This post specifically goes over the actions of Hermes, Emet-Selch, and Venat relative to Zenos's words. Coincidentally relating to Omega and their question of who was justified between the three. I am also not implying that I am choosing sides either, as personally I find all four characters flawed.
There was a piece of dialogue made by Zenos as he was speaking to Jullus during Endwalker 6.0.
Hermes's question for the purpose of existence and the meaning of life is addressed, as something that "must be gleamed by you and you alone" instead of having to look for answers beyond.
Emet-Selch's actions are also addressed when Zenos mentions how duty, honor and morality are "all constructs of convenience, when put to proof." Emet-Selch's motivations of upholding a duty (despite growing tired by the end to invite his own downfall) was also one of his motivations to continue the atrocities such as the Rejoinings.
Zenos also addresses Venat's actions regarding motives that would no longer be resented depending on the outcome, that those that do should be wearing a beast's skin. If Venat/Hydaelyn had to force others into suffering and torment, split the Source into 10 and 3 reflections, regardless of the end result of her actions, is that still grounds that her actions were justified?
I mostly bring this up as I find it fitting that after everything that happened at Elpis, immediately after Zenos gives some food for thought relating to the main players involved. That despite all these three Ancients having made tremendous actions that range from noble to despicable, then does it really matter who was right or wrong? Or does it matter who was justified as Omega puts it?
As an aside, please do not think that I'm a Zenos-stan or something, that he has an overall "point" and is thus "right", as I am very much aware that what Alisaie says in response to what he says and she has a point as much as he does to an extent.
submitted by /u/L1LE1
[link] [comments]
Continue reading...
There was a piece of dialogue made by Zenos as he was speaking to Jullus during Endwalker 6.0.
Hermes's question for the purpose of existence and the meaning of life is addressed, as something that "must be gleamed by you and you alone" instead of having to look for answers beyond.
Emet-Selch's actions are also addressed when Zenos mentions how duty, honor and morality are "all constructs of convenience, when put to proof." Emet-Selch's motivations of upholding a duty (despite growing tired by the end to invite his own downfall) was also one of his motivations to continue the atrocities such as the Rejoinings.
Zenos also addresses Venat's actions regarding motives that would no longer be resented depending on the outcome, that those that do should be wearing a beast's skin. If Venat/Hydaelyn had to force others into suffering and torment, split the Source into 10 and 3 reflections, regardless of the end result of her actions, is that still grounds that her actions were justified?
I mostly bring this up as I find it fitting that after everything that happened at Elpis, immediately after Zenos gives some food for thought relating to the main players involved. That despite all these three Ancients having made tremendous actions that range from noble to despicable, then does it really matter who was right or wrong? Or does it matter who was justified as Omega puts it?
As an aside, please do not think that I'm a Zenos-stan or something, that he has an overall "point" and is thus "right", as I am very much aware that what Alisaie says in response to what he says and she has a point as much as he does to an extent.
submitted by /u/L1LE1
[link] [comments]
Continue reading...