Since Fridays are designated for the remembrance of the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us, and that of God through him, I want to sacrifice some of my time every Friday to do some thinking about moral dilemmas and how God would want us to handle our daily life problems.This blog considers dilemmas from a Catholic perspective; any opinions and questions can be sent to this blog's askbox! Suggestions for topics for future blog posts are also welcome! Also, if there are any triggers that you as a follower would like to be tagged, I would be happy to tag them; just send an ask!
Spare Time: How Does Undertale Make You a Better Person?
(This is a super long post about Undertale's game design; it has no spoilers, except for how to win the Dogi fight toward the beginning of the game.)
This week, we take a look at Undertale, and how the battle system encourages peaceful and positive virtues. Hopefully, this post fills you with determination.
So I'm currently doing a sort of research project where I'm looking at video games and exploring the game design to see how to incorporate virtue into game design aside from the story, and Undertale is really making me happy right now.
I'm currently playing Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, Mario and Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story, and Mario and Luigi: Dream Team; all three of these are RPGs where the focus is going around and destroying enemies to gain experience and fight bosses. It's essentially the normalization of murder, and while I don't think that it has any serious negative effects (especially in the case of Mario games), it probably doesn't have any positive effects either.
So I started playing these games as pacifist runs, where you do as little damage as possible. If there's a boss you have to fight or something, there's no way around it, but the challenge is seeing if you're capable of progressing without the experience. It seems pretty doable for these games, but what I'm noticing is that these pacifist runs aren't fun. There's no reward given by the game for doing things peacefully. Of course, it's building virtue regardless, but you have to choose to do the pacifist run, which isn't that common.
Then there's Undertale.
Undertale is an RPG that pretty much encourages not killing enemies. There's an innovative battle system that, while having a 'Fight' option, also includes 'Act' and 'Mercy' options. The 'Act' option lets you do various things to the enemy, including complimenting, flirting, and various other things (it depends on who you're fighting), and the 'Mercy' option lets you either Spare the enemy (essentially skipping your turn) or Flee the fight. If the enemy's name is yellow, then Sparing the enemy will end the fight peacefully, and it's really satisfying. Also great about the game is that while there is the option to do a Genocide Run (fighting everything like a generic RPG run), the best of the game's multiple endings is the ending of the True Pacifist Run (I have yet to learn what distinguishes this from a normal Pacifist Run, but I figure I'll find out soon enough). With Undertale, I don't even think it's accurate to call them 'enemies'; I only say 'enemies' here for lack of a better word.
So why is it more fun to Pacifist Run Undertale than other RPGs? Because Undertale has the Pacifist Run planned into the game; most RPGs plan around combat and killing enemies and don't even think about pacifist runs when considering the game as a whole. What makes the RPGs I've been playing unfun to Pacifist Run is mainly that when you flee a fight, the enemy stays in the field and can easily come back to try to fight you, and it becomes a waste of both the money lost while fleeing and the time trying to avoid re-encountering enemies. (For the record, the RPGs I've been playing have all been Mario RPGs, so there's bound to be similarities not included in other RPGs. But I expect these similarities to be found in other RPGs as well, at least in the combat focus and the re-encountering problem.)
But Undertale plans around the Pacifist Run; earlier I pointed out that the Act option changes depending on the enemy, and that's actually really important to the gameplay. If you're doing a Pacifist Run, the game kind of becomes a puzzle, trying to figure out what actions you have to do to turn the enemy's name yellow so you can Spare them.
Probably my favorite so far is these two dog guardians, called the Dogi, that you fight; the Act options in the fight include Pet, Roll Around, and "Re-Sniff". They immediately dislike your smell, but if you Roll Around in the snow and dirt, then have the dogs Re-Sniff you, they'll find your smell nice; after this, you can Pet them, and then their names turn yellow so you can Spare them. This fight was fun, and I did no damage whatsoever to the dogs. The ever-changing Act options make it fun to find out how to successfully Spare the "enemies". Also, when you Spare them, you don't re-encounter the same enemies over again, which makes the Mercy options even more appealing. The system's kind of like Pokémon, where the encounters are random, regardless of when you flee from other Pokémon.
Now, I’m still just beginning my playthrough of Undertale, so I might do another post having to do with Undertale once I finish the game, or progress further, at the least.
Undertale became super popular after it was released, and that makes me really happy. I'm not sure if any content in the game is questionable, as I haven't played too far into it yet, but so far it's a game with a great story, a system that really pushes not killing enemies, and some amazing music and humor. I can't say from how much of the game I've played, but Undertale may be my new favorite game, and I'm glad there's a popular game that embraces the virtue of mercy; it being the Year of Mercy makes this even better to notice, too!
As always, thanks for taking the time to read this! If you have any comments or questions, I’d be happy to answer anything. Reply to this post or send an ask to the Friday Night Questions blog, and I’ll respond! Thanks again, and may you have a Merry Christmas, or Happy Holidays if you don’t celebrate Christmas!
Hey guys, so my Fridays have a gotten a tad busier lately; this blog’s still going to be running, it just won’t be posting every week anymore (you’ll notice I missed a post for two weeks ago and for this week). I hope to at least do a post every other Friday, and if there’s any sort of schedule change, I’ll let you guys know. Have a great night, and may God bless you!
God in Gaming: How is Tomodachi Life Like Real Life?
(Photo Credit: SkyRider3217 on the Tomodachi Life Wikia)
This week, I take a look at Tomodachi Life and compare it to God’s love for His people. That yakisoba you just fed your Mii is about to take on a whole new meaning.
I recently started playing Tomodachi Life again after a few months, and I remembered a big part of the reason that I enjoy this game so much: there’s such a strong parallel between your actions as the player and how God looks at the world. (Keep in mind while reading this that I’m fairly sure this parallel is unintentional, though I can’t say for sure. Because of this, many of the points I raise are going to have breaks in the parallel, and that’s to be expected.) These points also get stronger as the post goes on, so bear with me through the weaker parallels.
That being said, let’s look at the overall premise of the game, for the sake of those who are unfamiliar with Tomodachi Life. (Those of you who know the game well can skip these two paragraphs.) The game can be seen as a watered-down version of The Sims; you have an island that you begin to populate with Mii islanders, starting with a Mii of yourself. Not only do you get to modify the Miis’ appearances, but you can also modify their voices and personalities. You add more Miis, and as the island population grows, you unlock various locations on the island like the Food Mart, the Fountain, and the Amusement Park, some of which have events based on the actual time of day.
