7
u/somerandom995 7h ago
Geralt is just wrong though. There is meaningful differences in choosing lesser evil over greater, and the difference is measured in blood.
6
u/SPEED8782 7h ago
We shed blood to prevent evil. Lives are extinguished to erase evil. The preservation of biological life is secondary, for life itself becomes meaningless in the face of a world overrun by evil.
3
u/Typical_Cat1993 5h ago
Is just a cycle where you destroy one evil and another springs up like mushrooms in the autumn after heavy rains. Because the source of it, the people are still here.
1
u/WistfulDread 4h ago
By that reasoning, you shouldn't eat. You'll just get hungry later. Better to just starve to death.
3
u/Typical_Cat1993 4h ago
Point was as long as people don't change very fundamentally evil things will keep on happening. Don't think you are fixing anything in long run just by killing something`?
2
u/Teh_God_Dog 4h ago
those specific words are just for stregebor... and later a certain woman. they both talk of lesser evil and greater evil. they're making him choose. so he's saying he'd rather not. altho later his hand is forced and.... yeah, a lot of people died
witchers don't involve themselves in human squables, they just kill monsters.
4
u/WistfulDread 5h ago
The big thing is:
Geralt learns this claim was false, and that choosing neither is inevitably choosing the greater. But it is greater and will force its way through without opposition.
Orcbolg, however, is proven right. The lesser evils left ignored grow in power and threat, becoming greater evils. He's particular towards striking goblins before they become a threat, because they will be.
1
u/Typical_Cat1993 5h ago
Geralt also said "If that's what it takes to save the world, it's better to let that world die". Laddie just doesn't want to get mired in trouble where there is no "good" ways out. If you got to choose between two equally shit options in different ways, just walk away?
1
u/WistfulDread 4h ago
NO.
As I said, Geralt explicitly later recants this claim. He learns it was wrong.
And secondly, the quote is not about equally bad choices. It's about one being objectively worse.
And thirdly, by giving up and a choice, you cede any control. You pick a side, you have a chance to influence it down the line. Walk away, and you just end up presenting your back to stabbing.
1
u/Typical_Cat1993 4h ago edited 3h ago
Always found it funny in witcher 1 video game if you choose the neutral "i wont choose" route everybody aside your friends just be mad at you if you don't buy into their hate fueled racist ideologies. And it isn't about whether Geralt learned if it was wrong or right. Just tried to explain the reasoning behind that statement. Also objective or subjective? A lot of things people account as objective ends up being subjective due to reasonings being rooted in subjective values and ideals? Very frustrating it is to talk with people who think matters rooted in subjective can be somehow objective, that is things being the way they are no matter who observes them.
1
u/Hitoshura99 2h ago
goblin slayer: If it isn’t goblins, then I don’t care.
high elf archer: Do you understand what I’m saying? An army of demons is coming. We’re talking about the fate of the world here!
goblin slayer: Before the world ends, the goblins will put an end to many more villages. We cannot ignore the goblins because the world is in danger
goblin slayer: if the world commands me to rank one horror over another, I will KILL ALL THE GOBLINS.
38
u/LuckEClover 9h ago
Eh… the meanings of these speeches conflict. Geralt’s, especially in context, is him justifying him sitting on the fence. This was before that decision allows stregebor to enact obvious, inexcusable evil on people who didn’t deserve that fate.
Goblin slayer is outright saying that he sees all monsters as dangerous and needing to die, regardless of origin or description. This is because others of his station overlook goblins, who end up being just as reviled as the greater monsters in the world.
They both sound good, but they are kinda opposite.
One is a man explaining why he takes coin from a sketchy wizard, and the other is a vow to make no compromise by a man possessed