At last I reached the last episode of the seventh season of Game of Thrones! I want to focus here on something fallacious that the character Cersei says, and, intriguingly, something that not only logic but also the series narrative itself rejects--there will be mild spoilers below.
When negotiating with Jon Snow (season seven, episode seven), who was raised by Lord Ned Stark, Queen Cersei Lannister says that she knows that Ned Stark's son will be honest and thus that she will accept his word if he agrees to a certain promise. Ned Stark, one of the only serious moral deontologists in all seven current seasons of Game of Thrones, was certainly an honest and consistent person, refusing to allow circumstances or estimated consequences to affect his moral decisions. He was one of the relatively few non-utilitarian ethicists in the show. And, yes, Jon Snow likewise proves to be a very consistent deontological ethicist, the objections of others not keeping him from doing at least what he thinks is right. But this does not come about simply because Jon was raised by Ned. Cersei assumes that the son will be like the father.
Ironically, Cersei's own son refutes her assumption! Her child Tommen Lannister was nothing like Cersei, who repeatedly affirms that she cares only for herself and for several family members, and who repeatedly uses whatever methods bring her satisfaction, whether that means charging her brother Tyrion with a regicide he did not commit without evidence or authorizing the prolonged private torture of a personal enemy or some other atrocity. She admits to doing things only because they feel good to her, including her incestuous deeds. Being the mother of her own son Tommen, even if she did not recognize the illogicality of what she said about Jon she still had experiences living in a city ruled by a son who was not selfish like her! Tommen was gentle and actually expressed interest in being a good ruler. Even if she did not consult the illumination of deductive reasoning, she has personal experience that disproves her assumption about Jon Snow.
It is true that in a hereditary monarchy, like the one of King's Landing (the city the Lannister family rules from), a throne and title get passed on to a child without any preemptive guarantee that the child will be just, rational, and righteous as opposed to unjust, irrational, and cruel. Even in the Biblical accounts of 1 and 2 Kings one can see that there is absolutely no connection between the righteousness or depravity of someone's parents and what that person will do or become. Good kings or queens can follow wicked ones and wicked ones can follow good ones. This, of course, does not mean that monarchy itself is either good or evil, it is only further proof that there is nothing sinful or obligatory about monarchy [1]; it is solely how it is used that makes a particular monarchy good or evil, for the basic concept of a monarchy is morally neutral, as I've demonstrated in a separate post. But a just reign can lead to a tyrannical one, and vice versa, with there being no way for someone with my epistemic limitations to know in advance what the outcome will be.
We do not have to be like our parents, and we should not be treated in a certain way just because our parents did or didn't do something. Justice is treating each individual as he or she deserves, not as his or her parents deserve (Deuteronomy 24:16). This is why it is absolutely idiotic to think highly or lowly of a person because of his or her familial background. Absolutely nothing--nothing at all--about the intellectual stability, moral character, or personality of a person follows because the parents were or weren't a certain way. To think otherwise is to embrace a blatant non sequitur fallacy.
Although Game of Thrones gives many examples of people who are atrociously depraved by Christian standards (seriously, fuck every person in real life who is anything like a great deal of them), it does also give examples of how one's parentage does not determine one's actions, beliefs, or degree of ethical goodness. This certainly means that no one will by necessity be good or rational because of the goodness or rationality of either parent. But it also means, very importantly, that no one will by necessity be a monster just because his or her parents were vile. With Jon Snow, Cersei made a lucky guess.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-moral-theology-of-monarchy.html
No comments:
Post a Comment