The Miis can interact with one another, and they can form lasting friendships and even fall in love, get married, and have kids. As the player, your role is to solve islanders’ Problems, which can range from feeding them to resolving arguments between Miis. Upon solving problems, your islanders can give you gifts that can either be given to other Miis or sold at the Pawn Shop, and their own Happiness level will go up. When their Happiness level is high enough, they’ll level up, and you can give them free gifts, catchphrases, and so on.
I could go on so much longer about how the game works, but I’ll move on and explain anything new as I go. So as to keep true to the blog’s name, I’ll make my point in the form of a question: How does Tomodachi Life parallel God’s view of the world?
There’s so many places I could start, so we’ll start at the game’s beginning. After naming your island, the first thing you do is create a Mii of yourself to live on the island. How your islanders address you and your Mii is interesting: let’s say your name is Roxie. So you make your Roxie Mii and put her on the island, and you add a bunch of more islanders. If one of your islanders is talking about your Mii, they’ll refer to her as “Roxie”. When they’re addressing you, however, they call you “Roxie’s look-alike”. This is probably the flimsiest of the parallels here, but when I play the game, I see it as me, the player, acting as God, and my Mii acting as Jesus. Think about it: your Mii is the first one you create (“I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages”), and it’s supposed to be you (“consubstantial with the Father”). Simultaneously, though, your Mii acts exactly like the other Miis, mirroring Jesus’ simultaneously being God and human. Again, this parallel works the least: your Mii isn’t different from the others in any way, and there’s neither a game mechanic paralleling the Holy Spirit nor a parallel to Jesus’ actual story (being born of the Virgin Mary, performing miracles, etc.). This is basically a nifty side point to the main idea that the player acts as God in the parts that do match the parallel.
Let’s look at how your Miis develop. They’ll tell you when they’re hungry or have a Problem, but you can still interact with them in small ways and give them food and gifts regardless of whether or not they have a Problem. Whenever you give them food that they like, their Happiness level will go up, and though they don’t thank you when given food, they do thank you most of the time when you solve a Problem. It seems that you’re the only one who can give Miis food (though sometimes you can look in their stomachs and see food you didn’t give them), and that brings up my first point: you provide for everything that your Miis do. They don’t go to the Food Mart on their own, you give them all of the food that actually fills their stomachs. You also provide them with all of their clothing, and their catchphrases are all written by you. Not only do you act as their creator, but as their ever-present helper as well.
You also are relied on in every issue a Mii has. Whether it’s resolving an argument, giving them food, or helping calm down a crying baby, the Miis always come to you when they’re in trouble. This is ideally how our relationship with God should be; “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.” (John 15:5 NIV) Miis interactions with you as the player act as prayers, and one of the strongest cases of this is when resolving an argument. You’ll enter an angry Mii’s room, and they’ll tell you that they had an argument with someone. You can then tell them to try to make up, and when you do, they respond, “Please help me calm down first!” This is meant to be a gameplay element telling you what to do next, but look at the Mii’s point of view: they’re willing to try to repair the relationship, but they’re asking you to help them calm down before trying to solve the problem. We as God’s followers need to pray to Him in the problems we face, and we need to ask him for the self-control necessary to face adversity with a cool head.
Miis also actively talk to you when they’re not facing trouble. When you visit them and they don’t have a Problem to solve, sometimes they’ll have a little speech bubble you can tap to hear a little tidbit of their personality. Of course, God doesn’t need us to tell Him about ourselves, as he knows us better than we do, but the point is that there’s the choice of the Miis to talk to you in the way we choose to pray to God even when there’s nothing we’re asking for. Sometimes, a Mii’s Problem will just be their wanting to show you a funny face or ramble on to you all about how much they love their Sweethearts. Especially in this last case, Miis like to thank you for what you do for them, and this constant thankfulness is something we should all strive to do more in our lives: “Devote yourselves to prayer, being watchful and thankful.” (Colossians 4:2 NIV)
This last point is based on a very small feature in the game, but it’s one I’d really like to stress as well. Sometimes at the Amusement Park, you’ll have the Tomodachi Quest event, which is a classic-style RPG where 4 randomly selected Miis travel throughout the land to defeat enemies and a final boss (all of which are random Food and Treasure items from the game). When you play, you’ll notice that different Miis have different abilities: some can heal, some can use magic, and so on. The 4 “classes” of fighters are actually dependent on which of the 4 Personality Groups the Mii is sorted into when you create it. Now, why is that important? It’s about vocation.
In 1st Corinthians 12, St. Paul discusses the different gifts and abilities that people are given by God through the Holy Spirit: some have gifts of healing, some receive prophecies, some can speak in tongues, and so on. Common to Christianity is the idea that God gives everyone He creates a unique vocation, dependent on their skills and abilities, and St. Paul stresses how important it is that our gifts are different: “The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I don’t need you!’ And the heat cannot say to the feet, ‘I don’t need you!’ On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor.” (1 Corinthians 12:21-23 NIV)
In my experience playing Tomodachi Quest, I’ve learned that it’s extremely hard to win the game without a healer in your group, but having a party full of healers makes it equally hard. Everyone has a different calling from God, and we need to remember that no matter how small, these callings are all important. This is no excuse to aim lower than we think God is calling us to reach, however. It’s also important to mention that the personality group determines the class of the fighter. Our vocation has strong ties to the unique aspects of our personality, and it will play to those strengths.
And that wraps up the parallels as I see them at the moment; there are probably way more that I haven’t explored, but you get the gist of it. This is what makes Tomodachi Life so great to play; recently, I’ve been playing it when feeling out of touch with God, because it reminds me in a small way how much He cares for us and wants us to become better and more loving people. Tomodachi is the Japanese word for “friend”, and I think the closeness of Miis’ friendships in the game is what brings together this parallel of Tomodachi Life to the Christian life.
Thanks for reading (and congratulations, at that, seeing how long this ended up being); as always, feel free to add on to what I’ve pointed out here or provide any other feedback by replying to this post or sending an ask to Friday Night Questions! If you want to see more, take a look at previous Friday Night Questions posts (Random Acts of Kindness, Scrupulosity and Depression, Why We Have Jails, Snobbery, Sadistic Media, and Witty Humor); have a great day, and may God bless you!
