4 ms·
This may be true, but it invites escalation. Ender's Game revolved around this philosophy from what I can remember, and in the end..well...I won't spoil it if y
by Avicebron 4y ago
This may be true, but it invites escalation. Ender's Game revolved around this philosophy from what I can remember, and in the end..well...I won't spoil it if you haven't read it or watched the movie. but betting on preventing future aggression != guaranteed peace.
- jimmygrapes 4y agoIt's been awhile since I read the book(s) or watched the movie, but wasn't one of the core philosophical tenets underlying Ender's... specialness... the fact that he was ruthless in revenge? In the sense of "I may not be the one to start a fight, but I will certainly ensure that my response to aggression is so thorough that no further aggression is possible." Granted the initial 3 sequel books were large tomes about the corresponding guilt, repentance, and consequences stemming from that initial idea.
- Avicebron 4y agofocusing on the consequences, it would be a very difficult earth to live on if a a response (the gp's point) was that using violence/punishment/retribution to stop further aggression was rational. I agreed that in the context of pure overwhelming aggression it might be possible (ender's game), but I doubt we would have gotten very far as a species or a planet if everyone followed that mentality with each other.
- XorNot 4y agoThe whole point of that book was that Ender was bred, taught and programmed to think that way and that it was wrong - it accomplished nothing. Even Ender himself realises this - and wouldn't have done it if he wasn't playing a game.