Fantasy Morality

[Ardent]

These quotes are from the original post of this thread:

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

... wonders why such a cruel fate, usually the whim of fickle gods, can befall Túrin Turambar when Eru Ilúvatar is a benevolent creator.

As other posts have pointed out, this is a question of how one reconciles suffering with a loving creator. But I would go further and ask how can there be love in a world where there is so much evidence of its non-existence?
The same question hangs over other concepts such as 'beauty' and 'freedom'. Like Eu they cannot be quantified or pinned down and neither can they be eliminated from our fantasies. Being in pain may stop me appreciating the sunset, but it doesn't mean the beauty is no longer there. Logic may tell me that suns do not set (the earth spins) and that it is merely a huge, dangerous ball fire. I still say it's also beautiful.

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

In his discussion of "slave morality" vs. "noble morality"...:
...Where Túrin railed against his fate, Frodo, Aragon and co. seem to fall in line under some form of deontology, the journey to Mount Doom will be long and hard, but it has to be done and that is that.

Deontology: deont = duty + logic. Why not say "a sense of duty"?

When Sam sees the Scouring of the Shire in the mirror of Galadriel his sense of duty impels him to return and do something about it. Galadriel has to remind him that he was resigned to his duty to Frodo before looking in the mirror, effectively saying "know thyself". If you do not know yourself prophecy is an unreliable guide. Sam has to decide which is 'nobler in the mind'; to go back and take up arms against the Scouring, or to suffer that outrage in favour of the greater purpose.

Personally I find Nietszhe's philosophy flawed. Like Sam we have to choose, not between 'serving' or 'being served' but between different battles, different masters, different things we love.