Sixth Candelbram - Voice

[firstofthefallen]

What is strength to you, or what it is to be strong?

Alternatively, who is it that has right to rulership, or to command? Do you agree with the sentiment that those who are strong are superior and thus have greater rights than those who are weak?

And if that is the case: may the weak become strong?

Comments

[firstofthefallen]

I will agree there is a chain to some degree. But it should begin to become more arbitrary then necessary. What one wants one should do, provided they have the strength to do it and that they will pay the price if they fail to have the strength they believe they do.

Then luck was on her side. Most would not be so lucky.

[calculatedfire]

To overcome selfishness is strength.

[firstofthefallen]

No.

Selfishness is strength.

Only a fool believes true strength resides in others. In the end the only one who matters in the world is yourself. Better that people learn to care for themselves then waste themselves away in concern for others.

[calculatedfire]

A village is strong while an individual is weak, and failing to plan for the future by setting aside desires today will come back to haunt.

[firstofthefallen]

What a foolish sentiment.

A village can be as weak as a single individual if those who compose the village are incapable. Even a single fool in a village brings the strength of a village down greatly. It is quite possible for a village to be weaker than an individual, and a village can only be as strong as it's weakest member.

One may pursue ones desires and plan for the future when one's desires are the future.

[calculatedfire]

People must be many things to survive, and no one can be all of them. A man may be a strong fighter, but he will eventually fall ill and need a doctor, or he will need food, or a shelter.

Victory does not always go to the strong, but mainly to the skilled.

[firstofthefallen]

When I say strength, I do not mean solely physical strength. To be skilled is necessary to ge strong as well.

[calculatedfire]

Learning how to deal with others is a skill.

[firstofthefallen]

I agree. It is.

[calculatedfire]

How do you define that?

[firstofthefallen]

One must learn how to cope with other people. To know who is worth one's attention, and who is not. To know what is worth reacting to, and what is not.

[calculatedfire]

One can find value in people that is not immediately apparent.

[firstofthefallen]

And with that I agree.

This does not mean I should help them solely to ensure they might reach that value, or it might be clear. Rather, they are needed to make sure of this themselves.

[calculatedfire]

If you do not help others, no one has a reason to help you.

[firstofthefallen]

I have no need for the help of others.

[calculatedfire]

At this time.

[firstofthefallen]

Or most times.

[calculatedfire]

But, not all times?

[firstofthefallen]

Only once have I given someone true aid, and received their aid in turn.

And the once was enough.

[calculatedfire]

You also gain enemies by refusing to take others into account.

[firstofthefallen]

Enemies will always be with each person.

A few more makes little difference.

[calculatedfire]

Depending on the strength of the enemy, a single enemy more is sufficient.

[firstofthefallen]

On that I will agree.

But there are few who've eer had the power to challenge me. And most have come to my cause, or to the other cause I don't find vulgar.]

[In some iterations of the universes he's occupied. He's also gone through the versions where they side with Law and he dies, but he feels no reason to state that.]

[calculatedfire]

Again, that does not mean never.

[firstofthefallen]

And I agree.

If you think I don't realize there will come a day where I will meet an insurmountable enemy, you're mistaken.

And they will kill me. Just as the strong has the right over the weak to do.