Who was in the wrong here?

Who was in the wrong here?

The hack known as Kentaro Miura who only knows how to victimize people by raping them.

The idiot fans for thinking that all the rape and violence makes it DARK and REALISTIC because WAR IS HELL. But I'm pretty sure I don't remember any accounts of horses being possessed by demons and sexually assaulting women from my history books.

Objectively Guts

Caska.
Always.

It's fantasy, you autist, not a historical manga.

Guts.

Griffith, always Griffith.

Fucking pompous self-centered egotists, prancing around as if his shit doesn't smell.

While I agree, rape is a very common thing in war.

Guts

Griffith, he had the kingdom he wanted within his grasp, he had to have a mancrush on Guts that made him go cuckoo near the finish line

Both.
If they reached out for each other and communicated things wouldn't have gone so wrong.

Griffith.

He had his goal in his grasp and he fucked it all becauset he couldn't accept Guts not conforming to his vision.

but he had the red behelit so it was gonna go to shit regardless

Neither are wrong in this act particularly, they're both men fighting for their own. Griffith's mistake was taking it so personally after Guts won his freedom

>Pass user since 2012
Really tops off this shitpost 8/10

yo mama!

Well, since Guts is on the right page, it's obviously Griffith.

Griffith is in the wrong, I have to assume that anyone who says otherwise isn't even reading it. Everything went to shit because he couldn't control his manboner over Guts.

This.

nice.

>they're both men fighting for their own
One is fighting for his freedom, the other is fighting for his "right" to have a slave soldier.

Imagine that you're walking home after you've resigned from your job. Suddenly your autistic boss approaches you with a gun and starts talking about how you can't leave your job because you're his property because he said so.
Who was in the wrong here?

A right he's claimed years before. That was their deal - if Griffith wins, Guts is his. Beating Griffith was the only way Guts could walk free ever again.

again They had a deal. Guts lost. That's all there is to it.

>your personal property leaves you, violating the NAP
>so you kill your entire group, rape his girlfriend, and then bring monsters into the world to take it over

>A right he's claimed years before.
No such thing as a right to enslave people, m8

It's a fictional world m8. It wasn't a right or a law, just a deal they both agreed on. I can see Griffith being dissatisfied by Guts breaking that deal. A fight was really the only way of setting this.

>just a deal they both agreed on
Then you're assuming that voluntaryism is correct. Even if it is, many voluntaryists disagree with "consensual slavery".

But you're talking about legal conditions, and how it might have been in the real world. But this is fiction, and this isn't slavery, this isn't any sort of a law, it's JUST a mutual agreement. They made a deal, Guts went with it, and frankly was quite enjoying it. When he decided to break the agreement, Griffith challenged him once again on the same conditions. Very logical to me.

>But you're talking about legal conditions
Actually I'm talking about ethics, which applies to every human interaction.

>the other is fighting for his "right" to have a slave soldier.
That's just what Griffith told himself. He wanted Guts around for other reasons but was unable to admit it.

You're talking about a couple of low-born mercenaries, not Descartes and Aristoteles.

Ethics are for those too weak to ignore them.

A lesson Griffith learned well, might I add.

stop triggering me you fucking ideologue. human "rights" aren't an intrinsic property and neither are ethics, fuck you.

How denying rights makes you less of an ideologue than me?

Define them right now and relate them directly to this circumstance in a logical manner

Because there are no universal objective rights

Why?
Also, define them and prove they don't exist right now in a logical manner.

They are not quantifiable or observable in any fashion and future discourse is meaningless unless you invoke God

Claiming that makes you as much of an ideologue than someone who claims the opposite.

>They are not quantifiable or observable in any fashion
Why?

Did you only read this scene in isolation from the rest of the series or some shit? None of that justifies what Griffith then goes on to do

sperg on a friend taking a leave now that your war campaign is done.

not an argument, support your statements with reasoning

No hard feelings, but that's not an argument.
I wasn't the one who called you an ideologue, and I don't even think it's a neccesarily bad thing in the first place, but that's besides the point.

The very concept of human rights isn't particularily old, and isn't objectively correct for all civilisations anyway. Not every civilisation has the same values in the first place, it's rather strange to judge a fictional world on our own concepts.