This week gets more positive; I look at a great “random act of kindness” and wonder why this isn’t the norm.
(And I also talk about McDonald’s because I want to talk about food again.)
Check out this story from the Huffington Post; a McDonald’s cashier made the bold decision to shut down his register to go help an elderly man with cerebral palsy eat his food. He went over to help the man cut his food, and to feed him as well. A person in line took a picture and posted it to Facebook, and the post went viral.
Every so often, we see posts like these on social media, and we’re just blown away by how nice people can be. Here’s the question I have: why don’t things like this happen all the time?
The immediate answer here would be “because there are a lot of greedy people”, and to an extent, that’s a valid answer to the question. But why are people greedy? Think about it: whenever we make a decision that isn’t pointless, it’s either good or bad. Why would that decision ever be bad? Bad by definition means we aren’t going to like it, so what motivation is there for bad? Here’s the thing: we always choose what we think is good. Consider the typical “greedy CEO” scenario: Alfred Moneybags, the head of Lots-O’-Cash Inc., has to decide what to do with $1.2 million that the company owns. He can either donate the money to a homeless shelter or keep the money for himself; he decides to greedily keep the money, etc. Why would he not give the money to the shelter? Because he sees keeping the money as good. Maybe he obviously realizes that it’s wrong to keep the money from those who need it, but for him, the good of keeping the money outweighs the general good of donating to the homeless shelter. His personal motto might be success through monetary gain, which leads to flawed ideas like this.
I use the extreme case to point out a flaw that leads to the answer to the above question of why random acts of kindness are so random. The principle is this: people make decisions based on which option provides them with the greatest personal good.
So let’s say you’re the cashier at the McDonald’s; it’s rush hour, and you’re faced with a customer who needs assistance eating. You could take the assumed approach and politely apologize, moving on to the rest of the customers. In this case, it’s seen as a greater good to you because the hassle and risk of helping out the one customer isn’t worth it. The safety and ease of this are the perceived greater good, so therefore, the random act of kindness doesn’t happen.
I might continue more on this tomorrow since it’s getting super late, but for now, I’d be happy to respond to any extra discussion on this topic, especially since I barely scratched the surface! Again, if you want to respond to this, go send a message to the Friday Night Questions ask box! With that being said, may God bless you on your life journey, and may that journey lead you to Heaven!
Adventures in Scrupulosity: Is Jesus Ever Not In Us?
This week, I’m doing Friday Night Questions a bit differently; I’m going to discuss some recent personal troubles with scrupulosity and depression, especially as it applies to Confession and Holy Communion. Pretty serious post today as opposed to the norm, but hopefully it helps those with depression and scrupulosity!
The easiest way to define scrupulosity is as a religious form of OCD. It’s still under debate whether or not it’s actually a form of OCD, but it gets the point across: scrupulous people tend to question every little decision they make and worry about whether or not it’s morally correct or acceptable. For example, things like small arguments with family members that don’t matter that much in the end can easily set off someone’s scrupulosity.
Being Catholic, there are additional aspects to scrupulosity. It’s morally wrong to take Holy Communion (or Eucharist) at Mass if you have on your conscience what’s called a mortal sin: this is a serious sin that the sinner chooses to do out of their own free will with the knowledge of its moral incorrectness. Having mortal sins on our conscience puts us out of a state of grace, which is required of us in order to take Communion.
To be cleared of mortal sin (and venial sins if desired), a Catholic must go to Confession (also called Reconciliation). When Jesus left the Apostles, he gave to them the gift of the Holy Spirit; Simon Peter was instituted as the head of Jesus’ church, and was thus the first Pope. Through expansion of the Catholic Church, Peter passed down the authority of the Holy Spirit to his successors and subordinates within the Church, and this continues to the present day. Ordained priests have the Holy Spirit, which gives them the authority to absolve people of their sins, and this is done in Confession. A person with true regret for their sins and intent to not repeat them, once having confessed those sins to the priest, is absolved by God of their sins, and they are cleared of those sins.
What causes scrupulosity in many Catholics is the fear that something they have done may be a mortal sin that needs to be confessed before their next Communion, as well as other fears regarding Confession and Holy Spirit. In the past week, I’ve had a burst of depression and anxiety due to this, and this week’s big question is this: how do we deal with scrupulosity and depression in our faith?
My story goes like this: my parish has Confessions on Saturday afternoons, and can also be done by appointment. Last week, there were a few mortal sins on my conscience that happened after the scheduled Confession time on Saturday; I couldn’t confess them.So I went to Mass on Sunday and didn’t take Communion (while you can’t take Communion when you’re out of a state of grace, it’s still required to go to Mass every Sunday, unless there’s some other circumstances that are easily Google-able). Communion is such an important aspect of my religious life: it feels like all of my moral strength comes from Communion, as when the bread and wine are presented, they actually become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ being within me is important, and this week has been a rollercoaster ride of sadness for me because I missed out on the Eucharist.
(If you don’t want to read this whole story, go ahead and skip the next two paragraphs, continuing at “Now here’s where I…”.)
The whole week, I was basically stuck in this depression: I wasn’t doing the things I wanted to do, I felt constantly bored, and doing religious things was super stressful for me. I’ve also had a prayer problem where I don’t feel like I’m really talking to God, and instead it feels like I’m just reasoning stuff out without God being there. This was my last week at my house before leaving for college on Friday (today), and part of the orientation scheduled for Friday was a welcome Mass (side note: super excited to be at a Catholic college!). With this in mind, I decided to schedule a Confession with a priest at my church on Wednesday, and planned to go to the morning Mass at my own parish on Thursday so I could have Communion and be in good spirits; the confession went well, and then I got into a small argument with my sister, and I spent the whole night debating whether or not what I said in the argument was big enough to be a mortal sin, and it drove me near the point of breaking down. I ended up actually missing the morning Mass because I woke up late, but the bright side was that I had some more time to think about it. I ended up not considering it to be a mortal sin, and then I did more thinking about stuff, and I realized that in a completely different situation, I feel like I’ve been living this double life where the person I am online is different than who I am. This I still consider to be a mortal sin; I talked to my dad about everything that had been going on with me this week. He has some slightly differing views on Confession, and he feels absolved as he takes Communion, as opposed to needing to take Communion beforehand.
