AnimeSuki Forum - View Single Post - Fate/Zero

Lordarrow · 2012-04-25, 21:01

Lancer may be stupid to a fault but he really was a good guy. He didn't really hate anyone and all he wanted was to regain his honor. Damn Kirigitsu to hell and beyond.

As for my final words on this matter. If you all couldn't tell by what I previously wrote, what Kirigitsu did really boils my blood. I hate nothing more than a corrupted idealist who assumes the mantle of some kind of efficient and emotionless pragmatist. He is really no worse than a mass serial killer.

Clarification: To some who continue to defend him and his actions, what I 'm actually saying is that your entire premises is flawed. Your conclusions are based on accepting Kirigitsu as he says regarding what he is doing as an absolute truth and not on a deeper analysis of his actions as well as his background. Furthermore, juxtaposing off-tangent subjects are not valid arguments to my analyses. It may be true that war is hell and and that the most pragmatic are the victors of war. However, that is relevant/true only if your assumptions of Kirigitsu as a emotionless, combat pragmatic are also true. Which I reject. You cannot use conclusions to justify premises. In regard to the ad hominem arguments. You can say that I be a naive idealist who who can't accept that war is hell and that bad things happen to good people. That may be true, however that does not mean that my theories are false.

I suppose Kirigitsu's decisions could be 100%, the best possible options supposed that he be some supremely rational, omniscient, and pragmatic machine. But he is not. He is human and as a human, he will make errors and bad judgments. That is the fallacy of human judgment. The claim that his decisions have to be the best and most pragmatic options in winning the war is therefore fallacious in itself. We don't know every option that could have been made and neither would Kirigitsu.

Furthermore, for Kirigitsu, everything he does is on his own judgement and as such is really accountable to no one. Because of that, as a human, he is even more prone to oversight by the very fact that he is accountable to really no one but himself. There is no second or third, fourth, and etc. opinions to be found. There is a reason why we need supervisors, co-workers, teammates, managers, superiors, teacher assistants. Multiple perspectives check the lapses in human error and broaden the option pool. No such systems in place to check Kirigitsu because he operates outside the system as a assassin/hit-man/magus killer. Btw, Maiya doesn't count because she's more or less a enabler of Kirigitsu. Seeing how easily Kirigutsu smuggles guns and explosives into japan. There is also really no modern technology counters to magic. Kirigitsu is basically given free reign to do as he pleases and kill as many as he wants to achieve his objectives.

The whole killing one to save ten, or hundred to save a thousand is complete bunk. More so, because its not possible to determine how many will be saved should you kill such and such. The butterfly effect comes to mind. A single small event can have multiple,varied, and unpredictable outcomes. This is also true for reality.For all we know killing such and such people would kill even more people than would be saved. I shall also call it the assassinate Hitler dilemma. Suppose we go back in time to kill hitler and we succeed. We save millions. However, since we killed Hitler and now since the world doesn't have the experience of such inhuman atrocities. The world is unprepared for a worse, more inhuman dictator that even Hitler. This time, a billion people are wiped out. Could we have predicted as such? The answer is NO. We wanted to save many people at the cost of one life but instead we caused the death toll to rise exponentially. I would say that this way of looking at "saving" people is just simply impossible. Therefore, I would postulate this argument for kirigitsu, is is simply a excuse to himself and to others as why he couldn't have bothered to come up with better solutions. (Becuse he doesn't have to and subsequently doesn't want to). Recall the boat dilemma from the VN.

Also as a more personal note.His focus on how many he can minimally kill to save such and such amount of people, rather than how many he can save by killing such and such. This to me, really means that he is more focused on the killing rather than the saving.

So what do we have in the end? A stand alone, uninhibited, assassin with supernatural powers and no regards for human life? I'd say a mass killer is a apt description for such a person. It is more chilling, that near the end he said he would stain all evils in the world in order to save it. So to answer a question whether or not he would cause a mass genocide. He sure would. Whats the lives of a couple million if you can save untold billions in the future? The real paradox is when he learns through his own personal life and experience that it is impossible everyone can be saved but yet he wants to save everyone through the grail forever. Oh the irony of his beliefs. He is an idealist pretending to be a pragmatist.

