Emet-Selch Is Not That Tragic

[Alleo]

To what end?

If you can only see it as wrong, then you are simply viewing things through a moral absolutist lens.

Considering that not everyone can agree on what is truly moral and what is not, then how can there possibly be a truly absolute morality?

I looked the term up a bit more and interestingly its about the cultures itself. So can we really claim this term for solo people? Can we really say that in the morality of the Ancient ones Emet and the Ascians actions would be right?

What if the Ancients morality also includes not murdering sapient beings? This would make Emet the bad guy and wrong in their culture too. And seeing how quite a few reacted (enough to create Hydealyn) then I doubt that murdering all those beings on the shards would count as right for them...and again we cant ignore their part of the plan that includes whole souls thus people that are alive even in their warped view. Souls that would be their own people too just with the missing memories. I have a really hard time seeing their culture being fine with that.

So no I dont see the story as showing us that both sides are right. They hit us over the head with the message that we should walk on for those that come after. Heck they made a mini arc about this very theme with Thancred himself.

There are stories out there that show this moral construct in a good way (Attack on Titan for example) but this game is imo not one of them.

lmao, that was my first post in this thread, and aimed at no one. On a videogame forum, about a videogame character, specifically a topic on how that videogame character is not all that tragic. If I had said "I love Emet-Selch", would I have been policed? Would I have gotten such concern for my health? Thanks, really, but I don't need it. I only have 38 posts on these forums, after all.

If it helps, I promise you, should Alisae do a fraction of what Emet-Selch did in the future, you will see me here questioning her--provided I am asked to call her a hero, and not a villain.

Yeah I doubt that the term "health" would have come up if we all just said something positive about his actions. I mean its seemingly normal that people say that they miss character x but when someone goes into a deeper discussion about the faults of a person and if that makes him a bad person even in the standards of the ingame morality then its not healthy? Isnt it not healthly too to post about games at all?

Stories are written to create emotions in us. All those people crying tears when something sad happens in a video game, movie or book must be unhealthy too because those are not real people, right?

So ive always felt the plan they had for reviving all of their civilization was not really thought out. We ARE the souls of the Amaurotines, fragments of them as theyve very plainly told us. If you feed our aether to Zodiark what exactly are you bringing back? You think hes just going to give up all the power he gains from souls and release them back? The sacrificed life forces originally are what allowed him to even take form and Emet wants ALL of them back. Now Emet admits that all the ascians were tempered if you talk to him in the Solar after one of the cutscenes so im not sure if this has some bearing on his ability to think of these angles because Zodiark would want resurrection and wouldnt want that kind of questioning.

I agree with that thus I believe that they might have never made this plan if they had not been tempered.

I mean these people sacrificed themselves willingly so that their rest of their city can live on. Instead of just accepting their sacrifice they suddenly turn around after everything is done and talk about the plan and if we take what Hythlos says as true then it were the Ascians who created that plan to beginn with after everything was save. So the people that got tempered created a plan that would give their "god" (and its interesting that Lahabrea calls him a god even though Zodiark is a construct of their own making thus 100% no god) more aether. It could be that it was part of their own grief to do that but at the same time they already knew death and at least in the short story its made clear that they had no problem with death. And suddenly that changes?

In the end Emet seemingly only cares about those lost souls while either ignoring or not caring about the consequence of now sacrificing the source people too after all the rejoinings happened. These people would have souls from ancient beings which includes people from Amaurot and also those that survived the calamity...that means he wants to sacrifice the people that the other sacrificed their life for so that they can live on..he is trampeling on the wishes of those that gave their life to protect the few that would survive it..and its not like it would have been the end of their race. They know what children are. They could have reproduced and since the also had a lifestream at that time, the people that died in the calamity would have been reborn with time. And at the same time they could have made those that are used as fuel for Zodiark into heroes that will be remembered forever.