Like I said before - I definitely love Anders and I do understand why he did what he did, but I don't think it's comparable to a man stealing medicine for his wife. In the case of theft, which is objectively still wrong (I'm a bit harsh I'll admit), it doesn't directly threaten the life/physical well being of the pharmacist and the pharmacist is, in fact, directly complicit in the conflict that motivates the criminal act (so I would view that as along the lines of Anders blowing up a garrison full of sleeping Templars - still questionable under a strict application of just war theory, but given the nature of the mage/templar conflict, passable). What Anders actually did is closer to a man with a sick wife who holds the pharmacist's daughter hostage until the pharmacist gives him the medicine - the victim of the action changes the heinousness of the crime dramatically even if the motivation remains the same. More meta-analytically, I think Anders actions are supposed to be considered heinous and indefensible (albeit sympathetic) because those actions were representative of how far Anders and Justice have come since Awakening as characters - Justice, at least, is no longer its original self, but rather Vengeance. I know a lot of players of Bioware games have vengeance-boners, but actions borne out of a wish for vengeance are fundamentally destructive rather than constructive and only serve to perpetuate and escalate conflict, to the detriment of all parties.
Calling Anders an out and out terrorist, however, isn't really correct either. He commits an act of terror - I'm not budging on that point - but I don't think that equates him with people like Osama Bin Laden or Hitler (also someone who commits acts of terror under my definition). Terrorism isn't Anders' primary source of recourse and he is arguably driven to it by a combination of aggressive violations of just means by the opposing side as well as mental imbalance/possession (a spirit like Justice is much less likely to understand the nuances between right motivations and right means) - I generally belong to the camp that believes that Anders is no longer fully responsible for his actions by the time that he has blown up the Chantry.
Thank you~ I just wanted to say Solas looks really pretty in that shot!
True. I wasn't really comparing Anders to the man stealing medicine, but more so that we all view the world in a different way when it comes to our morals and I guess am much more liberal when it comes to my morals. I do believe some things are wrong, but I also can understand when "wrong" doesn't matter anymore. For example I think killing someone is "wrong", but if I am defending myself and it is either that guy or me; the guy is going to die. I'm not going to be thinking about if he had a family or what made him want to attack me. I'm simply going to protect myself and that's selfish, but humankind if selfish when it comes down to it.
It might seem that I am coming across a little harsh towards you, but I'm not targeting you or anything that. I just really love having logical discussions with logical people!
We all have different view points on characters and that applauds the writers who made those characters, so I think we are going to have to agree to disagree...even though we aren't really disagreeing all that much. Lol!
Retour en haut
