The Dresden Files > DF Reference Collection
The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
Aminar:
--- Quote from: Orbweaver on November 05, 2012, 09:22:23 PM ---No need to apologize, Neuro, I took no offense. I do think on a different wavelength than most other people seem to, which is probably why the miscommunication happened.
To me, it looks as though Uriel is allowed to commit actions that it would normally not be able to if, and only if, the other side did it first. As we haven't really had a good look at what determines the actions it may take in response, I can't conclude that Uriel hasn't broken a rule of engagement in response to another broken rule. It may be that TWG allows it to "break" or "bend" the rules under very specific circumstances- but to me, doing something it otherwise would not be enabled to do, in response to a stimulus from the other side, is still a bent rule.
It also helps to clarify what Nicodemus meant when he spoke about the Church having excellent propaganda. Consider Sanya, for example- Heaven allowed him to pick up a coin, in order to make him a Knight later on down the line. They let him run around with Magog's brute strength and the knowledge of a Fallen Angel, doing no small amount of harm to the other humans/creatures running around the planet, in exchange for what he would do as a Knight of the Cross.
Heaven not being above using evil to their own ends means that the "White" part of TWG's title has a bit of a scuff on it. Do I think the Denarians are going to use the actions of their counterparts in Heaven as "proof" that they are just as corrupt, or possibly worse in nature, to justify their own actions? Absolutely. Two wrongs very rarely, if at all, equal a right. So in order to "right" the other side's "wrongs", the lies, betrayal, stealing, loss of life, bending or breaking of Will, etc... well, you get the point, I think.
Their "trusting" TWG, or it's agents, to hold to their "word" just doesn't fit with what we've heard from Nicodemus, Lash, or even with what we've seen with regards to a current Knight.
--- End quote ---
I don't follow you're logic. The rules are that neither side is to interfere unless the other does first to maintain balance. If TWG went around personally busting that they'd have lost the fight long ago.
The whole Sanja thing is him exercising his free will. They allowed him to do that ny following the rules.
The propaganda is that demons are all bad and the like when in fact it really seems they just want free will(at least in lasciel's case)
the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh:
--- Quote from: Orbweaver on November 05, 2012, 09:22:23 PM ---To me, it looks as though Uriel is allowed to commit actions that it would normally not be able to if, and only if, the other side did it first.
--- End quote ---
Agreed entirely.
--- Quote --- As we haven't really had a good look at what determines the actions it may take in response, I can't conclude that Uriel hasn't broken a rule of engagement in response to another broken rule. It may be that TWG allows it to "break" or "bend" the rules under very specific circumstances- but to me, doing something it otherwise would not be enabled to do, in response to a stimulus from the other side, is still a bent rule.
--- End quote ---
Fair enough then; to my mind, a rule that works on a basis of "if any of these other rules are broken you are permitted a precisely defined action in response corresponding exactly to the scale of the infraction" would count as legitimising any such actions, and meaning that no rules are broken or bent in taking them. (I am inclined to see the rules under which non-free-willed, or differently free-willed - as per the best interpretation of combined WoJ and textev on DV angels appearing to be that they have classic Catholic dogma values of angelic free will, viz. one Choice and one only, to fall or not to Fall, so for practical and tactical purposes non-free-willed - beings operated as having a degree of commonality, and therefore, the was in which the non-free-willed Accord signatories operate as being potentially useful information in re how Uriel may deal with the rules under which it operates; I don't see operating within the letter of the rules to whatever the best available outcome is, while disregarding the spirit, as bending them (hacking them perhaps) because the concept of "spirit of the rules" seems inapplicable in this context.)
--- Quote ---Consider Sanya, for example- Heaven allowed him to pick up a coin, in order to make him a Knight later on down the line. They let him run around with Magog's brute strength and the knowledge of a Fallen Angel, doing no small amount of harm to the other humans/creatures running around the planet, in exchange for what he would do as a Knight of the Cross.
--- End quote ---
That's an interesting take on it. Taken at face value, I would posit that Uriel's avowed position on free will would be such that Heaven could neither intervene with Sanya choosing to take up a coin nor choosing to set one down again; I would find the idea of that being a long con rather appealing, save that I think we have WoJs indicating that we are meant to take Heaven at face value in the whole free will thing.
--- Quote ---Do I think the Denarians are going to use the actions of their counterparts in Heaven as "proof" that they are just as corrupt, or possibly worse in nature, to justify their own actions? Absolutely. Two wrongs very rarely, if at all, equal a right. So in order to "right" the other side's "wrongs", the lies, betrayal, stealing, loss of life, bending or breaking of Will, etc... well, you get the point, I think.
--- End quote ---
That argument is however predicated on the underlying assumption that each side is equally entitled to differing opinions; if one side gets to define what is right and what is wrong at a universal scale, it seems that the other might have a harder time of arguing against it than in a difference of opinion among humans.
I don't get the impression it's possible within the DV for the WG to, tomorrow, announce that murder is henceforward right and no longer evil, for example. If one were to posit that as possible or even likely, it would certainly throw the consistency of Heaven's following its own rules in other areas into question.
