendel.  Instead she decided to not complete her mission.  Note he didn't simply walk away, instead she actively worked to derail the entire mission.  She broke her contract with Harmony, a contract she willingly chose to follow.  She was the soldier who disregarded orders.  Harmony was once again completely justified in "putting pressure" on her to complete the assigned task.  Note he did not take control of her to do so.

 

Now the present.  Paalm has gone rogue.  She has decided to bring down Harmony.  Whether this was a result of insanity, rage, feelings of betrayal, or what have you doesn't matter.  Her method does.  Let us not forget that she was a Kandra.  She was a demigod, and had all the force of that authority behind her.  She quite easily could have openly spoken out against Harmony.  She could have told her story, preached against him, and many people would have listened.  Instead she chose to go on a rampage.  She killed criminals, priests, innocents, basically anyone she felt she needed to.  In essence she destroyed their free choice completely in order to further her own goals.  By any objective interpretation of law, she had willing chosen to become a dangerous criminal.  harmony, or indeed any upholder of the law, had a duty to stop her.  harmony was not only justified in sending Wax and others after her, he had to do so.  When Wax shot her, Harmony used the flaw to take control of her body in order to contain her violence.  Note that even then he did not take control of her mind as evidenced by her choice to kill herself.

 

To conclude, Harmony in all likelihood was not right in his course of action, but each action was justified. 

 

 

By that measure the founding rebellions of most ex-colonial nations where not justified.  Or rather the forces attempting to stop them were justified...can we have a situation in which both groups are justified in their actions?  Some of Paalms actions where not justified (And we do not know whether the contract was entered in of her own free will, it may have been a new master of the previous contract with the Lord Ruler, she did however initially serve willingly, so this mitigates that either way) , we do not know if she could have openly preached, or what was in place to prevent her doing so, we also do not know what her training was, and how she was used to completing missions, she may have simply been using the methods Harmony had previously allowed her to use for him, in ways now counter to his interests( For instance how brutal had Harmony allowed/required her to be to keep cover while working as an outlaw) .  This happens when soldiers rebel, they keep acting on the skills they have built up, with a new mission, some may turn into politicians, but history shows us more who fight, tooth and nail. 

Edited October 23, 2015 by ArchonTremaine

[the winter system]

The ends might not justify the means, but that applies for both sides, doesn't it? 

[derrickthewhite]

Two points: 

 

First, Mind Control is not the end all evil action. Yes, there are some people who believe that, but 30 seconds of mind control is preferable to death. That's not very poetic, but its practical. "Give me liberty or give me death!" sounds wonderful, but the vast majority of humanity when faced with those circumstances will choose servitude. And I see very little difference between magical mind control and other harsh forms of coercion. Being trapped in your own body is bad, but we don't exactly see paralyzing someone as worse than killing them. Harmony's seizure of Paalm is no more torture than a police officer using a painful grip to arrest someone: Temporary, and while it can be used as torture, its primary purpose was to win a struggle. 

 

Second, Paalms primary claim is that everyone is under harmony's thumb. That they do what he wants them to do. Including that the houses are part of his apparatus. That everyone is stuck living the lives he's outlined for them. Despite the fact that the houses are corrupt and Wax is acting as a tool of harmony to try and fix the current order. Despite the fact Harmony complains these people aren't going out and colonizing like he wants them to. She's attributing far more power and precision to Harmony than he actually has. She's blaming the entire system as the intention outcome of a single (admittedly powerful) person. Which is quite far from the truth. 

[the winter system]

But Paalm was one of the people who would take the death. 

[Landis963]

But Paalm was one of the people who would take the death. 

 

And that's her choice, as amply demonstrated by the fact that she tripped her fail-safe after Wax fired the earring bullet into her.  I'm not certain how that makes Harmony any worse a person.  Again, Paalm was a danger, if not to herself then definitely to others.  She needed to be apprehended somehow, and if it results in her death, that would be regrettable, but so be it.