Solf J Kimblee (
explosivecombat) wrote2014-07-09 07:37 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
- !ic,
- **anonymous,
- *text,
- @carmen sandiego (here she is),
- @flynn,
- @greed's poor life choices,
- @hiccup haddock,
- @royce,
- @walter,
- admittedly kind of asking for it,
- being you guys is suffering,
- but is everyone mad about genocide,
- come at me bro,
- engaging in heresy,
- good ideas are clearly relative concepts,
- hell are you even,
- how edgy of you,
- i used to be hardcore,
- just thought he'd ask,
- kimblee is overstimulated,
- like a brick to the face,
- my logic is flawless,
- my social skills are flawless,
- no sense of self-preservation,
- professor of fauxlosophy,
- raid on the city knock out evil tusks,
- sanity is so passé,
- slacking off like hell,
- so fucking flawless,
- surprisingly not plotting anyone's death,
- texting into the void,
- that may have been a bit insensitive,
- that wasn't morbid at all,
- the greater internet fuckwad theory,
- this is really stupid,
- tonight we're going hard,
- well that's needlessly sinister,
- why we can't have nice things,
- with apologies to carmen sandiego
035. [ANON TEXT]
[Well, good evening, network - it seems Seth's device is active again, though at the very least he's not inviting everyone to war like he's throwing the world's most unasked-for party this time around.]
You know, one of the things I've always found most fascinating about human morality is the idea that we're higher beings due to our natural inclination to put others before ourselves. It's generally accepted in society that we should be willing to sacrifice ourselves before harming another; I've always found adhering to that sort of notion to both vaguely admirable and sickeningly saccharine. If you must kill one to save another, that's still a life that's lost; why shouldn't the reward go to the one who's willing to fight for it, rather than the one who did nothing to earn it but sit there in pious devotion to doing nothing wrong?
We claim superiority for suppressing our instincts to survive; if anything, I think that would put us lower than dogs, not above them. All this intelligence and no will to live; it's pitiful.
But then, I suppose my lack of understanding of these things is why I can't be considered one of you.
For the time being, however, say I were to humor you in discussion for a while. Do you think your will to fight to ensure your survival actually needs to be tested? Since I suspect the answer will overwhelmingly be "No," I have another pre-emptive question for the heroic types.
Is there anything outside of arrogance and so-called moral superiority that makes you say so?
[...O...kay that's really not any better but apparently, it's just that kind of night.
You know, full of misanthropy.
Because some nights are like that.]
You know, one of the things I've always found most fascinating about human morality is the idea that we're higher beings due to our natural inclination to put others before ourselves. It's generally accepted in society that we should be willing to sacrifice ourselves before harming another; I've always found adhering to that sort of notion to both vaguely admirable and sickeningly saccharine. If you must kill one to save another, that's still a life that's lost; why shouldn't the reward go to the one who's willing to fight for it, rather than the one who did nothing to earn it but sit there in pious devotion to doing nothing wrong?
We claim superiority for suppressing our instincts to survive; if anything, I think that would put us lower than dogs, not above them. All this intelligence and no will to live; it's pitiful.
But then, I suppose my lack of understanding of these things is why I can't be considered one of you.
For the time being, however, say I were to humor you in discussion for a while. Do you think your will to fight to ensure your survival actually needs to be tested? Since I suspect the answer will overwhelmingly be "No," I have another pre-emptive question for the heroic types.
Is there anything outside of arrogance and so-called moral superiority that makes you say so?
[...O...kay that's really not any better but apparently, it's just that kind of night.
You know, full of misanthropy.
Because some nights are like that.]
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Anyway, that's neither here nor there, I suppose. I was just curious.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I have one or two others, but you're a large part of it, actually.
no subject
There's something I think I already know the answer to, but will you humor me far enough to remind me, if I ask?
no subject
no subject
no subject
[...there's a second text a moment later, because that...it didn't answer anything, did it.]
That's the case, yes. Why?
no subject
So, in another hypothetical Olivine, for example — we have our understanding that if I interfere, I do so assuming the risk of my own actions; you're there doing your job, and for that duration, I'm someone standing in the way of it, so that's how you'll treat me irrespective of everything else.
But once the job has concluded, it stops having bearing on how we interact in your personal life. To put it a little overly flippantly, there wouldn't be any hard feelings. Do I...still have it right?
no subject
There would be no hard feelings on my end.
However, I do understand that that doesn't extend to your reaction to it. The fact that you comprehend why I do what I do doesn't exempt me from the consequences of my actions, and bluntly put I don't want it to; I've always believed in people receiving what it is they deserve, and I would be a hypocrite to insist that that shouldn't extend to me as well.
I know that there may come a point at which you insist those consequences should be brought down - in fact, I know there probably will be a point at which you insist on it - and the fact that I continue to act as I do with that knowledge in place likely says more about me than I intend it to. At the same time, you're well within your rights to decide that you don't want to do this anymore at any point, and I'm not going to argue with you or stop you should you reach that point in future because it is the logical and accepted conclusion of my actions. It's not a conclusion I would like, but again, I would be a hypocrite to insist that the situation should be otherwise.
But anything I do professionally doesn't have any bearing on what I think of you personally, no.
no subject
There's something else I want to ask you, actually, but it wouldn't be very fair of me to keep you waiting without an answer while I did, so. I really do appreciate the consideration for my point of view on it. I think in a way I can...in a sense, I respect that you wouldn't treat me any differently? I can see how it could come away as manipulative, walking into that sort of situation on little more than arrogance and trying to use our friendship or your feelings on me against you, whether it be to stop you or to keep myself alive or...well. I can't say for certain that it'd be as easy for me to appreciate in the heat of the moment, but when we're just talking about it hypothetically, it's a little easier to see where your point of view comes from.
I may not be able to be as rational about it in that theoretical heat of the moment as I am about it now, but for what it's worth, at this point I honestly don't want to lose you. It may be that someday the consequences of your actions are more than I can tolerate in good conscience, and if it comes to that it sounds as though we'd both accept it, but...it's not really something I'm eager to see happen, either.
So I think that maybe, while it's entirely possible for there to be hard feelings on my part, I also don't think it's a given that those hard feelings would be inherently...inflexible ones? Maybe that's a good way of putting it.
no subject
And the other question...?
no subject
You wouldn't deliberately be crueler to me than you would to anyone else, just because we're friends?
no subject
At one point I probably would have.
But no, I wouldn't.
no subject
[Okay, that's...kind of awkward but all things considered it's probably just as awkward for him to admit as it is in general so let's just try to...do something about that maybe.]
That...actually does go a long way toward making it easier to accept, though, so I appreciate that too.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
That said, I think your current stance is quite considerate as far as treating me fairly when it comes to potentially blowing me up, and I respect that.
(And that was an attempt at humor, so I hope you smiled at it.)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)