Objectively preferable outcomes taking into account everyone's...needs? Preferences? Most likely projected reactions?
( people argue for pragmatism, but then question the ability of the tranquil to make choices when they are, surely, the ultimate pragmatists. it's a delicate area and gwenaëlle is not a delicate girl. )
Everything ripples in a Circle; the Gallows haven't changed for it.
[ a pause, to fathom how to proceed, ]
What benefits one won't benefit another, but where the patterns don't overlap, the outcomes do. It's — easier, safer, when the majority are calm. I keep logs; they're a useful point of reference.
What if the most long-term beneficial outcome meant disrupting the short-term calm?
( there's no insistent bent to the question, no waiting gotcha; she asks it in the same tone, interested in hearing the answer. interested in whether it's the same one she'd give, or not. )
Trading visible action for an abstract theory. I don't have so much faith in my ability to predict events. You can plan for a future, but you can only react in the present.
( the tranquil do not innovate, she supposes, but it's the reasoning that makes her contemplative. hope is an emotion, isn't it? and hope is what she's describing, when she unravels it backwards through his answer.
pragmatism. )
No. ( an answer, a verbal shrug, a pause said aloud while she thinks of something else. )
Earlier, you said to Adalia that you weren't offended but you didn't say whether or not you could be. Is it—
( a hesitation. she's thinking her way through something. )
You're not an idiot. If something offensive doesn't rely on personal contexts you aren't privy to, you can recognise when someone is behaving offensively to you.
I haven't forgotten manners, [ implied (to someone listening — and isn't this a rarity?) that others do ] Though matters are different here. It's required adjustment.
One may justify a great deal upon feeling. Glass becomes a mirror. If you won't take it amiss, I'd not speak of that widely.
Your secret's safe with me. ( since apparently no one else is looking for it. after a moment; )
There's a saying about how you should measure a person not by how they treat their equals, but by how they treat their inferiors, I'm sure you've heard it. Someone once said to me that's good enough, so far as it goes, but that it misses the forest for the trees if it doesn't examine how that person chooses their inferiors.
( this is just an interesting conversation they are having, about interesting things. is all.
no subject
Objectively preferable outcomes taking into account everyone's...needs? Preferences? Most likely projected reactions?
( people argue for pragmatism, but then question the ability of the tranquil to make choices when they are, surely, the ultimate pragmatists. it's a delicate area and gwenaëlle is not a delicate girl. )
no subject
[ a pause, to fathom how to proceed, ]
What benefits one won't benefit another, but where the patterns don't overlap, the outcomes do. It's — easier, safer, when the majority are calm. I keep logs; they're a useful point of reference.
no subject
( there's no insistent bent to the question, no waiting gotcha; she asks it in the same tone, interested in hearing the answer. interested in whether it's the same one she'd give, or not. )
no subject
[ for a past ]
Are you considering the Inquisition's purpose?
no subject
pragmatism. )
No. ( an answer, a verbal shrug, a pause said aloud while she thinks of something else. )
Earlier, you said to Adalia that you weren't offended but you didn't say whether or not you could be. Is it—
( a hesitation. she's thinking her way through something. )
You're not an idiot. If something offensive doesn't rely on personal contexts you aren't privy to, you can recognise when someone is behaving offensively to you.
no subject
One may justify a great deal upon feeling. Glass becomes a mirror. If you won't take it amiss, I'd not speak of that widely.
no subject
Your secret's safe with me. ( since apparently no one else is looking for it. after a moment; )
There's a saying about how you should measure a person not by how they treat their equals, but by how they treat their inferiors, I'm sure you've heard it. Someone once said to me that's good enough, so far as it goes, but that it misses the forest for the trees if it doesn't examine how that person chooses their inferiors.
( this is just an interesting conversation they are having, about interesting things. is all.
she exhales. )
no subject
[ an impolite question, but they've already dispensed with courtesy ]
no subject
( honestly. )