Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27677820-20160131035943/@comment-27677820-20160224235511

Thunderwolfx17



I can see you're very passionate about your argument. I can respect that. What I can’t respect though, Is these Damn random Words with Capital letters At their Start. Quite annoying friend. I’ll look past it though, because you actually have some interesting stuff to say.



1. I disagree absolutely and wholeheartedly. I answered a similar question to this in a different forum. Here’s a quote from Flowey himself. “With their (the monsters’) souls and the humans’ together, I will achieve my REAL FORM.” What he’s saying in this line is it was the monster souls alone that allowed him to go into his form again. Believe me, I tried very hard to find some evidence that it was love or something that made him want to go into his form again, but that just ain’t the case. Oh well, there goes the possible canosity of Dreamer Reborn



2. I’m not trying to say that it wasn’t selfless of him. I thought I made that very clear in the main body when I said it was a “noble sacrifice, there’s no way to turn it around and say ‘it’s actually because he wanted destroy humanity and everything you care for’.” The problem was though (as I go on to say later in the body as well) that it wasn’t complete selflessness that motivated him to do it, but preservation of his goodness, self loathing, not being able to go back and other assorted whatnot. I very easily could have just written “see the end of paragraph 3” instead of writing a real response to this point, but that would just be rude.



3. Yet again, I feel as though this point was addressed in the main body. In the second paragraph I say “You could argue fairly that Flowey wasn’t really Asriel because he couldn’t feel, he was just acting the way anyone else would, which is true to a certain extent.” I’m not blaming him for his actions as a flower, but his actions after he can feel love again. I made a very clear and specific point not to blame him for his transgressions as a flower during this piece. People always jump to the assumption that I’m trying to communicate this point, but on the contrary I completely agree with him not being able to blamed for his actions as a flower.



<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#efefef;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">4. This seems a lot like the point you’re trying to make in your third argument, but with different words. I’ll restate my answer to number three, but with different words. How Asriel acts in a strange situation can’t define his “true self”, like you say. How he acts once he’s back in a normal situation (feels emotion and has a body) is a whole different story.

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;">

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#efefef;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">5. I’m starting to see a theme here. Again, see the answers to numbers three and four. I don’t consider what Flowey did to be adherently wrong, or that he should’ve been expected to act any differently. Whether or not what he did is wrong in a moral sense is not of consequence.

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;">

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#efefef;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">6. This is extremely annoying. Again, this is a “Flowey can’t be considered bad because he couldn’t think straight response”. I’d like to make it clear yet again that I don’t blame Flowey for his transgressions and make a specific point never to blame him for his transgressions during the piece. Why people always assume I do, is beyond me. This whole piece is about his actions after he could feel love again, not while he was a flower. To restate, I completely agree with your points in 3, 4, 5, and 6 yet none of them conflict with my argument.

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;">

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#efefef;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">7. It happened again. See responses to 3, 4, 5, and 6. I don’t consider Asriel to be anything but a good person, just that he could never go back to being wholly good again.

<span style="font-size:13.3333px;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(239,239,239);font-weight:400;white-space:pre-wrap;">To wrap up: Every single point you make besides #1 was answered in the main body. Not only that, you automatically jumped to the conclusion that I blame Asriel for his actions as Flowey as well, when I never say this once during the piece. This is really peeving me off if you can’t tell. I’m adding this to the main body now, so people don’t get the wrong idea in the future.