Patton’s Morality

I wanted to make a post talking about Patton’s system of morality (as described in Putting Others First) and what exactly the problem with it is.

If we put all of Patton’s arguments together, he seems to be suggesting three main rules:

Above all else, don’t cause harm to anyone.

If you have the opportunity (time/resources) to help people, you are obligated to do so.

You should do good for its own sake, not because you expect a reward.

All of these are fairly typical black-and-white “gut instinct” type moral rules, and they don’t work that badly in most day-to-day situations. But, as the video shows, each of these rules can be harmful when pushed to extremes. The fear of possibly causing harm was what made Thomas avoid speaking to Lee and Mary-Lee about the callback, and feeling obligated to do as much good as possible can quickly lead to a lack of self-care and burnout.

However, it’s the third rule which is most interesting to me. Thomas went to the wedding (a good deed) and he expected a reward (a positive reaction from his friends); Patton brings up rule 3 as a counter to that expectation; you shouldn’t save a kingdom for the money/cake/thanks, you should do it to be a good person. However, as the video points out, it doesn’t really make sense to equate physical or monetary rewards with emotional ones; shouldn’t doing good feel good?

And actually, I think that’s a good question. Because a lot of “good deeds” (in society’s eyes) don’t feel good. Exercising, eating healthy, working hard - these things are often less than pleasant, but they are morally lauded. In fact, they are often praised because of their difficulty - “no pain, no gain” is an insidious mindset. And in contrast, a lot of essential self-care - taking breaks, doing low-energy activities to recharge - is criticised.

There’s a phenomenon where people sometimes assume that bland or bad-tasting food must be "healthier” than sweet or salty food, even if it’s nutritionally equivalent. I feel like in some situations - including in SvS - people can make a similar assumption about morality; that the morally right choice is also the painful one, because doing good is “supposed” to be a sacrifice.

Which is why the question about self-sacrifice is the one that causes Patton’s breakdown, because that is the root of where the SvS discussion went wrong. I’d argue that Patton clearly wants to say that Thomas sacrificing himself to save others is the “right” answer - that’s most people’s moral instinct, after all! But he realises that telling Thomas to sacrifice himself in a situation where he earlier refused to sacrifice other people ultimately means that Thomas is less valuable to himself than other people are. He knows that’s wrong, so he doesn’t know what to do.

(Which is fair - I think most people’s moral instincts struggle in the face of a philosophical thought experiment, that’s kind of the point.)

Realising that he’s had this self-sacrificial world-view, and it has led to his current unhappiness, is what allows Thomas to realise that his internalised messages about selfishness are unhealthy for him. And I think Janus’s points at the end - that self-care should always be a priority, not saved for an emergency - is really on-point.

Having moral guidelines is okay, but forcing them into rules that don’t take your own well-being into account is ultimately not good for anybody.

Thoughts on “Flirting with Social Anxiety”: Roman, Virgil, Bravery, and Self-Worth

I originally started by just keeping a running list of thoughts in my head as I watched the “Flirting with Social Anxiety” video for the second time through. But then it started getting long and involved, so I elected to just make a specific post for some of the reflections and analysis my thoughts started to follow down the rabbit hole.

Obligatory reminder that this is just my interpretation of the canon work. You may disagree or interpret things differently, and that’s totally valid. These are just some of my thoughts and where this video (deemed “essential viewing” for the canon story by Thomas) fits in the broader narrative with relation to character arcs (specifically Roman). 

Without further ado, here are some thoughts on the new Sanders Asides video. Apologies for the length. Turns out, I have a lot to say. 

Keep reading

(wtit spoiler warning)

unpopular opinion, but im not really a big fan of the idea of the orange side being wrath or anger. while similar to inside out, the sides arent really emotions; rather, they are your different conflicting thought processes when you work through a problem. you have the side of you that is logical and knows the facts and tries to use reason to solve things, the side of you that focuses on your morals and tries to use steadfast loyalty to your values to solve problems. there is the side that is anxious and tries to use to make use of fear to protect u and solve the problem.

there are the sides of you that are creative that think of fantastical solutions to your problems, whether good or bad, that try to take you to your dreams and desires. with roman, this is with disney-esque tales and hopes that keep thomas going and having a reason to things. with Remus, I think it may be using the intrusive thoughts to get Thomas to slow down when thomas is overwhelmed and wants to rest, which makes sense bc, at least with me, ik when I have an uptick of intrusive thoughts, it usually means i need to rest and relax so I'll be less overwhelmed and take care of myself.

and there is the side that is deceitful and cunning and mean and self-centered as a means towards approaching your problems with your self-preservation as the primary thing to uphold. unlike morals which may tell you to share what you have, this deceitful side of you acts selfishlessly to make sure that you are put first, no matter the cost. which is why I think any anger or wrath would come from Janus. anger as an emotion is often an expression of self-preservation. you feel anger when you know you've been hurt and you lash out in anger to protect yourself. janus has lashed out a fair amount for the small amount of episodes he's been in.

by now, it's also fairly agreed upon that Janus and patton are opposites/counters as well as roman and remus. with both pairings, it's seen that you need a healthy balance between those two sides, those two lines of thought, to not completely fall apart.

i am a firm believer that anxiety is the counter or parallel or opposite of logic. your logical thought processes get so messed up when you're anxious and scared, and logical thinking is often used as a tool to combat anxiety. this was explored between Virgil and Logan very early in the series. virgils anxiety causes cognitive distortions that weaken logans logical processes in being listened to. logans logical thoughts are able to tame Virgil's anxiety when it's too strong. i think Logan and Virgil balance each other out. those are the two who make a healthy balance together which has been discusses, albeit briefly, early on (remember the Yerkes Dodson curve?).

this is why I think that whatever the orange side, the seventh side, is, it won't be a counter to anyone in specific, and it won't be wrath/anger. right now, orange is showing up when Logan is weakened in someway. when janus kidnaps him in svs redux, orange only shows up after that. when Remus messes with Logan in today's wtit and logan is frustrated and out of it, only then did orange come through. we don't know if orange can control other sides as well, but if it's like janus at all, where janus tries to remove logan and his rationality from the problem solving, there's a reason it would focus on messing with logic & rationality to achieve it's goal of however it helps thomas.

because remember, all the sides do what they think is best for thomas. the sides are the manifestations of his different thought processes driven by different outlooks that all have an end goal of trying to solve thomas's problem in that way. but in the end, it is always up to thomas to choose which thought pattern he'll listen to. thomas chooses what he will do based on the persuasiveness of his different thought processes.

(for example, c!thomas comes across a wallet on the sidewalk. morally, he thinks the wallet should be turned in to the local authorities at all costs no matter what. his self preservation instincts tell him to take the cash and leave the wallet behind since the detour would waste his time. his anxiety tells him to leave it alone so he wont get framed for stealing. good creativity/roman would make him imagine a grand heroic prize for tracking down the owner of the wallet and personally delivering it, and bad creativity/remus might make c!thomas imagine finding and killing the wallets owner so he can take all the money. logical thought would say for c!thomas to return the wallet to local authorities if he has the time to do so, and if not, to leave it be. these are all just the different thoughts running through c!thomas's head which can then be personified as sides, and whichever action he does is attributed to the side who had the most persuasive line of thought, but none of these lines of thought are trying to hurt thomas, it's all different ways of protecting/helping him.)

so whatever orange is, needs logic and rationality to be a bit disrupted before being able to be persuasive enough to be listened to. this doesnt really seem like anger/wrath to me. someone can be rational and angry (ie. planning a revenge later rather than hurting someone now, passive aggression, etc.) which all feels more like Janus things to me, and I think you actually need to be rational to use your anger effectively. going ham on someone without thought will not have the same effect as thinking about the best places to hit without them getting you back. anger and logic don't need to keep each other in check like deceit and morality or logic and anxiety; rather, they need to work together. i dont think logan would be opposed to a side that represented anger at all. and orange would not destabilize logan so much if it were anger.

plus, Virgil is the only side that really represents an emotion. but I think people generally always have a sense of anxiety and fear in their problem solving, but anger/wrath isn't always there. for a quick issue like a lost wallet, i can see how these other sides of thought processes can exist, but i dont know what anger would tell Thomas to do there since anger is just an emotion.

so the question is, what is a thought pattern that exists when solving problems that tries to protect/help you, while also needing to push away or overpower your sense of logic & rationality to be persuasive enough to be listened to? I don't have the answer to this but I'd love to hear what other people think about this! especially if u see flaws in my reasoning of why orange isn't anger, I'd love to know!

