The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Did Michael lie?

<< < (25/33) > >>

nadia.skylark:

--- Quote ---This is also assuming that "wizards getting rid of a Shadow" is such a big problem that Nicodemus is not only aware of the possibility but actively working against it. Consider the events of Small Favor, where Nicodemus is caught completely off guard by the fact Harry no longer has the Shadow, plus Lash's own admission that she's never had to tempt anyone for more than a couple weeks before they gave in.

If anything, that indicates that Nicodemus isn't even aware it can be done, not that he's actively and specifically controlling information about that specific thing. Harry getting rid of the Shadow is such a rare thing that, even if it's technically possible, it's so unlikely that the one person on the planet with the most knowledge and experience with the coins completely ignores the possibility that it happened.
--- End quote ---

You are absolutely and completely correct. Which makes me wonder where Michael got the idea, since all of this is extremely good evidence that it wouldn't work.


--- Quote ---I honestly don't see how it's a reasonable expectation -- certainly not to the point of calling someone a liar if they don't conform to that expectation.
--- End quote ---

Fair enough. I don't think we're going to agree on this point--it seems to be based on what our separate experiences have been. (I grew up in an entire family of scientists, so that's probably where I got my expectations regarding evidence.)


--- Quote ---Michael believes that he's saying something that is true. He would not be saying it if he did not believe it to be true
--- End quote ---

This is your claim. It is not a piece of evidence. I absolutely believe that Michael would lie given the right reasons. To use a more extreme example, if Nicodemus was torturing Michael to extract the location of his family, do you think that Michael would tell him the truth or lie to protect them?


--- Quote ---When you say things you believe to be true -- to the point you're advising your best friend on a pivotal life choice without an ounce of hesitation or doubt -- do you immediately follow up with, "If I'm wrong, this won't work and you'll be worse off than if I'd never said anything"?
--- End quote ---

Um...yes. To take a personal example: I have a learning disability. Despite this, my aunt thinks that I can get through college, even getting a PhD if I want. She absolutely and totally believes this. She has still admitted that she could be wrong, and helped me come up with contingency plans that would still let me get a job that would support me.


--- Quote ---What you're proposing is that after Michael says something that he fully believes is true, he should immediately contradict himself and tell Harry the exact opposite of what he was just saying, otherwise he's a liar.
--- End quote ---

What I'm saying is that I see no reason whatsoever why Michael would fully believe this with no doubts whatsoever (unless he got it mixed up with black magic corruption or some such, or had been fed false information by someone) and there are several reasons for him to doubt this information.


--- Quote ---No, he doesn't make that claim..   The exact quote from Proven Guilty is page 459 paper back
--- End quote ---

That seems pretty absolute to me. It's not like he's saying: "give up the coin and your magic and I think that will probably be enough to get rid of the shadow"--there are no qualifiers in Michael's statement.


--- Quote ---Let's not forget that this is what Michael's own wife did to keep from becoming a warlock and it worked.   Something that is very unusual because most of the time when the line is crossed there is no going back that is why most would be warlocks get the chop.  So it stands to reason he thinks it might work in Harry's case.
--- End quote ---

Which is why the possibility has been suggested that he got the shadow's corruption mixed up with black magic corruption.


--- Quote ---However he wasn't "absolute" about it and when Harry said, "fuck that."   He didn't argue the point
--- End quote ---

I'm not sure how you think Michael wasn't "absolute" or what him not arguing with Harry has to do with it. Could you please explain?


--- Quote ---But makes Michael mistaken, not a liar..
--- End quote ---

Michael might very well be mistaken at first--the possibility has been discussed.


--- Quote ---If Michael deliberately had told Harry to give up his power knowing it wouldn't work.. That would be a lie....
--- End quote ---

Yes. Which is also a possibility.


--- Quote ---That isn't what he did, more importantly there is no motive for Michael to lie to Harry in the first place...
--- End quote ---

Please re-read the thread. I have provided motives repeatedly and am getting tired of repeating myself.


--- Quote ---It isn't Michael's motive to get Harry to forsake his power, it is to rid him of the shadow.
--- End quote ---

Actually, I would argue that it is Michael's motive to save Harry's soul--a subtle but important distinction.

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: nadia.skylark on February 28, 2019, 04:41:14 PM ---You are absolutely and completely correct. Which makes me wonder where Michael got the idea, since all of this is extremely good evidence that it wouldn't work.
--- End quote ---
What? It is not evidence at all that it wouldn't work. The only thing it's "evidence" of is that Nicodemus isn't accounting for the possibility, which is only evidence against your supposition that he's specifically propagating the idea.

