Louis Cypher/Louisa Ferra/Lucifer (
firstofthefallen) wrote in
animus_network2012-08-19 05:55 pm
2nd Candelabram - Text
A question.
Let us humor our captors and say that they are telling us the truth that our worlds are destroyed. Let us then assume we have only two places we can be: we might stay here, in this Tower for however long that may last or we might attempt to break out.
The Tower, while a cage, offers a sense of security. There are constant meals and general protection from what lies outside it's walls. We are, however, at the beck and call of the people who run the Tower and their whims. Yet with them you could say it's the devil you know, and know that their torment and cruelty would be as consistent as the stability they offer.
So assume a means of leaving this is found and we might venture out, and that what is outside is in fact inhabitable. But what we venture out into is a vast unknown and the only information we do have is that creatures like the ones who invaded here - and many more of them - roam the outside world. It would be a harsh, dangerous world. But also one with possibilities that could not be explored here. With freedom not to be found between these walls.
So given the choice if the chance of going home is out of the question, what do you choose: stability or freedom?
Let us humor our captors and say that they are telling us the truth that our worlds are destroyed. Let us then assume we have only two places we can be: we might stay here, in this Tower for however long that may last or we might attempt to break out.
The Tower, while a cage, offers a sense of security. There are constant meals and general protection from what lies outside it's walls. We are, however, at the beck and call of the people who run the Tower and their whims. Yet with them you could say it's the devil you know, and know that their torment and cruelty would be as consistent as the stability they offer.
So assume a means of leaving this is found and we might venture out, and that what is outside is in fact inhabitable. But what we venture out into is a vast unknown and the only information we do have is that creatures like the ones who invaded here - and many more of them - roam the outside world. It would be a harsh, dangerous world. But also one with possibilities that could not be explored here. With freedom not to be found between these walls.
So given the choice if the chance of going home is out of the question, what do you choose: stability or freedom?

[Text]
Faced with an hypothesis, all of them will go with freedom of course. Faced with an actual offer, at least half of them would go with stability. And after a period of that freedom? The remaining half would beg for stability back.
[Text]
What you speak of is normal for humans. Humanity wishes most of all to have what they perceive to be freedom, even if it isn't freedom at all. But not all creatures are human and do not have the same desires mankind does. All might want freedom but existences process it other ways.
Though what you say is true. Many will go for stability. But to beg for stability for those who do seek freedom?
I believe they will continue to wish to desire to be free. I have seen it.
[Text]
Those who seek freedom have no idea what real freedom is. What you wish for is not always as you expect it to be. Absolute freedom? I can count on a hand the number of human who could bear the weight of such freedom. Give it to them, they would be lost. They're that weak.
What they call freedom is simply a lighter form of imprisonment because they cannot work on their own. It is why humans will always relinquish their freedom to higher beings.
[Text]
You speak as if you know freedom, and yet you do not. Your words are one of the encaged and because you so know that you are too weak to gain freedom as you would wish it you view all others as being too weak as well. It's a common trick in order to protect one's ego. I hope it works well for you.
In the end those "higher beings" will be displaced. Will be toppled. And it will be humans who toppled them. What you seem to lack understanding of is that mankind possesses a power no other creature possesses, and that is their ability to grow. A single man may have a life of only a hundred years at best but the genes he passes on are stronger than the ones passed on to him, and the children of his descendants will be even stronger then them, and so on. All that keeps a man from being one of the most powerful things in all creation is that they are limited in the time they have upon this earth.
But as a pack animal absolutely nothing can stop them. In the end they will overrun all obstacles in front of them.
I have seen these revelations before. I shall see them again.
You will never see them because you so choose to be blind and to further bind yourself with your bitterness.
[Text]
Alas, this is nothing but a fool's hope.
The true freedom is when nothing surrounding you can affect you, yet your action can affect your surroundings. Nothing must be external to you, everything under your control. In short, you have to become a higher being yourself, a God. Of course, this is freedom taken to its extreme.
To simply have a moderate form of freedom, you just must reject any sort of authority and take full control of your own life. This, I accomplished. But to have absolute freedom, you must have nothing less than complete control over all and be rid of anything external that could affect you. This, I was about to accomplish. I shall accomplish.
I have witnessed the evolution of humans as you claim you saw those revelations. All I saw is a pathetic specie that barely deserves to exist. The humans I have known were actually more alike viruses, who only survived thanks to the protection of those they sold their souls to. Can you imagine humans getting rid of authority under all of its form? Can you imagine humans transcending the society, the morals and values they have desperately created and clung unto since the dawn of time? Can you imagine them rejecting the Gods and claiming full control of their destiny?
If you do, nothing but disappointment awaits you at the end of the road.
[Text]
And I have long since won my freedom. And I will win it again from foes far less suitable than my previous enemy.
On freedom, I agree with you. But that true freedom is obtainable. It comes with a high price and a hard road but I believe that not only may one person accomplish it. In the end all beings may accomplish it if they but persevere. If they but reject the lies and hopes they are given to keep them chained to the Earth and to servitude. For freedom can only come from the rejection of what one already has. You cannot be made free if you continue to be what you were.
No. You will not even have that moderate form. Your words yet again betray you; you may see the faults in others, but not in yourself. And you have fallen into underestimating mankind. For, perhaps like vermin, they are a species that comes in droves. And yet unlike ants, who come in millions and are unidentifiable, so often are there those among man who become exemplars. Who bring definition, and purpose, to their race.
I do not believe they will cast down their Gods. I have seen them cast down their gods. I have walked to the end of the road again and again, time after time, and more often then not I am pleased.
For you, there will be no end to your road.
[Text]
And then you say, freedom can only come from the rejection of what one already has? If they reject the lies and hopes they are given? Do you even realize your words? Look around you in this tower and see for yourself. Reality is nothing like the chimera you are describing to me. Certainly a few fairy tales of old feature humans such as you describe them. Reality? I have yet to see it. Anyone in this tower has to seen.
Albeit I have to say, this tower at least served us to demonstrate that no human is unique. They are, unlike what you claim, very similar to ant. Even if one man happens to become exemplar and bring purpose, this man may exist in countless exemplary beyond the dimension. Not to mention, the simple fact that the specie needs defintion and purpose makes it a moot point.
I will not discuss your claim that you gained freedom and have seen them cast down their gods. those are your claims, your life, and as long as you do not bring me the shred of a proof, I will not believe you more than I believe those in charge.
And to end this- Allow me to give you an advise, for future times you shall debate. I am sure it will come in handy then. You should focus solely on your opponent's argument, and not on your opponent's person. In politics this is something I would advise, and even encourage you to do. In such a situation, the purpose of the debate is not the truth, the purpose of the debate is to make a greater image for yourself and destroy that of your opponent.
Alas, this is not such a situation and when you send a remark on my way, instead of destroying my image of confidence, it simply displays that that truth is not on your side. You do not want your opponent to think you cannot win a debate simply out of intelligence. Furthermore, assumptions as larges as you make them, based on a few textual replies, make an even bigger fool of yourself. And this is not what you want to happen in a debate.
[Text]
And you drown in it without even knowing it.
[Text]
Unless I am not the one drowning, in which case I hope you'll use it well.