In regards to something involving the main cast

[h-alpha]

Meanwhile, the researchers at Elpis actually do know that at any given creation they make might just suddenly have a soul, and they still do... everything we saw them do. I think that one of Meletos' creations actually getting a soul just in time for the FATE where we kick its ass would be a weirdly, pointlessly dark beat to add, just as it would if it happened to Y'shtola's nixie, but I think it does say something that Meletos and everyone around him knows that can happen and is still okay with what he's doing.

I'd like to just add to your point two things. First, this bit of dialogue from the game:

HERMES:

"Tell me─do you know the difference between living beings and arcane entities?

It is the presence of a soul. Yet the soul isn't something you can choose to have at will.

No, it manifests only in those beings whose forms adhere to the laws of creation. That can endure on their own.

Beings that do not fulfill this requirement, such as those spontaneously born of magic or natural phenomena, do not have souls.

No matter how much it might resemble flora or fauna, if it lacks a soul, then it is considered an arcane entity.

So you see, it is not for mankind to decide what is living. That domain lies beyond our manipulation, and it is hubris to assume otherwise."

Second, this line from the Through His Eyes sidestory from ShB:

"A soul... How?"

Through their mastery of creation magicks, men could weave anything into existence. Anything they could imagine, they could bring forth─anything, that is, except a soul. As Hades well knew, souls spontaneously manifested within creatures that were born in accordance with the laws of nature. It was a gift from the star itself, long held to be impossible to recreate. No artificial being, no matter how subtly sculpted in the image of nature, could come to possess a soul. Such creations occupied a separate classification known as arcane entities.

Not that I don't agree with your points here, but I'd like to just clarify that unless I'm missing something else that contradicts what we're told here, creations don't spontaneously gain a soul sometimes. In fact, it sounds like it's quite the opposite, that even creatures born of "natural phenomena" sometimes don't have souls (the lightning sprites/pneuma that we see just shortly after Hermes says that, for example).

Which to me, that explains a lot of why the researchers at Elpis seem adamant about testing whether their creations can survive on their own or not, because if your creation can endure on its own and have offspring, those offspring may have a chance of gaining a soul and being considered to be living.

[h-alpha]

(continuing this) Hermes does go on to say this:

HERMES:

See how they gather to feed. How they express themselves through their actions despite their lack of words.

Speech is not the sole defining characteristic of a thinking, feeling creature. Nor is silence an indication that they do not possess these qualities.

Be it a soulless arcane entity such as the pneuma, or an ephemeral life-form such as the petalouda, all seek to perpetuate their existence. To survive.

He also says that it's ultimately up to the Bureau of the Architect to pass judgement whether Meteion is an arcane entity or truly alive. To me, Hermes is interesting in this way: in one breath he will recite to us what is considered "right" by Ancient standards, and in the next breath he will contradict that and say something much more alike to what we as Sundered folk might feel about the topic. Contradiction seem to be the theme for the Ancients.

But in that, I do kind of get why the Ancients may come off as insensitive when it comes to this, because (at least to me) it seems that for them, until a creation is perfected enough to survive on its own and gain a soul, it's in a sort of "prototype" phase and isn't really considered to be alive. Which... that felt to me like the whole point of this part of the story, that it's a way of looking at life that doesn't necessarily give respect to their creations and that's why Hermes disagreeing with it all is a thing. If it were perfectly good and moral and right, there'd be no reason for us to have a character who disagrees with the ideals held by his society.

[EaraGrace]

(continuing this) But in that, I do kind of get why the Ancients may come off as insensitive when it comes to this, because (at least to me) it seems that for them, until a creation is perfected enough to survive on its own and gain a soul, it's in a sort of "prototype" phase and isn't really considered to be alive. Which... that felt to me like the whole point of this part of the story, that it's a way of looking at life that doesn't necessarily give respect to their creations and that's why Hermes disagreeing with it all is a thing. If it were perfectly good and moral and right, there'd be no reason for us to have a character who disagrees with the ideals held by his society.

