Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-34762984-20180927183143/@comment-34762984-20181001161538

TheHumanAmbassador wrote: S.shipley wrote:

TheHumanAmbassador wrote: Yep. But as I said, not that far on the scale. They ARE evil, but they have their motivations. I'd say they're at around Flowey-level. ..Which happens to be yet another parallel, they're both SOULless beings of evil that had motivations to take them there. One just takes a more clever and maniupative tactic than the other..

Their reasons are also eerily similar to the possible reasons you'd want to play through the Genocide Route-The few reasons Flowey left out, Chara embodies-The gaining of power, to further their own goals... Okay, there definitely seems to be something I'm missing here.. What do you mean not that far on the scale? Are you referring to Chara? Your beliefs about them? Mine? And didn't you say I went so far off the Yang side that I reached nothing but white? Chara's not that far on the Anti-villain scale based on my take. They're far closer to the villain side. Like Flowey. But technically, if they're not pure evil, they can be considered an anti-villain.

Yes, I did say that. It didn't look like your Chara had any evilness to it whatsoever-That they were a pure angel. Just like the Chara Defense Squad, but WORSE, because they at least argue Chara turned even in Genocide. (You're better than them, though, because they later contradict themselves, and you don't.)

I believe the Yin I finally found in your take was that they'd ruin your ending out of spite, even if you actually changed. ..Or somethong like that, I'm not really sure. We're in agreement about a lot of stuff, it's Chara's morality that is mainly different, we both agree about their main actions, at least from Frisk's perspective. even what's not said directly (like Chara betraying Frisk with the destruction of the world, and how yes, they WANT Post-Geno Pacifist specifically.. Actually, we only agree there once Genocide's finished.) I still consider your side to be more Yang than even the CDS though, seeing as "never evil" is more Yang than "evil until you corrupt them". I think that's probably what kickstarted that comment to begin with, actually. I still don't know quite what it is that makes your Chara not perfectly good, but I have an idea... The gist of my argument is that THEY WERE NEVER YOUR PARTNER, NOT THAT THEY WERE NEVER EVIL. Just because they don't cooperate with you willingly doesn't mean that they not accountable for anything. There was a big quote that I made in this theory and that was "Fulfilling Justice doesn't justify how it's fulfilled." They encourage you to commit wrong despite the fact they know it's wrong, and the way they provide text that suggests you kill the monsters you confront (i.e. "Not worth talking to" and "In my way") shows that not even the innocence of the victims and whatever love they had for their family is going to hold them back. They let their hatred of the guilty overcome their love of the innocent. Why is this theory called the Anti-Hero Hypothesis and not the Hero Hypothesis? Just take a look at the definition of what an Anti-Hero is:

Although antiheroes may sometimes do the right thing, it is not always for the right reasons, often acting primarily out of self-interest or in ways that defy conventional ethical codes.”

Just because their intent to get after you for the Geno Run seems noble doesn't mean that they're excused of whatever tactics they use to fulfill it.

I hope this clears things up for you.

I eagerly await your response.