My dad’s big point in the conversation was that I was being too hard on myself; this I know to be true, as there’s no way this depression isn’t partially due to my scrupulosity. But still, I had this mortal sin on my conscience, and we talked about our opinions on Confession, and he told me how passionate he feels when he takes Communion. It was incredible: just talking about the feeling of absolution he gets during Communion made him cry, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen my dad cry before. I still hold to my view on Confession, but I saw a side of my dad I’ve never seen before, and I’m praying that either he comes to accept the true nature of Confession or that the way he handles Communion and absolution is accepted by God. I felt genuinely that I wanted God to bless and protect him, and I finally felt God in that room, at 12:30 AM.
Now here’s where I get into the answer to the question: what can the scrupulous do to combat depression and scrupulosity? When talking with my dad, he pointed this out to me: the cycle I was going through was one of feeling depressed at not feeling God’s presence, then anxiously trying and failing to feel God’s presence, then going back into depression because it wasn’t working out. This cycle doesn’t work. So far, I’ve learned that one of the best ways to get out of this cycle is to try to figure out how God, in all aspects of the Trinity, loves you, because He does, and that’s an undeniable fact. He wants you to succeed in your faith and get past your troubles, telling us multiple times not to worry.
My dad pointed out what my specific problem was: the way I saw Communion, it was like I saw the “amount of Jesus in me” like a gas tank, and that every moment of depression was lowering this gauge, and that every sin I found was taking Jesus farther away from me because of Satan’s tricks, with Communion as the thing that refills this tank. But what my dad showed me was that it’s not like a gas tank at all: Jesus is always within you, and what changes is how much you experience him. What Communion does, from what my experience is teaching me, is strengthen the power of Jesus within you. The depression and sin doesn’t take Jesus away from you, it allows Satan to cloud your vision and makes it harder to see Jesus. But what this means is that Jesus is always inside of you in His entirety. God, in all of His goodness (as God is purely good, with nothing bad at all), is on your side, and he wants to help you fight Satan’s influence, and while Communion is our greatest tool in doing this, we are still capable of it in our depression. It’s better to take Communion (so long as we’re in a state of grace, of course), but when we’re stuck in depression, we have the opportunity to exercise our faith. We have chances to counter the questions Satan asks us and confirm that Jesus is not against us.
(As kind of an obligatory note, I want to say that this nature of Communion is something my dad has suggested to me that has synchronized with me, but I haven’t gone deep enough into learning about my faith to know whether or not this is an aspect of the Eucharist. If you have any information about this, feel free to share it in the askbox here or reply to this post!)
The last thing I want to discuss is scrupulosity itself, and how to combat it and live a truer life. One of the best things to do when fighting scrupulosity is to find yourself a spiritual director; this is a person who you can confide in on scrupulosity issues, as well as general moral issues. Probably the most common advice for the scrupulous is to find a spiritual director (also called a spiritual advisor), and though I don’t have a spiritual director myself, I feel like that’s something that can really improve your scrupulosity. (Here’s a link to a Catholic Answers Forum thread about tips on finding a spiritual director!)
As for dealing with scrupulosity in daily life, I’ve found that this post from the WordPress blog LittlestSouls seems to sum up a lot of the things necessary for handling scrupulosity. (Keep in mind, though, that this post is not infallible; there may be errors of judgment, and some of the advice may not click with you the first time.) The virtues that the post stresses as important are obedience (make sure that your actions follow God’s plans), humility (don’t kid yourself about when you’ve actually sinned), and abandonment (specifically the abandonment of your own desires for those of God). In following these, you can recognize trials and troubles as opportunities to practice your faith, and times to counter Satan’s claim that Jesus is not within you.
This paragraph is basically going to list a few tips and tricks I’ve picked up in my spiritual development. Firstly, keep in mind that all good thoughts come from God, and that all bad thoughts come from Satan. Trust in the good and reject the bad, and don’t stress too much when you’re uncertain about it; confide in someone who can help you sort the uncertain situations. And while it’s important to separate mortal sins from venial sins, it can still be freeing to confess venial sins in your Confession, so don’t be afraid of doing this. If you walk out of the confessional and realize there’s something you forgot to confess, don’t be afraid to go back into the confessional and confess this new sin; the whole point is that you feel sorry for the sin, so there’s no reason to be embarrassed about it. And if it’s after an opportunity for confessions and there are sins you need to confess before taking Communion once again, the best move is to not take Communion, practice your faith from then until your next Confession, and thankfully take Communion at your next Mass. Finally, and I can’t stress this enough, if you’re stuck wondering whether or not a sin is mortal, you can ask your priest during your Confession. I’ve done this several times, and the priest has pretty much always given me sound advice on what to do in these situations.
Hopefully, this helps those of you who deal with scrupulosity; if you want to learn more, please look into help for scrupulosity more! It’s always good to look for help with these kinds of issues, especially when depression plays into it.
As always, thank you so much for reading this week’s blog post, and if you have anything to add, any questions, or any objections to what I’ve said, please don’t hesitate to send an ask to this blog or to reply to this blog post! Here are the links to all previous Friday Night Questions: Witty Humor, Sadistic Media, Snobbery, and Why We Have Jails. Thanks for reading, and may God bless you all!
With Ace Attorney 6 and the Ace Attorney anime being announced recently, I thought I’d take a look at justice according to society through Ace Attorney, and how it compares to true justice. (I know this is super late, sorry guys.)
[Warning: This post contains spoilers for Case 3 of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, as well as the overall plot of Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney. Be warned!]
Ace Attorney is probably my favorite video game series out there; I see it as a weird hybrid of CSI and Law & Order, where the player, as a defense attorney, investigates a murder case, then defends their client in the trial, finding contradictions in the testimonies provided by the prosecution’s witnesses to prove the defendant’s innocence. It’s super fun, and treats the concept of death far more respectfully than Danganronpa, which I discussed in my post on sadistic media two weeks ago.
The cool thing about Ace Attorney is that every case (with an exception or two) hands you a client who is actually innocent, meaning that there’s always some incredibly complicated (and usually ridiculous) explanation for the true nature of the murder. This is the case in Turnabout Samurai, the third case of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, the first game in the series. In this case, action star Jack Hammer, who plays the Evil Magistrate on children’s TV show The Steel Samurai, is murdered, with the prime suspect being the Steel Samurai himself, Will Powers.