Orbweaver:
--- Quote from: the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh on November 05, 2012, 09:51:02 PM ---
Fair enough then; to my mind, a rule that works on a basis of "if any of these other rules are broken you are permitted a precisely defined action in response corresponding exactly to the scale of the infraction" would count as legitimising any such actions, and meaning that no rules are broken or bent in taking them. (I am inclined to see the rules under which non-free-willed, or differently free-willed - as per the best interpretation of combined WoJ and textev on DV angels appearing to be that they have classic Catholic dogma values of angelic free will, viz. one Choice and one only, to fall or not to Fall, so for practical and tactical purposes non-free-willed - beings operated as having a degree of commonality, and therefore, the was in which the non-free-willed Accord signatories operate as being potentially useful information in re how Uriel may deal with the rules under which it operates; I don't see operating within the letter of the rules to whatever the best available outcome is, while disregarding the spirit, as bending them (hacking them perhaps) because the concept of "spirit of the rules" seems inapplicable in this context.)
--- End quote ---
I can understand how you would see things that way... I'm just not sure that Nicodemus, Tessa, Lasciel, Namshiel, or any of the other Denarians/Fallen are going to view things as either you or I see them. They've certainly shown no shortage of dislike for the agents of Heaven, mortal or otherwise. Shiro's manner of death was a message to more than just Harry, I think, as was Michael's own "fall" from service. Whether they managed to take anyone out on the not fallen, non-mortal side of things isn't something we've been privy to.
--- Quote --- That's an interesting take on it. Taken at face value, I would posit that Uriel's avowed position on free will would be such that Heaven could neither intervene with Sanya choosing to take up a coin nor choosing to set one down again; I would find the idea of that being a long con rather appealing, save that I think we have WoJs indicating that we are meant to take Heaven at face value in the whole free will thing.
--- End quote ---
I think they could intervene, provided someone on Nick's side of things had done something first. That's the catch with everything Heaven does.
--- Quote --- That argument is however predicated on the underlying assumption that each side is equally entitled to differing opinions; if one side gets to define what is right and what is wrong at a universal scale, it seems that the other might have a harder time of arguing against it than in a difference of opinion among humans.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, that's true. I'm not stating that the two sides are necessarily using "right" versus "wrong" as a basis for their actions, but rather using it to convince others that their way of doing things is for the "good" of everyone involved in those actions, whether directly or not. Hence why the Denarians probably aren't taking the flip side of the proverbial coins at face value. They know that their own actions are likely going to cause something very similar in nature to happen, and therefore can't expect Heaven to act in a manner consistent with the initial "rules" given.
--- Quote --- I don't get the impression it's possible within the DV for the WG to, tomorrow, announce that murder is henceforward right and no longer evil, for example. If one were to posit that as possible or even likely, it would certainly throw the consistency of Heaven's following its own rules in other areas into question.
--- End quote ---
I can't honestly speak as to the motivations of TWG. Maybe if we're lucky, Jim will put him/her/it into play during the BAT. He'd have to be careful, though, as riling that particular section of readers up is a very easy thing to do.
X:
The only way a coin can be taken up is through Free Will, meaning Sanya made the choice. Was he influenced? Absolutely, but he made the choice freely. At that point in Sanya's timeline, I don't think they (The White God/Knights of the Cross) planned anything regarding him except maybe an eventual death. When Shiro came along, after Sanya realized what was happening, they saw an opportunity because he had previously freely given up the coin to become a Knight, which he then again, chose freely. I don't feel that was a long con or a drawn up fate waiting specifically for Sanya, but the combined consequences of all of his freely made choices and actions.
Orbweaver:
--- Quote from: X on November 05, 2012, 10:25:59 PM ---The only way a coin can be taken up is through Free Will,
--- End quote ---
Not according to Michael in Small Favor, I think. He states that a heavily compromised individual can be coerced into taking a coin- people on drugs, people with serious mental instabilities, people who are locked in a coma (I think, I don't have the exact quote to hand)- but the Denarians are capable of inhabiting someone with Free Will without their given consent.
--- Quote --- meaning Sanya made the choice. Was he influenced? Absolutely, but he made the choice freely. At that point in Sanya's timeline, I don't think they (The White God/Knights of the Cross) planned anything regarding him except maybe an eventual death. When Shiro came along, after Sanya realized what was happening, they saw an opportunity because he had previously freely given up the coin to become a Knight, which he then again, chose freely. I don't feel that was a long con or a drawn up fate waiting specifically for Sanya, but the combined consequences of all of his freely made choices and actions.
--- End quote ---
Are you sure they were freely made, though? That's kind of Tessa's gig. She preys on the suffering of others to get them to pick up the coin, and she (when paired with Nicodemus) excels in causing suffering. I absolutely would not put it past her to get someone unwillingly addicted to a substance, and then touch a coin to their hand while they were so out of it they couldn't possibly accept an offer. Sanya didn't exactly elaborate much on what process Tessa used to get him to take a coin.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version