And where did Michael get the idea? It's not relevant. What's relevant is that Michael believes it to be true, and is sure enough of it to -- again, without the slightest hesitation or hint of doubt, and absolutely no tells that he's lying -- advise Harry that it's the right thing to do.


--- Quote ---This is your claim. It is not a piece of evidence. I absolutely believe that Michael would lie given the right reasons. To use a more extreme example, if Nicodemus was torturing Michael to extract the location of his family, do you think that Michael would tell him the truth or lie to protect them.
--- End quote ---
It's how the character acts and has always acted. Michael hates lying -- he always has. He's urged others not to lie. He has conspicuously avoided lying himself. When Harry lies, Michael is visibly uncomfortable.

Lying is just not something Michael does.

You're completely rejecting one of his central character traits here.

And Michael just plain wouldn't tell Nicodemus anything in that situation.


--- Quote ---Um...yes. To take a personal example: I have a learning disability. Despite this, my aunt thinks that I can get through college, even getting a PhD if I want. She absolutely and totally believes this. She has still admitted that she could be wrong, and helped me come up with contingency plans that would still let me get a job that would support me.
--- End quote ---
You and your aunt are both aware of that learning disability as a tangible, factual, objectively observable factor in the discussion.

The supposition that giving up Harry's magic won't work is not. It has been made up, in this thread, by someone who is not a participant of their conversation and it is clearly and obviously not something that either Michael or Harry have considered as a possibility.


--- Quote ---What I'm saying is that I see no reason whatsoever why Michael would fully believe this with no doubts whatsoever (unless he got it mixed up with black magic corruption or some such, or had been fed false information by someone) and there are several reasons for him to doubt this information.
--- End quote ---
Except the fact that he says it with certainty, without doubt, and without hesitation. Because he clearly, obviously believes he's telling the truth. That Michael is saying it at all is evidence that Michael believes it to be true. What "evidence" he's basing it on doesn't have to pass your test, because what we're talking about is whether Michael was telling the truth as he saw it, not whether he could convince a jury of his peers that it was absolutely true beyond a shadow of a doubt.

What you haven't explained is why Michael wouldn't believe it to be true, or why he would say it if he didn't believe it was true.

"He could possibly be wrong," is not evidence that he's wrong, nor is it an argument that he has to doubt everything he ever says and argue against his own statements and beliefs.

Michael is a man whose life is based around Faith, not doubt. When he speaks, he says what he believes to be true. He is not someone who's going to hem and haw and contradict himself based on the remote possibility that everything he's saying is completely wrong.

You seem to be expecting Michael to speak and behave like someone who is not Michael, based on a supposition that did not exist until it was made up in this thread, and was obviously not a factor in his thinking years ago when this conversation took place, nor could anyone reasonably have expected it to factor into his thinking.

This doesn't make him a liar in any way, shape or form.

nadia.skylark:

--- Quote ---What? It is not evidence at all that it wouldn't work. The only thing it's "evidence" of is that Nicodemus isn't accounting for the possibility, which is only evidence against your supposition that he's specifically propagating the idea.
--- End quote ---

...What? I said "you'd think if Nicodemus knew that the Church knew of a way to destroy a shadow, he'd try to get rid of the information"; you said "Nicodemus seems completely unaware of any possibility that a shadow could be gotten rid of, and furthermore Lash agrees with him"; then I said "You're right. And given that both Nicodemus and Lash should have far more information on how shadows work, this is evidence that either getting rid of one's magic does not rid oneself of the shadow or that no one has ever done so successfully." This is the equivalent of saying "Mab says that she has the ability to change Harry as her Knight. But Uriel says she doesn't. Because Uriel can be supposed to know more about the subject than Mab does, this is evidence that Mab is wrong."


--- Quote ---And where did Michael get the idea? It's not relevant.
--- End quote ---

It's relevant because Michael's source(s) has an effect on the validity of this information. There's a distinct difference between him believing the information because it's a long-held church theory, believing it because he personally disapproves of magic, believing it because it's something Tessa mentioned in a fight, and believing it because the archangel Gabriel came down and told him. And if Harry knew Michael's sources, it has a good chance of affecting whether he believed the information.


--- Quote ---What's relevant is that Michael believes it to be true, and is sure enough of it to -- again, without the slightest hesitation or hint of doubt, and absolutely no tells that he's lying -- advise Harry that it's the right thing to do.
--- End quote ---

...You don't understand how lying works, do you?