As the case continues, it is revealed that producer Dee Vasquez is the true killer; Hammer was a great actor, but five years prior to his murder, he was responsible for the (most likely accidental) death of Manuel, an actor in an upcoming Hammer movie. Manuel was pushed onto a sharp-tipped fence during a fight scene, and died as a result. Global Studios covered up Manuel’s death, but Vasquez, who was there as a witness, used it as blackmail, forcing Hammer into demeaning roles like the Evil Magistrate. Hammer planned to confront and murder Vasquez, but Vasquez fought back in self-defense, killing Hammer the same way Hammer killed Manuel five years before.
During the trial, Vasquez puts up quite the fight, but once she is definitively proven to be the murderer, she calmly backs down and confesses, which is pretty rare for culprits in this series. Though it isn’t really noticeable, after confessing, she isn’t violently persecuted for having committed the murder, which kind of shows the best-case scenario in a murder case. The killer admits it and willingly faces the punishment for their crime, and others acknowledge this and don’t judge them, allowing the killer to make amends and become an overall better person. This last part, to be fair, is something I only assume from the fact that Vasquez wasn’t persecuted, but it still serves to prove my point.
I was originally going to bring up Vasquez’s case to show how not to handle this kind of situation, but I’d honestly forgotten that this was how the case ended, and I’m actually really happy that this is what happened. I feel like this is exactly how God would want this case to end, but now I have to ask the question: does Dee Vasquez deserve to go to prison?
Strictly based on the U.S. legal system, this is actually debatable, as it would have to be questioned whether or not murder in self defense was Vasquez’s only option, or if there was some other way for her to avoid the conflict with Hammer, but we’ll consider the latter, as it creates the worst-case scenario and makes this topic more interesting. Legally, Vasquez would definitely go to prison, assuming she could’ve avoided the conflict somehow, but morally, would prison be necessary as a punishment for her?
To resolve this, I’ll move to a different topic that parallels going to jail to an extent: excommunication from the Catholic Church. Excommunication is when someone is forbidden from taking part in the Sacraments (Holy Eucharist, etc.) due to some grave offense against the Church. An excommunication can be absolved by the Pope, a Bishop, or a priest, depending on the gravity of the offense. According to the Catholic Church, the purpose of excommunication is purely medicinal; the point isn’t to cut the excommunicated person off from the Church completely or to provide a “once-and-for-all” punishment, but rather to encourage that they mend their ways and work to return to the Church; once the excommunication is absolved and all other business is taken care of (reconciliation for the sin that brought on the excommunication, for example), this person is now free to participate in the Sacraments once again. It’s also important to point out that while an excommunicated person is barred from taking part in the Eucharist, they’re still allowed to attend Mass, and they’re actually encouraged to do so, because the whole point of excommunication is to lead the person back to a righteous life.
So what does this have to do with imprisonment? Well, think of the excommunication scenario, but replace an offense against the Church with a criminal offense, and replace excommunication with imprisonment. The purpose of prison should be to try to correct the consciences of criminals; we hear about some people who perform so well while in prison that they are eventually released, and this summarizes that purpose. If that’s the purpose, then in a case like Dee Vasquez’s, even though legally she’d be required to be imprisoned, if at the point that she confesses she accepts the punishment and plans to make amends (the latter of which, again, I would only like to assume Vasquez did), then what? The purpose of prison in this case would be to correct Vasquez’s conscience and lead her to live a better life, but if she’s already in a better place, is that necessary? I’d like to believe not.
But here’s where things get really complicated. As I’m sure you’re probably thinking, the purpose of prison isn’t just to correct people’s consciences; a big part of it is to separate dangerous criminals from society so that they don’t commit their crimes again. This is also a valid purpose of prison; look no further than Turnabout Succession, the fourth and final case of Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney. Attorney Kristoph Gavin was to defend Zak Gramarye in court, and to do so, he requested Drew Misham to forge a piece of evidence for the trial (though the true forger was Drew’s young daughter, Vera). However, Gramarye refused Gavin as his defense attorney, later choosing Phoenix Wright to defend him, and Gavin became furious, deciding to plant the forged evidence on Phoenix so as to lead him to be disbarred.
Gavin’s plan worked, but Gramarye disappeared before the verdict was announced, and Gavin decided to spy on those involved with the case. He set up poisons to kill Drew and Vera Misham to make sure they wouldn’t give him up (though it was 7 years before either of them took the poison, and Vera barely survived her poisoning), and kept a close eye on others involved. 7 years after the Gramarye case (before Drew and Vera took the poison), Gavin found Gramarye in a restaurant and took the opportunity to murder him, blaming it on Phoenix Wright. Gavin was arrested, and was later that year found to also be the one who poisoned the Mishams and killed Drew.
Consider this, then: why should Kristoph Gavin be imprisoned? While trying to correct his behavior is certainly something being in prison could provide Gavin, it’s clear what Gavin’s imprisonment served to do: it prevented him from being a danger to society. Had Gavin not been imprisoned, he could potentially have put many more lives at risk, and being in prison works to prevent that.
So if Dee Vasquez shouldn’t be imprisoned, but Kristoph Gavin should, what exactly are we supposed to do? The biggest problem is the dual purpose of prison: it acts as a correctional facility and a place to house the potentially dangerous, and the second purpose takes over, eliminating the first purpose from our minds. When we hear that someone is in jail, our most common thought is, “Good, horrible people like that should be in jail.” But what we should be doing is hoping that these people honestly correct their ways and encourage them to change for the better rather than rally against them, similar to the purpose of excommunication.
Think of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 5, where he told the crowds this: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:43-45 NIV) While it may be just fine for the people to keep someone dangerous locked in prison, this should only be while this person is a true danger and does not recognize their faults. We shouldn’t put people down for any reason; we should hope that they make amends so that they can once again be a valuable member of society.
Thanks for reading this, everyone; remember, if you have anything to add or see anything amiss with my explanations, don’t hesitate to send an ask to this blog or reply to this post! I’m always looking forward to going more in-depth with these discussions, especially if it’s a fault of my own logic (how can we learn but from our own mistakes?). Also check out previous Friday Night Questions: Witty Jokes, Sadistic Media, and Snobbery! Feel free to also send suggestions for future posts; I’d love to hear what you guys want me to talk about!
