Talk:Devil/@comment-24768935-20140728035127/@comment-25035274-20140804135449

I'm getting ready for a final exam, so I've gotta hurry through this, so apologies.

A) You keep saying people don't have predatory instincts, Yoush, and your argument for that is that you don't want to kill your friends. I'm sorry to say, but that's not a well-grounded argument at all.

Humans are predators. We have been since the beginning. On top of that, we're pack-hunting predators, with all the good and bad that entails. You don't want to kill or hurt your friends because it would be detrimental to the pack, if you want to break it down to the most basic level. You have other reasons, too, but those come from a more complex part of the brain and we're talking instinct.

See, 'instinct' is the animal part of us. The deepest, most primal part. It's the part of us that, when someone insults us, tells us we should punch him in the throat. It's also the part of us that, when someone hits us, tells us to shove his face in the dirt or the part that makes us wish, however briefly, that that dude that just jumped our close friend was dead. It's the part that informs all of our darkest urges.

Those predatory instincts actually still serve us in good stead in some cases, mind. They're the driving force behind most of our ambitions, at least the ones that aren't driven by sex. That guy on Wall Street, who seems to unerringly pick the right stock to trade into, and knows just when to get out of another? He's a predator, a hunter, and his kill is profit.

The good thing is, it's something most of us can control to some degree or another. Some people are better at that than others, however. That's why we wind up having terrorism in the Middle East, rampant organized crime in South-East Asia and Eastern Europe, and mass shootings in North America. Because somebody couldn't control their urges.

Also: As possibly the single greatest proof I can give you? We still hunt. And more often than not, it's because we want to hunt, not because we need the food. If we didn't have the instincts of the hunter, still, we wouldn't have so many huntsmen across the world.

B) Regarding, once again, your "Borg" assertion: (Pg 86) Case 4: Parasism: And I quote, "After perfectly binding and fusing with the host in this way, the parasite will stop controlling the host, and will return all the thoughts that it had seized back to the host. However, after fusing with the parasite, the host will no longer have human-like thoughts or values."

Reading further through, you see the worst case scenario which basically states that the parasite and human fuse, and become indistinguishable. One thing worth noting, as well, is that KC has outright said(it's in the KC Q&A) that sometimes the translators use his words incorrectly, which is to say too literally. Japanese and English don't do not translate directly and perfectly.

C) Your plan for dealing with the Matango assumes a lot of things that KC has never stated: 1) It assumes that witches can track any and all members of a specific type of monster race. 2) It assumes witches are capable of gathering every Matango in the world. 3) It assumes the Queen of Hearts wants thousands or millions of new residents.

The first two I'll simply say might be possible in a fan-fiction, but I wouldn't guarantee you that those are powers KC intends witches to have. The first is more likely than the second.

The third I'll directly argue against. I doubt the Queen of Hearts would want all those extra residents. To the contrary, it seems to me that she's rather selective about who she lets in. Wonderland is NOT an easy place to get to, after all.

I've got to get to class, now, so... I guess I'm done.