--- Quote ---It's how the character acts and has always acted. Michael hates lying -- he always has. He's urged others not to lie. He has conspicuously avoided lying himself. When Harry lies, Michael is visibly uncomfortable.

Lying is just not something Michael does.

You're completely rejecting one of his central character traits here.
--- End quote ---

Michael also carries a concealed weapon on a regular basis. He may be uncomfortable when called on it, but he is willing to conceal information in service to a higher good.


--- Quote ---And Michael just plain wouldn't tell Nicodemus anything in that situation.
--- End quote ---

I'm not going to argue about the effects of torture, so sure, let's go with that.


--- Quote ---You and your aunt are both aware of that learning disability as a tangible, factual, objectively observable factor in the discussion.

The supposition that giving up Harry's magic won't work is not. It has been made up, in this thread, by someone who is not a participant of their conversation and it is clearly and obviously not something that either Michael or Harry have considered as a possibility.
--- End quote ---

The tangible, objective factor here is that Harry has the shadow--they're talking about what to do about that.

The possibility that Harry giving up his magic would not work is supported by evidence in the text. Michael claims it will. Nicodemus, as you pointed out, has clearly never heard of the possibility. Michael also says that no one has gotten rid of a shadow without taking up the coin. That is all the evidence for and against the position.


--- Quote ---Except the fact that he says it with certainty, without doubt, and without hesitation. Because he clearly, obviously believes he's telling the truth.
--- End quote ---

I disagree with this.


--- Quote ---That Michael is saying it at all is evidence that Michael believes it to be true. What "evidence" he's basing it on doesn't have to pass your test, because what we're talking about is whether Michael was telling the truth as he saw it, not whether he could convince a jury of his peers that it was absolutely true beyond a shadow of a doubt.
--- End quote ---

This, so far as I can tell, is a circular argument: Michael didn't lie in this instance because he doesn't lie ever, and we know he doesn't lie ever because there is no instance in which he lies.


--- Quote ---What you haven't explained is why Michael wouldn't believe it to be true, or why he would say it if he didn't believe it was true.
--- End quote ---

YES I HAVE. Repeatedly. This keeps happening. Before you claim that I haven't said something, please re-read the thread, because you keep getting it wrong.


--- Quote ---"He could possibly be wrong," is not evidence that he's wrong, nor is it an argument that he has to doubt everything he ever says and argue against his own statements and beliefs.
--- End quote ---

I'm saying that there is no evidence that he is right apart from the claim he himself is making.


--- Quote ---Michael is a man whose life is based around Faith, not doubt. When he speaks, he says what he believes to be true. He is not someone who's going to hem and haw and contradict himself based on the remote possibility that everything he's saying is completely wrong.
--- End quote ---

He "hems and haws" about trusting Harry. He doubts Harry. You can't claim that he's not capable of doubting and concealing information when we see him do so in the books.


--- Quote ---You seem to be expecting Michael to speak and behave like someone who is not Michael, based on a supposition that did not exist until it was made up in this thread, and was obviously not a factor in his thinking years ago when this conversation took place, nor could anyone reasonably have expected it to factor into his thinking.

This doesn't make him a liar in any way, shape or form.
--- End quote ---

I am expecting Michael to speak accurately and behave like the character that I believe we have been shown (not the one that you believe we have been shown, clearly) based on clear concerns that he himself brought up, and possibilities that absolutely could reasonably be expected to factor into his thinking.

You apparently think that Michael has some intellectus for truth and to be inhumanly perfect, while at the same time gratuitously leaving information out of his statements such that they are inaccurate.

Mira:

--- Quote ---Except the fact that he says it with certainty, without doubt, and without hesitation. Because he clearly, obviously believes he's telling the truth. That Michael is saying it at all is evidence that Michael believes it to be true. What "evidence" he's basing it on doesn't have to pass your test, because what we're talking about is whether Michael was telling the truth as he saw it, not whether he could convince a jury of his peers that it was absolutely true beyond a shadow of a doubt.
--- End quote ---

Michael's evidence is his faith, since Harry never put it to the test we will never know if sacrificing his magical power would have driven Lasciel's shadow out or not.   So it is really a moot point.   

nadia.skylark:

--- Quote ---Michael's evidence is his faith
--- End quote ---

But why does Michael have faith that giving up his magic will save Harry from the shadow? (As opposed to, say, having faith that Harry's good works will save him, or having faith that Harry converting to Christianity will save him, or having faith that if Harry falls in love that it will save him, or... He has to have a reason, is my point.)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page