With that being said, have a great day, and God bless you!
On Fridays, I tend to give up meat or food I enjoy in general, and today being, well, Friday, I got to thinking about food. I’m super hungry right now.
It got me to thinking about food critics and the purpose of food, and this week, I’ll use that as a bit of a segway into the world of snobbery, exploring what snobbery is and how it’s okay and not so okay.
One show that we used to watch a lot at my house is Chopped, this competition show where four chefs go through 3 rounds of cooking challenges where they are given a Mystery Basket with four random food items they have to somehow incorporate into a fancy dish. It’s really interesting how it all works out; a chef is eliminated every round, and the judges have to give a basis for their choice every time, and when I listen to these reasons, it just hits me how precise you have to be if you’re going to be cooking for food critics and other professionals. I mean, I don’t know about you, but if I see some burnt spots on the tortilla wrapping my burrito, I’m not gonna send that back; I’m eating it. That’s why it’s really weird for me when I watch Hell’s Kitchen or MasterChef, where it’s about creating a perfect dish and not just about food existing.
What I’m talking about here is snobbery, but first, I want to clarify two different kinds of snobbery that exist. One is what I call “basic snobbery”, and it’s basically just being really knowledgeable about a certain subject, especially when it comes to more obscure information. The other type of snobbery is “true snobbery”, where someone fits all of the criteria to be a basic snob, but they also criticize others who supposedly know less about the subject. Someone who goes to Olive Garden and thinks that there’s so much more potential for the lasagna in terms of taste and preparation would be a basic Italian food snob, while someone who refuses to eat at Olive Garden and shames those who do eat there because of that would be a true Italian food snob. (Can you tell what I’m craving right now?)
Of course, there are varying degrees and all that, but I bring up the two extremes to clarify a point: it’s fine to be a basic snob, but being a true snob is harmful. And with that, being a basic snob has the potential to bring someone into true snobbery; so long as we don’t start criticizing others for their taste or their supposed lack of it, we could probably live okay lives as snobs.
But food specifically (yeah, I’m gonna go back to food) is one area where even basic snobbery might not be a good place to be. See, if you’re a tech snob and you have the perfect knowledge of how to construct the best gaming PC or what antivirus software is the best depending on the user, you’re only using up so many resources (money really being the only significant physical one). But if you’re a food snob, then you’ve put yourself in a position where you need certain seasonings and specific meats and spices and a decent fridge full of food, and you’re constantly using up resources that could otherwise be used to help feed those in need. Sorry about that sounding really guilt-trippy, but that’s kind of my point. Could you picture a starving woman on the streets refusing food offered to her by a bystander because it’s not the kind she likes?
While basic snobbery isn’t in itself a bad thing, it still has so much potential to lead to other bad things; there's the possibility of transitioning to true snobbery, the potential waste of resources (depending on the area of snobbery), the disappointment at some things the ordinary person would be happy for, and other potential dangers. Especially when it comes to morality, things that don’t do much harm or bad can be dangerous territory; if we hold to God along that path, we can make it, but it’s easier for us to fall in our faith. Snobbery is a tough road to take, and one of the most valuable resources that snobbery gobbles up is time, especially if it’s a hobby.
If you read last week’s post about sadistic media, you know that I’m a huge fan of the Project Diva games. Basically, I am a Project Diva snob. I mean, maybe I’m not since my really thorough experience is with the first game and there are a bunch of games that I hardly know anything about, but you know... that first game. *points at myself* SNOB. The toughest thing about loving this game so much is the amount of time and brain power it takes to sit down and play the game. The time I use to play Project Diva with my friends could totally also be used to sit down and come up with a bunch of different Friday Night Questions ideas (but I mean, that’s not an issue since you guys totally love my rambling about Hatsune Miku hahahaha). It’s really hard-hitting when you’re deep into spirituality like I’m trying to be.
So here’s the question, then: if you find yourself being a snob about something, how can you still maintain a healthy lifestyle? Traditionally, the answer to this question is to recognize how thankful you could potentially be for having whatever it is set in front of you, whether it’s a plate of lasagna or the technology available to play Project Diva (sorry not sorry). This answer is definitely not a bad answer; being grateful to God is incredibly important to living a healthy lifestyle, but if you’re struggling with it, here’s a trick I use:
One of my biggest struggles as a Catholic is going to Mass; for some reason, it’s kind of hard for me to get into the happy mindset and become a part of the congregation, as much as I really do want to. I had an idea one Mass, and while it hasn’t completely reversed my situation, it has had a really positive impact. What I did was act as if it was the first time I’d ever been to a Mass; thinking about it that way made me realize how interesting the different aspects of the mass are, and though this use of the method isn’t a case of snobbery, I think it’s a really effective method for fighting off the negative effects of snobbery: act like you’ve never experienced the subject of your snobbery before. You don’t have to completely convince yourself or anything, as long as playing the newcomer refreshes what’s great about the subject of your snobbery, you’re on the right track. The goal is to be thankful.
When you’re a snob, the biggest impact it has on your mind is a bit of disappointment; you begin noticing the flaws in your subject and try to convince others to recognize those flaws with you. But sometimes, you just need to sit back and relive your first experiences with the object of snobbery (the “snobject”?); after all, you became a snob for a reason.
I feel a bit weird about not getting really religious in this week’s entry, so I’ll end off with a verse from one of Saint Paul’s letters, calling everyone to think of the positives and not of the negatives: “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable--if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things.” (Philippians 4:8 NIV)
As always, thanks for reading, guys, and remember, if you have anything you want to add to contribute to the conversation, even if it’s an opposing view, I’m happy to take responses, either by askbox or responses to this post! Have a great day, everyone, and God bless you all!
This week, I’m going to take a look at mood in media and question whether or not it’s good that there’s so many moods out there in the world of entertainment.
This conversation about Hatsune Miku is about to get serious.
Hatsune Miku is a virtual pop star in a line of music software called Vocaloids. I love the concept of the Vocaloids; anyone who buys these programs can create a song using a synthetic voice, and with the fanbase being as large as it is, the identity of Miku or any of the other Vocaloids enables the songwriter to reach a wide audience, allowing their message to be heard more than if they released a song sung on their own.
