Your implication was clear; going back on it now does no good.
This is a transparent attempt on your part to salvage some measure of dignity in a thread where you're being badly exposed. I won't suffer such amateurish tactics though, so let's look at the actual posts. Quotes from myself shall be red, while yours shall be yellow.
Go buy a copy of "My Story" by Sherry the Mouse from a provisioner. It's the oldest and most established canon we have on the subject and, spoiler alert, it establishes that Blackthorn sincerely (and in fact correctly) views the Eight Virtues as a path to genocide. His opposition to this potential genocide was the basis for his formulation of the philosophy of Chaos in the first place and pretty much the one central trait which defined the character.
This is the first incident of the word "genocide" in the thread and it's pretty obvious that it refers to all the people who would utterly perish if the shards were merged, not some other random thing that isn't in My Story at all. Indeed you seem to understand this clearly in your very next reply.
The Virtues are, to Blackthorn, a path to genocide quite specifically because it was believed that if British could get every person on every shard to follow the Virtues, the shards would collapse into Ultima Prime. British by contrast as far as I can tell thought that if the people on the shards never really existed in some sense at all, then it can't quite count as genocide.
You've got your own wacky opinion on the matter at the point quoted above, but you seem to know perfectly well that I'm referring to the shards collapsing, not some other weird thing, and my "clear implication" mysteriously hasn't occurred to you yet. Funny that.
In my next response I refer to the Virtues as "world-destroying" which is even less ambiguous, but from there on out it doesn't matter, you're off on your weird tangent where you act like I'm referring to some other bizarre thing that has nothing to do with the subject.
Not likely, perhaps, but impossible is stretching it, and in any case, in present context the difference is, at best, academic. The point is that there was nothing genocidal about the Virtues themselves. You have gone back on yourself and, predictably, refuse to admit it.
You know what man, it's a one-page thread so far and the exchange in question takes place across like four whole posts. Copy, paste, and drop some quotes you think I've "gone back on" or quit posturing.
Something exists, it falls back into that which it came from. Did it really exist at all? Especially since it was but a shadow to begin with.
Good god man, the philosophical implications of a thing "falling back into that which it came from" are barely relevant when the
entire point of the story is that most of British's people do not have counterparts in Ultima Prime to "fall back into" at all and would thus "utterly perish" instead if their shard was merged around them.
That's like... literally the entire point. Whatever you think of merging, good or bad, most people just plain don't get to do it because they have nothing to merge with.
I never said they were multiple timelines occurring in a single world. Again, you make things up.
Look man, if there aren't multiple conflicting timelines taking place in the same world then comparisons with a "temporal paradox" don't really mean anything. Sue me for trying to put your words into some sort of functioning logical framework.
It's clear now that the paradox reference was nothing but a very sloppy metaphor on your part for the way shard inhabitants with counterparts in Ultima Prime would merge with them. I say sloppy because, again, it ignores the fact that most people don't have counterparts, don't merge at all, and just die instead.
No, you were clearly implying that the Virtues themselves were genocidal. I have explained myself clearly, you are making things up. Again.
Hurf blurf. Paste quotes.
This thread is about naming the Order. There's no actual good reason to not name the Order after the dominant philosophical system of the people. One which it's fairly clear that Blackthorn accepts the basics of.
Except for the part where he once overheard an omnipotent being saying that widespread acceptance of that system would kill everyone. A fact which has never been refuted, even if the threat has currently passed due to its main proponent having gone away.
I mean I'm sure Bennu could write something where it's suddenly discovered that the shards will no longer merge no matter how many people believe in the Virtues, thus making it safe for Blackthorn to promote them. People would wonder why his castle was full of Chaos symbols, but it could be done. He hasn't, though.
The demon thing, it's rather clearly you that's mis-reading, or rather mis-stating, the context. Blackthorn clearly says "this might be true, you'll never know for sure unless you question."
Blackthorn experiences the events related in My Story, where he learns that Lord British is conspiring with a powerful extradimensional being, and that the Virtues can potentially destroy the world and kill almost everyone.
He then writes A Political Call To Anarchy, where he basically says "You never know, the Virtues might be a conspiracy between a demon and Lord British to destroy the world. Ha ha, just playing, but seriously you don't know."
And you think this is... a coincidence? You think that these two references, probably written by the same developer around the same time, have nothing in particular to do with one another?
Seriously?
LOLs and bolding text do not make you correct. You are not correct and I will not pretend you are.
The fact that I am correct makes me correct.