Something doesn't need to be observable in order to be true. Not sure what you meant with "quantifiable" though.

We're not discussing what Griffith went on to do later, but whether he was right about trying to stop Guts, so that's irrelevant.

Language isn't intrinsic either, so you better shut the fuck up.

not an argument

It isn't irrelevant, what he goes on to do later stems from what he does here.

Holy shit, are people on Sup Forums actually so retarded they don't understand the burden of proof?

My IQ nearly dropped into the double digits just from reading this. Please stop.

>says human rights and ethics are just made up
>calls other people ideologues

>if you can't summarise thousands of years worth of philosophical and scientific inquiry in a Sup Forums post then it must not exist

We are a social species, he have ethical instincts built into our nature. Seriously, go read any introduction to evolutionary biology: ethical behaviours are compelled from the genetic level. The reward circuitry in our brain literally releases dopamine into our system to reward altruistic behaviours (like sharing, and expressing compassion, and being merciful). Fundamental human rights (like right to life) are extrapolations from our observable instincts (i.e. we have a "right to life" because we have a biological instinct to survive). These things aren't arbitrary: they're the logical societal result of millions of years of social evolution.

>Not every civilisation has the same values in the first place
But I'm not talking about civilizational values. I'm talking about rights. You can deny their existence, but naming societies with different values is completely off-topic.

Griffit spent a bit too much time reading and playing the political game and should have seen that a straight up duel with this improved and massive Guts was hopeless

It was fine when they were kids but Guts was now so much bigger and stronger as well as dexterous

Griffith was already nutty at this point and wasn't being completely open about why he wanted Guts around. I'd argue that it isn't irrelevant because it's part and parcel with what his driving motivation in that specific scene was. If he was just "enforcing his rights" it shouldn't have led to what happens next.

>burden of proof
Which also applies to negative propositions.

>We are a social species, he have ethical instincts built into our nature.
We're also a competitive and opportunistic species and have taking advantage of people, territorialism, in-group favouritism, etc. in our nature.

But none of those things are strictly rational, and you will never be able to provide a reason for them other than "my personal genes and environment have led me to believe so."

Griffith just tried to enforce an agreement. Clearly, he saw nothing wrong with this. Who are you to tell him different?

It's a matter of instinctual hierarchy: some instincts exist on a higher order than others. You have a instinct which tells you to eat, and if you're starving you may desperately seek out food--the reason for this is that there is a higher order instinct at play: namely, your instinct to survive. Because of this, even if you are starving, you're not going to be concerned with eating if there is someone trying to murder you with a knife. Because the desire to eat is subordinated to the desire to survive, and if an attacker is actively threatening your life then you won't care for eating (that can occur later).

We may have instincts to compete, and take advantage of people, or to be territorial--though to what degree we seek each of these is doubtful--but these are nowhere near as universal or powerful as the instinct to survive. And, in fact, if you scratch bellow the surface, often these kinds of instincts appear, themselves, only as a means of ensuring a higher order instinct (i.e. we may be territorial because we're afraid of some neighbouring tribe killing us; or we may want to steal from someone because we fear dying of starvation). So even these are subordinated instincts.

My right to life doesn't conflict with anyone else's right to life, but a desire to take advantage of another person--even if this is a desire subordinated to ones own survival--DOES interfere with another's right to life. If you have an individual right to life, then someone else's desire to kill you (let alone a desire to profit from your death) cannot supersede that.

That's really neato. Now explain what these rights are, why they exist and how they are consequential to Guts fighting Griffith for his leave of the band of the hawk.

Accurate depiction of this fight

Brawn beats brain, everytime

Neither was wrong.

Guts wanted to go out and find his own dream. Since he could ever remember he has been running and fighting. Griffith found him and gave him a position that allowed his to swing his sword. He grew to admire Griffith and after hearing the speech he gave the Princess he came to the realization. He needed to step out of Griffith's shadow and find his own reason to live. His own dream. Afterwards he could come back and be equal to Griffith and become his friend.