Now, I’m a firm believer that music is the form of media that is the most effective at changing people’s moods. It’s why the Benny Hill theme instantly makes even the most boring video suddenly hilarious, and why a sad soundtrack in the background of an ASPCA commercial can so easily bring someone to tears. From what I’ve read, Odds & Ends, a song created by the band Supercell and one of my favorite songs in the Project Diva rhythm game series, was such an uplifting song that many Japanese players couldn’t get through the song on their first playthrough because the lyrics made them so emotional.
But I’m not here to talk about Odds & Ends (as much as I want to). Let’s move to a different song: Kagerou Days, a song written by Shizen no Teki-P for the Kagerou Project, as well as a song in Project Diva F 2nd. I love this Miku song as well, but for this one, it’s mainly because of the melody. The song is a story where the narrator keeps living the same day over and over, and each day of the loop, despite his attempts to save her, the girl he spends this day with dies somehow, and he immediately wakes up to the next day of the loop. Wanting to end the loop and stop watching the girl die, he decides to sacrifice himself for her; however, he wakes up in another day of the loop, and here the song ends. Think Groundhog Day, but a lot darker, and with a sad ending. To be honest, I find the concept of the time loop interesting, but I don’t believe this song has a positive effect on a listener who understands the meaning of the song. Groundhog Day has a similar concept, but it ends happily, with the protagonist learning to become a better person, and this is a much more acceptable alternative to Kagerou Days in terms of the story. There’s not really an upfront lesson, so what’s the point of the song?
This is an example of what I call “sadistic media”, where regardless of the moral of the story and how good the ending is, the main focus of the media is something usually disturbing and almost always negative. Movies like The Hunger Games and video games like Five Nights at Freddy’s also fall into this category. Sadistic media tends to be extremely popular, and the horror genre as a whole seems to me to be the most significant example of this.
My question here is this: are there any benefits to sadistic media? The point that it doesn’t exactly benefit the audience, while valid, isn’t exactly solid. The events of the Passion of Jesus Christ play out in a negative way, but we can learn from the Passion and the Crucifixion how significant the sacrifice of Jesus’ life for the absolution of human sin is. While these are Biblical events and not media, the overall negative feeling is what I want to focus on. What can a piece of sadistic media do to create some positive effect?
The most common ways media can affect people positively are through teaching lessons and lifting spirits. It’s not really likely that sadistic media can make you feel more positive about yourself, so we’ll focus on teaching lessons. I don’t really want to keep throwing out Japanese media for fear that people are going to be unfamiliar with what I’m talking about, but for lack of a more commonly known example, I’ll bring up the video game Danganronpa.
This game follows Makoto Naegi, an incoming high school student at the prestigious Hope’s Peak Academy. Upon entering the school, Naegi blacks out, and he wakes up to find that he and 14 other students are trapped inside the school, unable to escape. The antagonist of the game, Monokuma, then appears and informs the students that their only way to escape is by murdering another student without being discovered as the murderer. As Naegi, the player investigates the ensuing murders with the other students and, in a class trial during each chapter, figures out who the culprit is so that they can be executed by Monokuma in a sickeningly ironic way. This game is super dark.
As the game progresses, the already-low 15-person population of Hope’s Peak is whittled down to six remaining students, and at this point, the students have seen so much that they begin to resort to pure despair, with the ever-present fear of being another victim and the impossibility of escape from the school bearing down on them hard. But Naegi, having been able to expose the previous culprits and carry on despite the loss of his friends, shows them hope, and they end up escaping through means that would really spoil the story if I told them to you. But the point is that through every case, the player watches Naegi continue past the horror of losing those close to him with a slowly developing and eventually unwavering hope that proves to be the downfall of Monokuma’s despair. Though the hope Naegi relies on isn’t portrayed as a trust in God in the game, as a Catholic, I can still certainly accept this as a great lesson to leave the game with.
So I’ve shown that there can be upsides to sadistic media; though this game is only one example, there are other examples to be examined, and I encourage that you explore the idea. With this in mind, though, I turn to a final question: do the positives of sadistic media outweigh the negatives to the point where we can see it as an okay thing? Though it’s possible that there are very specific cases where this is the case, the general answer is no, and I’ll use Danganronpa again to explain why.
See, the end lesson of the game is a powerful one, especially for Christians who have someone to put their hope into: if we have hope, we can overpower despair and come out of dangerous situations as better and truer people. But this moral of the story is really central to Chapter 6, the final chapter of the game. What does the player experience for the other five chapters (plus the prologue, if you want to include that)? It’s the sickening despair that terrifies the students throughout the game: Monokuma’s disgusting dark humor, the shock value of the crime scenes, and the selfish motives behind some of the cases bring out dark feelings within the characters and extend those dark feelings to the player. While the intent of the game and the final chapter is to teach the player to inspire hope and reject despair, the game unintentionally surrounds the player with negative images and ideas that don’t get overturned until the very end. I used to consider Danganronpa my favorite game because of the whole mystery crime-solving aspect of it (not to mention that the character designs are really great), but after recognizing the inconsiderate way the game handles death and the overall negativity the game inspires, I just cannot find myself appreciating this game, and I can’t recommend this game to anyone. (Little bit of a side note: the music in the game does an extremely good job at conveying an unnerving atmosphere, just to stress my earlier point about music and mood.)
Now, I don’t want this post to backfire on me and create negativity in you guys while you read it, so I’ll return to where I started to bring some positivity back to the post: while sadistic media does exist, it definitely doesn’t represent all media. Like I said, the Vocaloids are an example of how an artist can deliver an extremely positive message to their audience and legitimately inspire them to become, as Matthew Kelly puts it, “the best versions of themselves”. Those who create media have an incredible power to take the relaxing activity of leisure time and turn it into something that drastically improves the lives of those who hear the message.
I’ll end off with a quote from musician Steven Van Zandt: “As most of the population suffers through life, barely surviving, disappointed and confused day after day, hopeless, wondering what happened to their strong and beautiful country, it is in the media's power to restore, if not some of our quality of life, at least a bit of our peace of mind.”
Thanks for reading, guys, and remember, if you have anything to add or any differing opinions, I’m always open to hear them. Just send me an ask and I’d be happy to continue the conversation! Have a great day, and God bless you guys!
