Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alatar
They survive by being very pragmatic and individualistic
|
I suppose, Tolkien intended the conversation I provided you with excerpts of was written to show that orks (exceptional ones, those who had free will about them) were crooked. Otherwise, why say that leaving one's companion in trouble is bad, and than behave in an opposite way? If survival was what counted and was approved of, Shagrat and Gorbag would have praised 'big elf warrior' for what they thought he did. 'Clever chap, that warrior, he did exactly what is vital for survival', that kind of thing.
EDIT
to SpM. We just cross-posted. One thing in your post caught my eye:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SpM
But why is it just to condemn beasts to a life of brutality and suffering? Do lives not matter to Eru if they don't have souls
|
That's why we have taint of Morgoth in the matter of Arda concept. The chain is as follows:
All matter has a bit of Morgoth in it - all matter will be unmade in the end - orks (but for exceptions) are made of matter, therefore they also will be unmade in the end. So human and elven
bodies will be destroyed in the end. It does not follow life does not matter for Eru. He created it, after all
No justice involved, just necessity.
For one, nothing temporal may be eternal. For two, nothing of Morgoth will last
As for exceptions, I could not find it at the spot (your archivist is getting older, you see), but I remember arguing elsewhere that none of orks in LoTR who have a hint or even slightest trace of will and individuality about them are treated as 'mere matter'. I believe it is author's intention as well - to have Shagrat and Gorbag kill each other, to have Grishnakh killed by stray arrow, to have Ugluk fought by Eomer
on foot and
alone, though it would have been as easy to have him shot from the horseback and so forth.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SpM
To do so would have involved interfering with his gift of free will to Melchor, yes, but no more so than his later interventions with regard to those affected by them
|
More so. Interventions always follow the pattern of natural events - Numenor is drowned in a flood which might have been caused by a chain of perfectly natural events, Gollum falls because of another chain of events, ring was found by Bilbo because of third chain of events etc. Besides, interventions do not suspend the free will of doers, they correct/change consequences of their doings
Melkor's abilities included ability of tainting a matter. Denying him such an ability, I suppose, could not have been done following 'chain of events' pattern. It would have invloved direct forcible removing of ability = direct suspense of free will = against the rules Eru sets himself = can not be done
Third - intervention will take place - the Arda will be remade. That is the greatest intervention of them all. For us, it haven't happened yet, but Eru is outside time. It may be (if the concept that God lives in eternal 'now' be correct) that for him, the moment of creation happens at the same time as moment of redemption. It is from our perspective, from the inside of time, that we may ask quesitons of the 'why haven't He done that, or this'. For all we know, all necessary things have been done, we haven't reached them yet in time.
Besides, it was already mentioned, that knowing things does not equal affecting them. I know the moon moves by an orbit around the earth. Based on certain calculations, I can bet you a dollar it will move likewise tomorrow. I know the fact beforehand. Yet, my possession of the data does not affect said orbit in no way at all
END OF EDIT