Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

[EaraGrace]

Most forms of utilitarian ethics are act or rule-oriented to a degree to offset this kind of reasoning - rather than always moving directly to maximize mean happiness in the long term, one must either prioritize the immediate consequences in the former case, or follow a set of rules designed around utilitarian ends in the latter.

Rule and Act utilitarians don’t simply look at the immediate consequences from my understanding, they can make distinctions between consequences that could be expected and ones that can’t, but ultimately it comes down to utility which isn’t time specific.

The Rejoinings were also not a sure-fire way to restore the Unsundered World, as the Ascians obviously had no idea how to fix the Void, and could be (and were) killed on the way to their goal, rendering the suffering they caused in its pursuit pointless. To paraphrase Sidgwick again, a risk is only ethical when the chance of benefit outweighs the cost and chance of loss.

The Unsundered obviously felt it worth the risk, as did apparently some Sundered as well, and found success. Zodiark was nearly freed, and seven shards had been rejoined. On whether that is still enough to justify the risk, we’d be getting into trying to quantify the happiness and suffering on Etheirys vs Hydaelyn.

While I think it would be perfectly reasonable to dislike Nier Automata (I'm assuming we're talking about Automata here) for not representing religion - or really any belief system - in total good faith, I think this is taking things out of context a bit. The plot of Automata basically consists of presenting a series of answers to existentialism, pointing out their weakness in a fairly superficial way, and finally coming to the conclusion that there is no fundamental answer and that meaning is something personal that emerges through the act of living itself. It doesn't really try to preach an ideology itself much, it just tears a bunch of other stuff down; theism only gets about 20 minutes of direct attention.

But it’s tearing down of other belief systems was in service to its overall message. The game doesn’t just say nothing, it actively pushes an existentialist message regarding meaning and purpose. The Ending E is pretty preachy though I love it for that. And then there’s Weight of the World.

However, the criticism it levies at religion, though shallow, is grounded in observable reality. If you base your life about the existence of a benevolent higher power that loves its believers, only for senseless bad things to happen to them, then the only obvious conclusion that doesn't compromise the whole ideology ("that bad thing must have been good for some reason! his grace has become a god!") can very quickly become antithetical to ones own well being. Of course, in reality, religions have developed very complex answers to these contradictions, but it works as a superficial rebuttal.

I’m not sure about that. One could easily say that Endwalker also works as a superficial rebuttal, not needing to go quite as deep as some believe it needed and failed to do. And given the real life rise in antinatalism, loss of global hope and optimism, and the increasing recognition of deaths by despair, I feel also connects to reality.

In contrast, there's not much of a rational basis for the idea that trying to eliminate suffering and maximize pleasure will eventually lead to an outcome like the Plenty. It's author fiat; a moral propped up only by the invented "universal constants" of the fiction.

Heavily disagree. Nozick discussed the experience machine and the Matrix directly talks about this in its own world building. The idea isn’t novel to Endwalker.