Griffith has so much on his egotistical grand master scheme plate he never thought he would find himself emotionally attached to anyone. Despite the speech he gave to the Princess it is obvious he has some feeling towards Guts but not any he can openly express. So instead of congratulating Guts and wishing him well, something a friend would do. He attempted to reestablish his dominance. A mistake on his part because Guts had surpassed him but mostly because he acted rashly instead of stepping back and acting without emotion. Something he had done with every other aspect of his life and what led to his current high position of power.

The breakdown of Griffith after losing Gut sin this fight is what led him to fug the Princess and pretty much throw away his entire dream. Had the Belith not existed Berserk could have ended much much sooner and on a more solemn but appreciable note.

Also why the FUCK is Guts so godamn handsome? I'm not even gay but I can admit he is a cute as hell for a man.

No, only Griffith. Guts wanted to find his dream because he heard that Griffith doesn't consider him a friend. He did what Griffith said, and Griffith, not fully conscious of his attachment to Guts made everything worse.

You are canadian, aren't you?

>Griffith doesn't consider him a friend

I thought Griffith only considered his equals as friends and Guts was pretty much the only one equal to him

I'd argue griffiths annoyance was more from selfishness than any real emotions about guts. He is annoyed that guts would have the audacity to try to leave and seemd to view him as a possession more than a friend.

That said, I agree with the most important part of your argument, which is that guts is super cute

...so you're agreeing with that user's statement?

Griffith did not consider him a friend. Hence why Guts took off to find his own dream. To carve out his own destiny and perhaps one day return to be equals.

I thought Griffith considered him as equal

Guts couldn't do human interaction. Griffith was the only person he ever felt was his friend. Of course, Griffith's ego could never let him admit that Guts was his friend, and guts hearing griffith denounce having any friends caused everything. So in that sense, Griffith was in the wrong. BUT you could say Guts got too attached, because Griffith set out from the start to use the hawk as pawns, they knew this, this was their purpose, to act as the means to achieve Griffith's dream, and Guts leaving caused the scope of Griffith's dream to change, and in the end, he did exactly what he planned to do from the start. So in that case guts is in the wrong. BUT REALLY both are really bad at being social and that utterly caused everything

I said he heard that Griffith doesn't consider him a friend. Remember his talk with Charlotte? That's the reason why Guts wanted to leave. But as I said in the same post, Griffith was not fully aware of his attachment to Guts back then. So, Guts didn't know that for Griffith, he was already a friend, his only friend.

It's not just a friendship thing, Guts wanted to become his own man, that's a normal thing to do

He did not. He did feel something for Guts but his own ego and self driven mindset could never allow himself to call Guts "friend". There are twangs of Griffiths humanity showing through his otherwise distant and calculating demeanor.

>I want you Guts
>risking his life to save Guts from Zodd
>selling his boy pussy for his men (arguable could just be fast way to obtain Kingdom but he notes his men's sacrifice)
>asking Guts to assassinate instead of ordering
>his breakdown after Guts leaves

However these were just cracks. His own ego could not elevate Guts to equal status so he went full retard after Guts basically bested him and left him. Something no other soldier or pawn had ever done.

>Griffith was the only person he ever felt was his friend.
All the Hawks were his friends. Griffith was his best friend.

Guts never would have wanted to become his own man if Griffith didn't give that speech to the princess anout how he wouldn't consider anyone a friend unless they were their own man. Up to that point Guts was obviously content

yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean Guts only wanted to do it because GRIFFITH and nothing else
that bonfire of dreams speech wasn't just about griffith

>I OWN you goyim, die for me
>you were content until you realised the worth of self ownership!
"no"

At this point... no one.
But afterwards, Griffith when he goes fuck the princess.

Wrong, Griffith said that he only saw those that had dreams and goals like him, as equals and therefore friends. He never specifically said he didn't see guts as a friend, quite the opposite he was obviously romantically interested in guts.

You forgot your trip hawk

I'm not hawk you massive cuck, but it's true, I'm not saying Guts was in the wrong, he was right for valuing his self-worth and wanting to gain his own lot in life.

Griffith fucked up by trying to put on airs around the royalty, that one act of dishonesty is what cost him everything.