It’s also important to note that some of those creatures being tested in Elpis are known to have souls, not all are arcane entities. The Lykaons and I presume other animals we see likely are possessed of a soul.

So allow me to speculate something. We all know that Elpis and the Ancients are Greek as can be. The names, architecture, and creatures all scream it. But what if it was also the way viewing the world that’s also Greek?

There’s a school of ethical thought called Virtue Ethics that dates back to Plato and Aristotle. In Aristotles conception, there’s an idea called telos which basically means purpose or goal. The idea is that all beings have a telos and it’s what decides whether they are living and acting as they should. A shipbuilders telos, for example, is to build ships and to build them well. They shouldn’t sink, they shouldn’t fall apart, they should be functional, etc. Playing through Elpis one only has to look around to the Ancients discussing Telos. Their creations are all judged by their telos and ability to see it out. Does it fulfill a role in the environment, does it add anything to a habitat, does it do those things well? The Ancients even view themselves with a very Aristotelian lens, talking about their role as stewards of the star, how one lives only long enough to see the completion of their duty and then returns to the star, how horrible it is to have their role ended before it is complete, etc. etc. Now Aristotle I don’t think would agree them, he has a whole thing about the virtues and all, but breaking everything down to a single purpose does track I think.

With this I also think we begin to see another dimension to Hermes objection. Having played the role of judge for so long, Hermes comes to doubt the actual value of telos as a way of viewing living beings. He watches as creatures are made, fail, and die raging and screaming against their end, all the while this process is called a moral good by his fellow Ancients. He realizes that if all life is is about fulfilling a specified purpose then Ancients as well have an end point, and will have no telos. And so he becomes disillusioned, and seeks other answers, other reasons for living. Then Meteions report comes. So he decides to make a final judgement. If mankind cannot find a reason for living that can survive the Final Days, then they are doomed no matter what. They would die either in the fires of calamity, or in the slow release of returning to the star.

Suddenly, a lot of worldviews start clicking for me when I view it that way. But I can’t point to an in text example of that term being used so for now it remains just a theory

[Iscah]

I always felt bad for Saro Roggo.




Every time you speak to him he's in a panic to prove himself to Matoya.

It should be pointed out that it's only what he thinks Matoya will do when she realises he "isn't useful", but when he finally gets up the courage to actually speak about those fears, she has no intention of doing so.

From the beginning she has tasked him with something she could do herself, and now asks him to do a further important-but-simple thing which assures him that she will never disenchant him.

[sidurgu-12]

It should be pointed out that it's only what he thinks Matoya will do when she realises he "isn't useful", but when he finally gets up the courage to actually speak about those fears, she has no intention of doing so.

From the beginning she has tasked him with something she could do herself, and now asks him to do a further important-but-simple thing which assures him that she will never disenchant him.

as grumpy as matoya is she cares a lot for her student and creations.

[KizuyaKatogami]

as grumpy as matoya is she cares a lot for her student and creations.

Not far off from how the ancients are then!

[KariTheFox]

If it needs a justification, Hyth says a few times that he struggles with magic, so maybe he needs to draw the extra aether from the butterflies while Emet could conjure it spontaneously (but wants nothing to do with us at that point).

If you read through the dialogue for the relevant quest, there isn't really any concern for the lives of the butterflies. Our two reactions are an ambiguous "you can turn them into clothing just like that?" which might be read as being concerned for them but also sheer surprise at being able to create something from an unrelated substance. The other response is "won't someone be angry with us for taking them?" which suggests we view the act on par with ripping plants out of the garden or, at worst, taking animals from a zoo. The concern is for the people who might "own" the butterflies rather than the creatures themselves.

Why did this thread go on for ten more pages after this?