I love sitcoms; I’m not sure why it is. Maybe it’s because each one is packed with an endless stream of jokes: if some jokes in a Modern Family episode rub you the wrong way, there’s still bound to be a joke that hits just the right spot. But when it comes to witty jokes, there’s a negative result that gets passed off as a positive trait, and this is an error that has gone unnoticed.
A good example of this is an episode of The Office in which, after a sexual harassment incident in the office, Michael Scott is told to give up inappropriate sexual humor, a change that is definitely for the better. Jim Halpert, however, doesn’t believe Michael will be able to follow through with it, and assuming this, he decides to create humor by asking him if this change includes giving up “That’s What She Said,” a running joke in which after an unintentional double entendre, Michael responds, “That’s what she said.”
Michael tells Jim that the change does include dropping “That’s What She Said,” and here the wit begins. Jim responds with a series of intentional double entendres with the intent of making Michael say “That’s what she said,” and Michael eventually does make the joke, in front of the superior who told him to stop using inappropriate humor. The scene shows Jim to be witty, and this is supposed to be a positive trait, but was it worth it? The answer to that question is no.
Consider the scenario in which Jim doesn’t provoke Michael, and everybody moves on. Though, knowing Michael, there isn’t a high probability that he will actually stop using inappropriate humor, a chance does still exist; this could be the point where Michael is guided in the right direction, and he might become a more considerate person. But Jim’s wit throws Michael under the bus and brings him back to being a worse person than he has the potential to be. “You’re ruining the joke, though, it’s supposed to be funny!” To this, I say that humor does not right any wrongs. Look at this situation as if it were actually happening, and you’ll see that Michael is actually severely harmed by Jim’s comments, which were made with the sole purpose of exploiting Michael’s weakness to create humor.
So what makes wit inherently bad? For it to be inherently bad, there must be some sin associated with making witty comments. Humor is not inherently bad, so the structure of a witty joke must contain something that is inherently bad. What separates wit from other humor is that it is a response to something; wit is intended to overturn a point or disrupt an activity.
One of my favorite Seinfeld jokes shows Jerry Seinfeld receiving a call from a telemarketer trying to sell him something, to which Jerry responds that he’s in the middle of something, but if the telemarketer gives him their home phone number, he’ll call them back. The telemarketer says to this, “Uh, we’re not allowed to do that;” Jerry responds, “Oh, I guess you don’t want people calling you while you’re at home,” and the telemarketer says, “No.” Jerry wittily replies, “Well, now you know how I feel,” and hangs up. I say this joke is one of my favorites, and knowing the negative use of wit at this point, I feel a bit guilty liking the joke.
In this case, it’s a bit less clear why exactly Jerry’s wit is wrong, because as opposed to the scenario in The Office, Jerry uses his wit to support a legitimate criticism. But with intention out of the way, we can look at exactly what is wrong with wit. If you were the telemarketer, how would you feel after Jerry hung up? You’d be annoyed; as much as Jerry has a point that telemarketing is a bit on the annoying side, you’d be bothered by how rude Jerry was to you. You’re just working your job, and you certainly weren’t the one who made the decision to use telemarketers to try to sell a product. As much of a point as Jerry has, using wit to support that point only makes rudeness more acceptable. The telemarketer has a more negative attitude, and is now more likely to express this attitude moving forward, possibly even by using wit.
“Wait, though, didn’t Jesus use wit sometimes?” Let’s take a look. In the Book of John, Chapter 8, a woman is found guilty of adultery, and the Pharisees ask Jesus if they should stone her according to the Law of Moses. To this, Jesus replies, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7 NIV) This is the closest to wit we see Jesus use, so the question is, is this an example of wit?
Let’s look at the structure of Jesus’ argument here: the opposing view is that the woman should be stoned by the people, but Jesus argues that everybody is guilty of sin; only the Lord is capable of judging people. So how does Jesus get the point across? His argument is that it is not the job of these people to judge the woman. He overturns their point by assuming the opposite and pointing out their flaw: they are all guilty of sin, so they do not have the right to judge. It’s a sharp response that overturns the argument; this is wit.
So then, if the point here is that wit is bad, why is it that Jesus uses wit? It has to do with what separates this use of wit from that of Jim Halpert and Jerry Seinfeld: Jim and Jerry use wit to prove a point that is not the main subject of conversation, but Jesus’ wit is a direct response to the situation before him.
“But hey, doesn’t this kind of a response do the same thing as Jerry’s response, where it just leaves the other person angrier?” This case may actually be significantly different; look at the passages before 8:7. The Pharisees ask their question, and have their trap set. Jesus does not respond immediately; instead, “Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with [H]is finger.” (John 8:6 NIV) It isn’t until the Pharisees question him incessantly that Jesus makes his response. Why does he wait? We can’t say for sure, but I’d like to believe this: with the delay in his answer, the Pharisees grow more impatient; their anger level is slowly rising. Then Jesus stands up and gives the witty response; what do the Pharisees think? They’re already pretty miffed, and because of this, the wit doesn’t make them that angry. Instead of throwing them this witty truth-bomb right off the bat, Jesus lets them simmer before providing his answer.
So why didn’t he just explain why it was wrong without the wit, though? After all, in Chapter 6 of Luke, Jesus teaches the same thing to the crowd, and he does it straight, no wit involved: “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.” (Luke 6:37 NIV) It’s the audience. Let’s imagine that Jesus gives the Pharisees a straight answer instead of the witty response; what do the Pharisees think? “Yeah, we’re guilty of sins, but that doesn’t follow the Law of Moses.” Remember that this is close to the only time that Jesus ever uses wit, and the reason why is because this specific case called for it. By using wit without producing anger, Jesus gets His point across while addressing the intended audience and showing the flaw with their interpretation of the Law.
So what’s my point then? I guess if there is one, it’d have to be this: wit with the intention of humor can only produce negative effects. To use wit in a productive way, the situation has to honestly call for it, and there has to be an incredible consideration for the audience. It’s better to not use wit unless it’s absolutely necessary to prove an important point, so don’t look for places to be witty.
Well, that’s all I’ve got this week! I think there are some holes in this thought process, especially toward the end, so if you see any, don’t hesitate to point them out! There’s no harm in going deeper, and I’d love to learn more from you guys about the morality of this! Have a great day, everyone, and God bless you all!
