When are we supposed to stop fighting?

[Iscah]

I think the story fumbled the message, ultimately.

The idea that conflict is inescapable to some degree and there will always be "things going wrong" and being resilient enough to cope with it – that much makes sense.

The idea the being safe is inherently dangerous and people will get bored of it? Firstly I don't buy the humanity could get to that state anyway – there is always going to be a villain or a mistake or a good-natured disruptor like Azem to keep things interesting, or a natural disaster will occur, or at worst a society might collapse but people survive and will try to rebuild.

The basic idea "accept that suffering will happen and prepare yourself to be resilient" makes sense, but it seems undermined by the suggestion that some races actually achieved perfection and then collapsed because of it.

The better message is to accept that things will go wrong, but still strive to make the world as good a place as you can.

[RyuDragnier]

I think the story fumbled the message, ultimately.

The idea that conflict is inescapable to some degree and there will always be "things going wrong" and being resilient enough to cope with it – that much makes sense.

The idea the being safe is inherently dangerous and people will get bored of it? Firstly I don't buy the humanity could get to that state anyway – there is always going to be a villain or a mistake or a good-natured disruptor like Azem to keep things interesting, or a natural disaster will occur, or at worst a society might collapse but people survive and will try to rebuild.

The basic idea "accept that suffering will happen and prepare yourself to be resilient" makes sense, but it seems undermined by the suggestion that some races actually achieved perfection and then collapsed because of it.

The better message is to accept that things will go wrong, but still strive to make the world as good a place as you can.

The message was not about being inherently safe, is that true perfection and unity leads to destruction, the lack of motivation, just existing. No room for anything interesting, nothing to strive for, nothing to work towards. That's what caused them to collapse, they had absolutely nothing left to live their lives for, nothing that they needed to push towards, no real dreams. Just an empty existence. Striving towards it is one thing, but one can never grasp it. It's essentially akin to the tale of Icarus. Get too close to the sun, and you get burned and fall to your doom.

[Cleretic]

The message was not about being inherently safe, is that true perfection and unity leads to destruction, the lack of motivation, just existing. No room for anything interesting, nothing to strive for, nothing to work towards. That's what caused them to collapse, they had absolutely nothing left to live their lives for, nothing that they needed to push towards, no real dreams. Just an empty existence. Striving towards it is one thing, but one can never grasp it. It's essentially akin to the tale of Icarus. Get too close to the sun, and you get burned and fall to your doom.

Or from an alternative angle: a world without suffering cannot exist, and any civilization that thinks it's achieved it is only getting there by ignoring or setting aside the problems rather than actually solving it all.

Endwalker's whole angle on suffering is very Buddhist, which inherently does mean it gets a tiny bit lost in translation to western audiences. Not that we aren't capable of understanding the story, but rather that Buddhist outlooks are a much more present part of the cultural background in Japan, so they're a little quicker on the uptake for this stuff.

[YianKutku]

Or from an alternative angle: a world without suffering cannot exist, and any civilization that thinks it's achieved it is only getting there by ignoring or setting aside the problems rather than actually solving it all.

Endwalker's whole angle on suffering is very Buddhist, which inherently does mean it gets a tiny bit lost in translation to western audiences. Not that we aren't capable of understanding the story, but rather that Buddhist outlooks are a much more present part of the cultural background in Japan, so they're a little quicker on the uptake for this stuff.

There's also the analogy with Francis Fukuyama's "The End Of History", which assumes a certain form of government (liberal democracy, according to Fukuyama, but the concept can also apply to any other system) is the Final State from where there will no longer be any progress, like the ending point of a Civilization tech tree.

And the message of FFXIV (and criticisms of Fukuyama's thesis) is that civilizations don't work like that, and if you think you've achieved perfection, you are blinding yourself to alternatives and pitfalls. Always keep striving to be better, but never assume that you're perfect or anywhere near. And there is no "endpoint" or "linear progression" where one civilization is "more advanced"/"better" than another, like steps on a tech tree.

Personally, I also agree with the Buddhist interpretation of Endwalker (as in I agree that Endwalker's message is inspired by Buddhist thought), but that's just my own opinion.

(EDIT for clarity: Fukuyama doesn't actually think liberal democracy is "perfect", but just thinks that there will not be any further progression from it. Which I would say is still mistaken, but that's going into a tangent.)

[Misutoraru]

In my view

None of the nations/stars achieved perfection, they all gone astray trying to achieve the perfection in their own view. And meterion’s mind were no more a child, her logical are flawed, Hermes never prepare her to interpret the complexities of meaning of life

Venat was no all seeing all know god, all her actions are based on her experience. On the the third wave of sacrifices for Zodiark, Venat believe their people are beyond salvation.

It is our nature to fight for better tomorrow, to work toward the perfect world, through failure, hurt and disappointment we value the joy, happiness and other virtues.

[Fenral]

Or from an alternative angle: a world without suffering cannot exist, and any civilization that thinks it's achieved it is only getting there by ignoring or setting aside the problems rather than actually solving it all.

This, actually. One needs only look down in the third stage of the Dead Ends to see it. They may have thought they achieved perfection, but their world got trashed.

[AlysanneVrannai]

Or from an alternative angle: a world without suffering cannot exist, and any civilization that thinks it's achieved it is only getting there by ignoring or setting aside the problems rather than actually solving it all.

This is how I understood it as well, "to live is to suffer" is a statement of fact, though what you define as suffering can be wildly different depending on where you are. The "perfect" society at the third stage of Dead Ends shows that even without 'regular suffering' there is still a form of suffering either way, living becomes a curse where existance feels meaningless.

[HemlockEvergreen]

Stand tall, my friend. Our journey will never end.

[KizuyaKatogami]

The message was not about being inherently safe, is that true perfection and unity leads to destruction, the lack of motivation, just existing. No room for anything interesting, nothing to strive for, nothing to work towards. That's what caused them to collapse, they had absolutely nothing left to live their lives for, nothing that they needed to push towards, no real dreams. Just an empty existence. Striving towards it is one thing, but one can never grasp it. It's essentially akin to the tale of Icarus. Get too close to the sun, and you get burned and fall to your doom.

If we’re talking about the ancients, they did have something to live for, they were the stewards of the star. They were living for the betterment of their star.

[Lauront]

I think the story fumbled the message, ultimately.

The idea that conflict is inescapable to some degree and there will always be "things going wrong" and being resilient enough to cope with it – that much makes sense.

The idea the being safe is inherently dangerous and people will get bored of it? Firstly I don't buy the humanity could get to that state anyway – there is always going to be a villain or a mistake or a good-natured disruptor like Azem to keep things interesting, or a natural disaster will occur, or at worst a society might collapse but people survive and will try to rebuild.

The basic idea "accept that suffering will happen and prepare yourself to be resilient" makes sense, but it seems undermined by the suggestion that some races actually achieved perfection and then collapsed because of it.

The better message is to accept that things will go wrong, but still strive to make the world as good a place as you can.

Come now, we merely need to accept that the Steppes is the perfect society and all others will suffer eventual doom.

But I agree.