Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Sluggy Related Forums » Reactions




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:16 pm 
Offline
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:04 am
Posts: 10
Plot thread ... resolved!

Oasis should wander the world as a clown-acrobat, making children laugh with her knife-throwing antics!

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:58 pm 
Offline
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:39 am
Posts: 590
Spirantz wrote:
I think we can agree that she was not considered innocent after the spaceship blowing up incident.

I wonder if Pete blew her up to restore the possibility of her being an innocent to Chaz.

Somehow I don't believe that will last though. Hah!


The body she is in did not blow up the spaceship. Does it follow the body , or the mind that controls the body?

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:56 pm 
Offline
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 4:50 pm
Posts: 1294
Spirantz wrote:
I think we can agree that she was not considered innocent after the spaceship blowing up incident.

I wonder if Pete blew her up to restore the possibility of her being an innocent to Chaz.

Somehow I don't believe that will last though. Hah!


Still not sure that innocence of Oasis herself is what Chaz actually judges.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:00 pm 
Offline
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:00 am
Posts: 1493
Website: http://econniff.blogspot.com/
Location: Just outside the city limits
Spirantz wrote:
I think we can agree that she was not considered innocent after the spaceship blowing up incident.

I wonder if Pete blew her up to restore the possibility of her being an innocent to Chaz.

Somehow I don't believe that will last though. Hah!

Wouldn't matter. She was innocent because everything she did was a consequence of her (literal) programming. Blowing up that spaceship was the first decision she made on her own. No amount of 'reboot's would make her satellite brain innocent again, save a full memory wipe. Which isn't what happens when she reboots anyway.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:12 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 9:56 am
Posts: 291
Location: East of the West, west of the East, north of the South, south of the North Pole.
Sotanaht wrote:
Zillatain wrote:
So... Should the world be happy for her or afraid of her?

I'm still stuck on afraid FOR her.

Who wants to be happy with her? ;-)

On a more serious note, I'm sure the world would be afraid of her if it would become widely known what she is – even if she would turn out ever so nice and well-behaved. There are always plenty of people who are ready to fear anyone they perceive as different. If they also believe that the other is powerful in some way, then they can become quite murderous.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 3:42 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 1586
Location: aboard the Fool's Folly
All I know is, I got to panel #4, and suddenly "I'm Free" by The Who popped into my head, and now it won't go away.

"I'm free
I'm free
And freedom tastes of reality"

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:37 pm 
User avatar
Online
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:44 am
Posts: 1161
Yodimus_Prime wrote:
Spirantz wrote:
I think we can agree that she was not considered innocent after the spaceship blowing up incident.

I wonder if Pete blew her up to restore the possibility of her being an innocent to Chaz.

Somehow I don't believe that will last though. Hah!

Wouldn't matter. She was innocent because everything she did was a consequence of her (literal) programming. Blowing up that spaceship was the first decision she made on her own. No amount of 'reboot's would make her satellite brain innocent again, save a full memory wipe. Which isn't what happens when she reboots anyway.


Can a satellite contain the essence of innocence though? Or does it just implant memories into a fresh, innocent new body with each rebirth? Hmmm.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:35 pm 
Offline
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 7:32 pm
Posts: 910
Location: under a pile of papers
Rombobjörn wrote:
Sotanaht wrote:
Zillatain wrote:
So... Should the world be happy for her or afraid of her?

I'm still stuck on afraid FOR her.

Who wants to be happy with her? ;-)

I like this idea!

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:12 pm 
Senior Community Staff
Senior Community Staff
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:07 pm
Posts: 5345
Location: Someplace other than where I am.
You know, Oasis could form her own religion. She can't be killed and she can smite the unbelievers.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:24 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:25 am
Posts: 390
Location: Please stay away from my carotid.
These two strips reminded me of the ancient Stoic argument that you are free if you live as you wish, and that someone who lives in error fails that condition; thus, no one who is evil is free.

I think they would mostly approve of what she has chosen to do here (those guys were pretty big fans of removing the desire for things you can’t have; on the other hand, they also liked forthrightness). Of course, I don’t know what kind of life she will lead from now on, but I like to hope that she, having had a, ah, taste of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, will choose good to what extent it is possible.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:34 am 
Offline
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 7:32 pm
Posts: 910
Location: under a pile of papers
BRPXQZME wrote:
These two strips reminded me of the ancient Stoic argument that you are free if you live as you wish, and that someone who lives in error fails that condition; thus, no one who is evil is free.

I think they would mostly approve of what she has chosen to do here (those guys were pretty big fans of removing the desire for things you can’t have; on the other hand, they also liked forthrightness). Of course, I don’t know what kind of life she will lead from now on, but I like to hope that she, having had a, ah, taste of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, will choose good to what extent it is possible.


Your comment made me think of this quote from Marcus Aurelius' Meditations:
When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural."
I wonder if Oasis and Sasha, "sister's" could come to this point.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:07 am 
User avatar
Online
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:44 am
Posts: 1161
randomlanguage wrote:
BRPXQZME wrote:
These two strips reminded me of the ancient Stoic argument that you are free if you live as you wish, and that someone who lives in error fails that condition; thus, no one who is evil is free.

I think they would mostly approve of what she has chosen to do here (those guys were pretty big fans of removing the desire for things you can’t have; on the other hand, they also liked forthrightness). Of course, I don’t know what kind of life she will lead from now on, but I like to hope that she, having had a, ah, taste of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, will choose good to what extent it is possible.


Your comment made me think of this quote from Marcus Aurelius' Meditations:
When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural."
I wonder if Oasis and Sasha, "sister's" could come to this point.


How do they define error regarding uncontrollable influenced actions? If someone believes their action to be just, relatively speaking, they are free. I doubt that Oasis has any regrets, as you suggest.
Have her other actions (that she could choose) ever really been in error? Not according to Chaz. But the memory of having committed so many atrocities under another’s influence would certainly forever weight me down. I would never feel free of them, even if my hand was influenced.

Randomlanguage - to clarify, same mind = both human, and possessing a share of the divine = children of the gods?
Hmm. Wasn’t he a big persecutor of christians? Lol. To obstruct each other may be unnatural, but it also seems to be human nature — regardless of what he says!

I wonder how he justified that. By not considering them humans? Or just hypocrisy?

Top 
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ] 

Board index » Sluggy Related Forums » Reactions


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: