PDA

View Full Version : Super Paper Mario and Free Will... Existentialism vs Fatalism?


DS Ultimate Debate
17th June 2009, 11:29 PM
Free will has always been an issue in video games. More so RPGs, where fatalism seems to be the de facto default in the universe, and if destiny says you'll grow up to be a hero that saves the world and defeats the evil overlord unleashing a demon sealed away for a 1000 years, then that's exactly what will happen, even if it takes having your village burnt down and family/friends brutally killed to bring it about. But Paper Mario is not any old RPG series. It's certainly not as fatalist or determinist as others. Your strategies in battle for example aren't quite completely deterministic in a nice turn based order like many games, and you do have a small amount of time to block or dodge attacks, or do fancy moves halfway through your actions for more effect. Super Paper Mario however moves further, and with it, presents two very different philosophical standpoints on free will, with both the free existentialism and the predetermined to the inevitable fatalism being taken up by major characters.

Fatalism; The Villain's Standpoint in the Story

Meet Count Bleck, the main villain of Super Paper Mario. He's a strange character that has, over time had a rather tragic past, and has lost his true love. He holds that there is now no other option ever, whether he likes or not other than to follow the advice of the Dark Prognosticus, culminating in the destruction of everything in multiverse. Everything, heaven and hell included. He has literally given up every potential hope to fulfil the prophecy written down in the Dark Prognosticus.

This here is a perfect example of fatalism taken to its extreme. Heck, this may even be a literal form of defeatism, Bleck has all but completely given up on any hope of finding happiness, and accepted the prophecy as he future as set in stone. There is a fallacy here in the character's thinking as the story follows on, when he finds Tippi is his lost love, and when he thinks it is hopeless to change around, the fallacy of thinking he's gone too far to stop his overall plan. Bleck does everything based on the assumption that the future is based purely on destiny, and the prophecy is fated to succeed. He hires his minions based on someone of their description being listed in the Dark Prognosticus as important in the prophecy, he turns away all offers, assistance and help from any other characters because he thinks the future is fated to happen, he even battles Mario in the semi final boss battle of the game because of this.

There is another villain however in this game, another who thinks similar. More precisely, he puts a lot of trust in determinism, basing his every action off of the (seen as guaranteed) future consequences. That character, is Dimentio. He, in the storyline turns out to be the true villain behind it all. He relies on the heroes success without their knowledge as the way to get his goals, and relies on a series of factors that get more and more unlikely as they progress.


More... (http://dsultimate.net/Board/upload/blog.php?b=816)

Chrisjh0223
18th June 2009, 01:25 AM
You covered lots of great points about free will vs fatalism/destiny. The last two quotes from Bowser and Tippi sum up my thoughts of Bleck and Dimentio. While there is a great deal of free will and actions going on, I'm sure that they're limited (as you suggested) and fatalism plays at least a minor key role while free will is the ultimate defacto due to everybody doing their own thing. The end is brought about by what the people decide, and people who believe in a destiny set in a single stone are horribly mistaken due to unexpected factors (such as Mario and allies taking the fight to Dimentio to the very end with revived powers).