2012-04-25, 21:01	Link #257
Lordarrow Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2012	Lancer may be stupid to a fault but he really was a good guy. He didn't really hate anyone and all he wanted was to regain his honor. Damn Kirigitsu to hell and beyond. As for my final words on this matter. If you all couldn't tell by what I previously wrote, what Kirigitsu did really boils my blood. I hate nothing more than a corrupted idealist who assumes the mantle of some kind of efficient and emotionless pragmatist. He is really no worse than a mass serial killer. Clarification: To some who continue to defend him and his actions, what I 'm actually saying is that your entire premises is flawed. Your conclusions are based on accepting Kirigitsu as he says regarding what he is doing as an absolute truth and not on a deeper analysis of his actions as well as his background. Furthermore, juxtaposing off-tangent subjects are not valid arguments to my analyses. It may be true that war is hell and and that the most pragmatic are the victors of war. However, that is relevant/true only if your assumptions of Kirigitsu as a emotionless, combat pragmatic are also true. Which I reject. You cannot use conclusions to justify premises. In regard to the ad hominem arguments. You can say that I be a naive idealist who who can't accept that war is hell and that bad things happen to good people. That may be true, however that does not mean that my theories are false. I suppose Kirigitsu's decisions could be 100%, the best possible options supposed that he be some supremely rational, omniscient, and pragmatic machine. But he is not. He is human and as a human, he will make errors and bad judgments. That is the fallacy of human judgment. The claim that his decisions have to be the best and most pragmatic options in winning the war is therefore fallacious in itself. We don't know every option that could have been made and neither would Kirigitsu. Furthermore, for Kirigitsu, everything he does is on his own judgement and as such is really accountable to no one. Because of that, as a human, he is even more prone to oversight by the very fact that he is accountable to really no one but himself. There is no second or third, fourth, and etc. opinions to be found. There is a reason why we need supervisors, co-workers, teammates, managers, superiors, teacher assistants. Multiple perspectives check the lapses in human error and broaden the option pool. No such systems in place to check Kirigitsu because he operates outside the system as a assassin/hit-man/magus killer. Btw, Maiya doesn't count because she's more or less a enabler of Kirigitsu. Seeing how easily Kirigutsu smuggles guns and explosives into japan. There is also really no modern technology counters to magic. Kirigitsu is basically given free reign to do as he pleases and kill as many as he wants to achieve his objectives. The whole killing one to save ten, or hundred to save a thousand is complete bunk. More so, because its not possible to determine how many will be saved should you kill such and such. The butterfly effect comes to mind. A single small event can have multiple,varied, and unpredictable outcomes. This is also true for reality.For all we know killing such and such people would kill even more people than would be saved. I shall also call it the assassinate Hitler dilemma. Suppose we go back in time to kill hitler and we succeed. We save millions. However, since we killed Hitler and now since the world doesn't have the experience of such inhuman atrocities. The world is unprepared for a worse, more inhuman dictator that even Hitler. This time, a billion people are wiped out. Could we have predicted as such? The answer is NO. We wanted to save many people at the cost of one life but instead we caused the death toll to rise exponentially. I would say that this way of looking at "saving" people is just simply impossible. Therefore, I would postulate this argument for kirigitsu, is is simply a excuse to himself and to others as why he couldn't have bothered to come up with better solutions. (Becuse he doesn't have to and subsequently doesn't want to). Recall the boat dilemma from the VN. Also as a more personal note.His focus on how many he can minimally kill to save such and such amount of people, rather than how many he can save by killing such and such. This to me, really means that he is more focused on the killing rather than the saving. So what do we have in the end? A stand alone, uninhibited, assassin with supernatural powers and no regards for human life? I'd say a mass killer is a apt description for such a person. It is more chilling, that near the end he said he would stain all evils in the world in order to save it. So to answer a question whether or not he would cause a mass genocide. He sure would. Whats the lives of a couple million if you can save untold billions in the future? The real paradox is when he learns through his own personal life and experience that it is impossible everyone can be saved but yet he wants to save everyone through the grail forever. Oh the irony of his beliefs. He is an idealist pretending to be a pragmatist.