Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

[EaraGrace]

All hail Fandaniel! \o/ Thank you, Amon, our savior!

Another strawman. Recognizing that reincarnation is better than some fates is not saying death isn’t bad. I can recognize becoming a Sin Eater is better than being a blasphemy, both are bad.

"Hell" is your word, not mine. Mine was "a fate worse than death," which, to the Ancients, it was.

Ok, either way one would expect them to be a bit less willing to stick around in such circumstances no?

Isn't that quote from when they're trying to resist Fandaniel's attempts to supplant their will? That changes the context.

And yours is from an awakening soul that is part of a entity that was Sundered and sealed away. Both of us are operating of of slanted perspectives.

In other words, yes. If you can find a single person who seems "ok" with their conditions - let's say, for a different example, we find a single person who's relatively personally upbeat even though their community at large is suffering from starvation, poverty, and plague - then that means their conditions as a whole aren't in fact bad and we don't need to concern ourselves with it. Thank god that dilemma has been cleared up and we can go back to living our lives, nevermind other members of that "group" screaming in pain and anguish.

You understand why I used hell as an example right? If the conditions in Zodiark were so horrific as to necessitate any cost in order to free them, then finding individuals who don’t seem to be immediately concerned with their current circumstances would contradict that no? I think it better that we don’t subject unknowing innocents to that fate then, if it is as terrible as you say.

Oh, you're right, my bad! I'd forgotten that the story established that an attack from the Final Days completely wipes out the target’s aether. So, yes, there was absolutely nothing else to use, by all evidence.

What evidence. Anyder survived the damage with concepts intact. Why was it not reduced to its base aether?

We never directly saw Elidibus's attempts to mediate (because we cannot allow any actual characters with agency within a hundred miles of Venat's flashback), so once again, who knows? No one here can actually say with certainty.

This is the god in the gaps argument. You can’t use the lack the evidence to the contrary as proof of something existing.

I'm saying they're less relevant because, since Venat's objections were ideological and based on the Ancient way of life, the very principle of "looking back" and not "embracing suffering," then yes, she would have objected even if the sacrifice was going to be some trees. The nature of the sacrifices does not matter very much at the core of her concerns; she was not acting for the sake of the sacrifices (she Sundered all of them as well.) She was acting "for the sake" of the Ancients--or rather "mankind"--because she saw them going down the "wrong path" by attempting to restore what they had pre-apocalypse to begin with. Whatever shape and means is used to do that doesn't alter the core action, and thus, Venat retaliating against it.

And yet previous sacrifices did not necessitate the Sundering. The third sacrifice was the breaking point. Why in your opinion, is that the case?

Let me explain this another way. From Venat's perspective, it does not matter if a hypothetical thief is stealing from a rich person, or stealing from an orphanage - or stealing some jewelry, or stealing someone's life-saving medicine, or stealing some stale bread. What matters is that they are stealing - or more specifically, that they have shown themselves to be someone that steals - and so long as they are committing that general act, period, then she will strongly object in the same way. (And then murder them if they don't acquiesce.)

Once again we’re back to arguing that Venat was proposing leaving trees and insects the role of the stars steward.

I would say understanding this is about as convenient as, uh, clarifying that Venat's actions were based on her "beliefs," clarifying that she deliberately left Emet-Selch survive to preserve the timeline, clarifying that the Sundering was a violent and horrific act that completely erased the identities of the Ancients, clarifying that one's resistance to the Final Days is largely random and arbitrary and not something that can be solved...

Oof the loaded assumptions here. Lots of unproven assertions based in mixed evidence and headcanon.

In other words, if the Final Days had just lasted a little longer he would have turned.

Maybe. Maybe not. In that other timeline perhaps he’s inspired by someone else. We have no way of knowing.

Ultimately, Omega is forced to conclude that it wasn't some factor of anyone's "strength of spirit" which allowed for their survival, but that there was no pattern and their resistance to turning was primarily up to chance.

First let’s recognize that what’s described as random is not peoples reactions, but instead the environmental factors that ultimately inform their reactions to despair. This is a subtle distinction, but one that’s extremely important. One of these is impossible to control or push in a certain direction. The other is possible to manipulate, but only in a limited way. What Omega ultimately concludes about the heart is not that it is random, but that it is illogical. As he says:

<blip> My earlier hypothesis has been borne out. The suboptimal operation being conducted here is the result of emotionally compromised reasoning.

Consistent only in their inconsistency, the responses from both contingent member and imperial citizen were highly irrational. Conversely, any Omicron considering their predicaments would have echoed my assessment exactly.
The divergence from self-evident logic is key...
Hypothesis. The illogical relationship between would-be saviors and suffering populace is another result of the unpredictable nature of mortal hearts.
<blip> Any property or ability has inherent advantages and disadvantages.
Yet never have I encountered such a unique detriment. It appears that those who share your metaphysical capabilities are prone to complicating simple cognitive processes.