The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Angelic intervention in Fool Moon
Cozarkian:
--- Quote from: morriswalters on April 09, 2019, 07:31:48 PM ---I had forgotten. Thank you. However it doesn't change anything. Cozarkian would have me believe that she is ignorant of the nature of her Knight. That's like owning a gun and not understanding the safety. Rereading the selection where he awakes in the cave reinforces my belief.
--- End quote ---
First, I was not asking you to believe that Mab doesn't understand her Knight. I was asking you to believe that Mab doesn't understand the full extent of the power of free will. Specifically, she doesn't understand that Harry giving his oath and accepting the Mantle by his own free will doesn't make him hers to mold. She doesn't understand that the Mantle can be conquered even while desiring a Knight that will fight it as long as possible.
On second thought, however, it is indisputable that Mab does not understand her Knight. I don't recall if it is text or WoJ, but we have definitive proof that Harry surprises Mab. She probably has a better understanding of Harry than he does of himself, but there are some things about him she doesn't understand.
I'm not sure the gun analogy is accurate, but if it was, I point you to the Molly short story. As Winter Lady, Molly is absolutely carrying around a full arsenal of weapons without understanding the safety features on most of them. Mab has a lot more experience than Molly and has learned the safety features for most of the Queen's weapons, but it is possible she still doesn't fully understand one or two.
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---On second thought, however, it is indisputable that Mab does not understand her Knight. I don't recall if it is text or WoJ, but we have definitive proof that Harry surprises Mab. She probably has a better understanding of Harry than he does of himself, but there are some things about him she doesn't understand.
--- End quote ---
Here's the WoJ:
--- Quote ---Jim:The thing is that Mab never really figures Dresden quite right. She never gets it right when she tries to predict what he will do.
--- End quote ---
Cozarkian:
--- Quote from: DonBugen on April 09, 2019, 11:53:24 PM ---In addition, take into account the comment to which Uriel (because it is Uriel; he's not about to go and rope some lower being into lying for him, especially considering the circumstance with Collin Murphy) responds to:
--- End quote ---
I'm not suggesting he did. I'm suggesting he used a proxy and didn't have control over the precise seven words used, only that the speaker was limited to seven words and that those words should be used to deliver the message that Mab was incorrect. This would be similar to the TWG inspiring the Bible but not writing it. It's also similar to how Mab used proxies in the very same story. Unlike Demonreach, who appears to have literally spoke through his proxy, Mab merely gave her proxies (Leah and Inez) instructions/inspiration regarding what she wanted Harry to know. Mab's proxies actual words were their own.
--- Quote from: DonBugen on April 09, 2019, 11:53:24 PM ---Cozarkain - I get the conundrum you're talking about, but I think you might not be giving the idea that Mab's lie is a lie of omission a fair enough shake. Faeries cannot speak lies; however, they do nothing but lie through omission.
--- End quote ---
In the Mab quote you provided, the first sentence is true, the second is true, the third is false but Mab believes it to be true. The WOJ in the post above yours proves that Mab believes the third sentence to be true and is not merely lying by omission. Also, the question here isn't actually whether Mab was lying. She wasn't, because she can't. The issue is that the speaker called Mab a liar, which conflicts with our understanding that the Fae can't lie.
The first question is whether Uriel could have called Mab's words "Lies" without bearing false witness. In response, others have argued that the word lie has multiple definitions. I disagree that the other definitions apply. The DV, at least when talking about the Fae, uses strictly the traditional definition (lies of omission, by definition in the DV, are not lies). It is fact that the Fae cannot lie, period. The only definition applicable in the DV (at least when discussing the Fae) is the traditional definition. Switching to another definition is equivocating (an informal logical fallacy).
I simply do not believe Uriel, a being with cosmic truth with a perfect understanding of the lie-prohibition on the Fae, when speaking to Harry, a person Uriel knows to also understand the lie-prohibition against the Fae, would equivocate on the definition of lie. That is especially true given the circumstance that Uriel was not attempting to mislead Harry but rather was attempting to educate Harry on a very important truth - that Harry still has free will even after becoming the WK. It simply doesn't pass the smell test.
Therefore, in my opinion, it was either a very minor and isolated incident of bad writing, or it was a clue that Uriel was using a proxy in a story where proxies were an important theme.
Cozarkian:
--- Quote from: nadia.skylark on April 10, 2019, 04:38:00 AM ---Harry could be wrong.
--- End quote ---
Also, Mab can learn. Mab could believed have believed that she could make Harry her monster in GS and then, when Harry defied her, she learned that she was wrong and obtained a better understanding of free will.
morriswalters:
Harry surprises her, but that isn't to say she doesn't understand how the Mantle works. Those are two separate issues. Uriel didn't say she was wrong, he said her words were lies. Jim doesn't leave a whole lot of room to maneuver in this instance. He says Mab can't lie. Uriel says her words are lies. And Harry tells her she knows it. Had Harry told her instead at that moment that she was wrong or mistaken I might feel differently about it, but he didn't.
From the Wikipedia.
--- Quote ---Lying by omission, also known as a continuing misrepresentation or quote mining, occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions.
--- End quote ---
Just as an aside, the bit about the Mab being unable to lie, is a shortcut. More properly she can't speak a direct lie. Here is an example of a lie of omission from Summer Knight. It's a play on his expectations.
--- Quote ---Mab placed her gloved hand on my wounded one, and a sudden spike of sheer, vicious cold shot up through the injury like a frozen scalpel before lancing up my arm, straight toward my heart. It took my breath, and I felt my heart skip a beat, two, before it labored into rhythm again. I gasped and swayed, and only leaning against the door kept me from falling down completely.
"Dammit," I muttered, trying to keep my voice down. "We had a deal."
"I agreed not to punish you for refusing me, wizard. I agreed not to punish or harass you by proxy." Mab smiled. "I did that just for spite."
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version