[Denishia]

...In Aristotles conception, there’s an idea called telos which basically means purpose or goal. The idea is that all beings have a telos and it’s what decides whether they are living and acting as they should ... Playing through Elpis one only has to look around to the Ancients discussing Telos. Their creations are all judged by their telos and ability to see it out. Does it fulfill a role in the environment, does it add anything to a habitat, does it do those things well? The Ancients even view themselves with a very Aristotelian lens, talking about their role as stewards of the star, how one lives only long enough to see the completion of their duty and then returns to the star, how horrible it is to have their role ended before it is complete, etc. etc. Now Aristotle I don’t think would agree them, he has a whole thing about the virtues and all, but breaking everything down to a single purpose does track I think.

With this I also think we begin to see another dimension to Hermes objection. Having played the role of judge for so long, Hermes comes to doubt the actual value of telos as a way of viewing living beings.

I think that emphasis on telos, on intrinsic reason for being tied to an absolute and singular purpose (why Venat is a rebel because not dying after stepping down from the Seat of Azem is saying one can complete one's telos and then still find new purpose and explore beyond that role), is at the core of one of the reasons I found the Ancients' society so distasteful.
Hermes sends the Meteia in search of an alternative philosophy to live one's life because the Ancients only had one answer, and like their one-size-fits-all but puddles-awkwardly-doesn't-fit robes, that answer doesn't work for everyone. He sent Meteia into the stars looking for a new definitive answer, but the very act of searching, accepting that there is no perfect answer, appeals to me philosophically. And is probably one of the reasons why I liked Endwalker's message and scenes like with the Ea. (Though having to teach middle-schoolers about space, more than once soothing, children about such concepts as the heat death of the universe made it amusing).

If we do want to talk about fandom double standards, then people's complaints about Hermes sending the Meteia into space is a clearer parallel/contrast to Y'shtola and the nixies than the butterflies.

The actual lore question I would have is do you think they will return to the Void Quests with Beq Legg sending the porkies into the Void? because those pigs came back without visible corruption, and they're aether siphons.

[EaraGrace]

The actual lore question I would have is do you think they will return to the Void Quests with Beq Legg sending the porkies into the Void? because those pigs came back without visible corruption, and they're aether siphons.

Could maybe make it a time thing. More time you spend the more it corrupts. There was a cut after the nixies went in so they could try to handwave it.

[Kozh]

He sent Meteia into the stars looking for a new definitive answer, but the very act of searching, accepting that there is no perfect answer, appeals to me philosophically.

I agree with the message that there is no one clear answer. You may have a purpose in life, while others may not. You may live for others, while others may live for themselves. These are all valid choices. Purposes are adaptive afterall. That being said, I disagree with this:

on intrinsic reason for being tied to an absolute and singular purpose (why Venat is a rebel because not dying after stepping down from the Seat of Azem is saying one can complete one's telos and then still find new purpose and explore beyond that role)

Hermes sends the Meteia in search of an alternative philosophy to live one's life because the Ancients only had one answer, and like their one-size-fits-all but puddles-awkwardly-doesn't-fit robes, that answer doesn't work for everyone.

The way I see it, “for the betterment of the Star”, isn’t an “absolute and singular purpose”. It’s a vague thing with a lot of leeway. It’s like how we in the real world say “you shouldn’t hurt others”. More like a general guide than absolute rule of life. Take Hyth’s “purpose” for example; his purpose is “help my friends achieve their dream”. It’s not directly “for betterment of the Star”. Another example would be the mentor and mentee pairing in Elpis.The mentor's last purpose before they “retired” is to make the mentee to become senior researcher or something (I don’t really remember the exact details, might be wrong).

As we are now, we simply don’t know how the Ancients came up with their purposes or even if they have multiple ones or can change it midway. Or when were they expected to have a purpose? If we only look at Amaurotine and people at Elpis, it’s very clear to see the realization of that “betterment of the Star”; which is by creating creatures. But what about people outside of Amaurot? The civilians who don't create creatures? How will they fulfill their purposes if creating creatures is the only way to make the Star better? Hence why I said that to make the Star better is just a general guide, not necessarily a rule that binds them.

(1/2) because I can't edit post on mobile