>Griffith said that he only saw those that had dreams and goals like him, as equals and therefore friends.
Alright so by that logic absolutely no one in the Hawks fits that crietria because everyone in the Hawks is literally following Griffith's dream

>He never specifically said he didn't see guts as a friend
Full fucking retard.

>quite the opposite he was obviously romantically interested in guts.
Yeah you're not fooling anyone hawk. Take your pathetic sad fanfiction and get the fuck outside and fuck some random cock. Your need for real human interaction is desperately urgent.

What're you talking about you dumb nigger, griffith simply stated he didn't think anyone without a dream was his equal, not that he didn't see guts or the band as his friends.

He was lying to the princess and to himself like the try harder he was and that cost him Gut's trust and loyalty which is a natural response to the guy you've basically been killing people for to just brush you off as a grunt, and then to try and force you back into servitude.

also

>Implying griffith wasn't gay for guts

How much homoerotic subtext do you need, guy's a faggot, even Guts noticed it, and rejected him.

>griffith simply stated he didn't think anyone without a dream was his equal, not that he didn't see guts or the band as his friends.
You are mentally fucking retarded if you do not see the contradicting points of your own post.

>Griffith didn't see anyone without their own Dream as an equal or friend
>the Hawks feels squarely in this category since they were all without their own dreams following in the gravity well of Griffith's own
>WELLLLL HE NEVER DIDN'T NOT EVER DISAGREE WITH THE IDEA GUTS WAS HIS FRIEND

No nigger no. He said plainly and clearly as day he did not consider his Hawks his friends. That to be his friend they needed to be equal. Everyone following his dream was useful but not his equal. He even remarked how he did not feel sorry for anyone that died following his dream. Only that he made sure their death counted.

>my yaoi fanfiction headcanon is truth
Die of cancer any time now.

>Implying that's not what I've been saying this whole time

Did hawk piss in your mouth or something? you need to calm your autism levels down. Griffith was lying, I already stated that, it was obvious he said that at the time to get the princess wet and make himself seem noble.

He later stopped giving a fuck about them because he selfishly blamed guts for his predicament instead of owning up to his actions which drove him and the hawks away from him.

The entire ritual was done out of misguided and selfish spite against his "property" that ran away from him.

>Throws water on guts while being naked
>Cradles his head after winning him in a duel
>Shows him a bunch of sexual pictures

I'm not stating in fan-fiction, Guts is straight, Griffith on the other hand is a massive faggot, if not solely by the way he dresses.

Griffith was lying, I already stated that
That is where I stopped reading your post. If your entire argument is "Griffith is lying" then there is no point is continuing this conversation. As you are going to throw out all the dialogue and actions of Griffith to interject your own reasoning without any real point of reference to bounce it off of. Since everything you don't like is just a "lie".

You're a dumbass.

Nobody. All was within the currents of causality.

>HAH THOSE IDIOTS AREN'T MY FRIENDS
>Wait no guys come back I love you

I mean, I don't think you need a degree to realize Griffith was lying. Simply reading the text would show this to you.

Maybe if you didn't fuck your dog all day you'd actually be able to comprehend something.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT KILL THEM ALL
DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHED
7

Excuse the shitty Paint job

Miuria with his disgusting foreshortening.

You're leading a terrible life because of these delusions - humans are selfish, by nature. We do everything for ourselves. The dopamine system rewards pleasure, and not pain, which can be present through certain altruistic acts (like sharing, because you have less, etc). Stop being such a deluded faggot.
Not to mention we're not talking about any certainty at all, because the dopamine route can be rewired, and same goes for the limbic system, so we can't even map morals on an materialistic level (because who's to say the limbic system of 99% of the people is right and 1% wrong, and not vice versa?), you scientistic faggot.

>we act altruistic because we want to so it's not altruistic because we wanted it

not this meme again

>meme
It's not a meme, the existence of an ego implies that it will do everything for itself primarily.

you can't sum up the entirety of our actions solely by the interface we use to make them

No one. It wasn't wrong of Guts to want to leave, and it wasn't wrong of Griffith to try to stop him.

You havent read the manga, have you?