The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Souls and Ghosts.

<< < (3/29) > >>

Arjan:

--- Quote from: Bad Alias on September 05, 2019, 04:01:53 PM ---I took his statement that souls don't get mired down in things like that to mean that souls don't get "stuck" here on earth as ghosts.* I do think that mortal concerns will affect souls, but that physical concerns won't. What I mean by that is that you couldn't damage someone else's soul by a physical action. What could damage (or enhance) that soul is how the person chose to respond to the physical action. In the videos just released, Jim repeatedly talks about how choice is a really big deal in the Dresden Files, and I think that links in here. If choice doesn't matter to the soul, why/how does anything matter?

Both Bob and Harry admit that Bob doesn't really understand the faith side of the supernatural. Harry specifically applies this to Bob's understanding of soulfire. I think Jim did too. We've also been told that becoming a fairy not only could destroy Molly's soul but is likely to. I think a soul can be destroyed in the DF, not just damned, or Jim is intentionally misleading us.

*This doesn't seem to work with Harry's experience in Ghost Story. Captain Murphy's task force seemed to be more than ghosts and Harry was given the opportunity to stay on. Maybe the task force were the ghosts who become something more. Maybe Harry staying on would be the exception that proves the rule. Maybe Uriel knew Harry wouldn't stay on, but that seems problematic to me.

--- End quote ---
I think all souls have the choice to stay on if their spiritual body is strong enough but if you believe in an afterlife the pull to go on to that afterlife is just very strong.  It explains stuff like ancestor worship, return to life of powerful necromancers and the old idea that some people linger on because they have unfullfilled bussiness.

nadia.skylark:

--- Quote ---Of course, the case of Lasciel suggests angels CAN choose to play both sides, so maybe they're not utterly constrained as such; they're just operating on a level where they 100% KNOW that the road to hell is paved with good intentions; as soon as they swerve from their purpose a bit, they know they're going the path of the Fallen, and it scares them onto the straight and VERY narrow (and, by extension, any Angel who deviates knows he's falling anyway so why bother not Falling all the way at once?)
--- End quote ---

Necro-ing this thread because I had a thought on this.

In Ghost Story, when talking to Harry Uriel describes humans as "two-year-olds playing with hand grenades" when talking about names. What if the same goes for choices, where angels and humans both technically have free will, it's just that angels, due to their knowledge, have far harsher consequences for exercising it?

After all, if a two-year-old lights the curtains of your house on fire because they like the pretty flames, and your house burns down, the two-year-old isn't going to be punished all that harshly, whereas if an adult does the same thing, they're going to go to jail for arson. Applying the same logic to humans and angels: humans don't know all the consequences of their actions, and even for those consequences they do know, they might not understand them. Therefore, if a human does a bad thing, they get the option to say "sorry" and try to do better in the future. An angel, on the other hand, understands all the consequences of their actions before they take them, so if they do a bad thing, they get punished for it to the full extent.

This reconciles angels claiming to not have free will with the WoJ we have that Uriel could technically have helped Harry more in Changes, he just would have Fallen if he did, since angels certainly wouldn't effectively have free will due to their knowledge, even if they technically did; and also reconciles the whole soul=free will thing.

Yuillegan:
So the Angels are the adults in your theory, as opposed to us being the infants?

I don't mind it at all. But I cannot decide if I think humans are part of the Angel life-cycle. Not anywhere near enough evidence. But still...the idea is intriguing.

This would reconcile the whole soul - free will problem. But I am not so sure that I can rule out Bad Alias' idea that Angels are limited because they have already made their choices, to some extent. Humans are the random element in the equation though...hmm I don't know.

Arjan - well I think you are both half-right and half-wrong. I think it is likely that mortal's choices and beliefs affect their afterlife. Hades seems to give this away when he says he doesn't get as many souls as he used to. And there are MANY belief systems out there. Perhaps you can even make some choices after you die too.

But the WOJ I referred to earlier contradicts the idea that Souls linger. Souls don't linger, they move on. But the imprint created by them is a ghost or shade. Hence how he was able to interact with his own ghost to defeat the Kravos the Nightmare after he "died". Harry in Ghost Story was an anomaly. He had "died" and crossed over, but was not "gone". However, he was more like Astral Projecting. And he had the help of an Archangel to do it. So I don't believe for a second that his situation was anything like "normal".

As for what Necromancers do...well we have mostly only seen them animate corpses and bind spirits (which are more like corporeal ghosts). We only have one act of "full" resurrection so far: when Kumori brings back that Mob hitter. And she used a lot of power to do it, and the whole process seemed very unnatural. He screamed the whole time and the paramedic described it "as though he was being brought back against his will". Maybe Necromancers can bring back a Soul from the afterlife. But I can imagine quite a few Angels who would be upset by that. Perhaps they can only do the recently deceased as once a being has "fully" passed on and is "gone" there is no option.

Bad Alias:

--- Quote from: Yuillegan on December 22, 2019, 10:51:30 PM ---Maybe Necromancers can bring back a Soul from the afterlife.

--- End quote ---
Or maybe they can only bring back life (and maybe the ghost). If the soul is what makes mortals capable of understanding right and wrong, then bringing someone back without a soul would basically be creating a monster. You might not notice with a mobster.

g33k:

--- Quote from: Bad Alias on December 22, 2019, 11:28:50 PM --- ... bringing someone back without a soul would basically be creating a monster. You might not notice with a mobster.
--- End quote ---

n.b. the difference can be minimal  (hey, somebody had to say it!)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page