“Can’t fix this guy all by yourself”

This line of Remus’ really stuck out to me when I was rewatching the new Sanders Sides ep. It’s from when Remus is wearing the dunce cap and starts a rendition of “All By Myself”, in which he sings the above line while holding the dunce cap out to Logan. I think the statement is so telling in what it says about Logan, and what it says about Remus. 

Because Remus is exactly right here: Logan does try to fix all of Thomas’ problems by himself. Early on in the series he would get annoyed when other Sides joined in (“this was supposed to be my episode”) and he has always struggled with taking the other Sides’ perspectives into account (giving Thomas 0.5% of his time for pursuing his dreams, railing against Patton in Moving On, ect.), as well as with being dismissive of their contributions. While Logan has improved over time, he still fundamentally believes that if Thomas would just do exactly what Logan said, Thomas’ problems would be solved or at least significantly reduced. The problem is that Thomas has other needs and concerns besides pure Logic, and so Logan will never be able to get him to behave in exactly the manner Logan wants- which leads to Logan feeling ignored.

And you can see that in practice in this episode! Logan is being much more flexible here than he has in the past, but ultimately he is still operating under the assumption that his schedule (which has Thomas’ day planned out in five-minute increments and excludes breaks) is the true key to getting Thomas out of the funk he’s in. Look at Logan’s speech to Remus:

I’m willing to concede that there is most likely some merit to what you are trying to do, and I think it could be necessary- at some point- but perhaps, you could also see the merit in what I’m trying to do… I assure you, it will be beneficial to Thomas in the long run, and that can only mean good things for all of us. There will be a time and place for you.

Here Logan admits that Remus is probably needed… in theory. Some other time. He follows that up by essentially saying Remus needs to step aside right now, because what Logan is doing is important, and what Remus is doing is not.

Is it any wonder that Remus wasn’t particularly receptive to this? Because Remus wasn’t doing what he was doing here for the heck of it; he was specifically reacting to Thomas’ state of mind. There’s a reason most of Remus’ intrusive thoughts involved Nico or being alone- they were expressions of the inner turmoil Thomas was having about Nico and his associated feelings of loneliness. Remus is a symptom, a blaring alarm that calls attention to the many issues Thomas is going through, and the more Thomas avoids these issues the louder the alarm gets. This was exactly the time and place for Remus. 

Logan is never going to be able to get Thomas on schedule when there are so many aspects of Thomas’ life and mental health that are in desperate need of being addressed. The ending of the episode is a great demonstration of this: Thomas ran out to meet Nico because Nico was where his mind had always been. Logan was never going to be able to keep Thomas on task when Thomas just wasn’t mentally present. 

Logan doesn’t quite get that he won’t be able to “fix” Thomas until the underlying issues are resolved- but Remus absolutely does, which he showed with his impromptu song parody, among other things. Remus is way more insightful than the others give him credit for, and I do believe that his behavior in this episode was well-intentioned and even necessary in its effort to call attention to Thomas’ inner struggles. Remus is not going to let the others sweep Thomas’ issues under the rug, and ultimately Thomas will be better for it.

Cause all along you’ve tried to fight it Bruises on your neck- clip on a tie and hide it Wring your hands till your knuckles no longer abide it How long can you keep your tongue and bite it? ‘Til there’s nothing left to hold and the fire ignites it And leaves you burning mourning yearning inside it?

So Logan huh?

@thatsthat24

If you like it, please reblog it! <3

Ooo wooahoah two posts in a row here are some sketches from the new video as well <3

STOP IGNORING ME

I've contributed to the new Asides by making memes :)

logan's incredible reflexes

A story in three parts

@thatsthat24

Bonus gif

@logicalyfun

Shh, the wine aunts are enjoying each other's company in their natural habitat

SO THAT NEW VIDEO HUH

It's gonna take me weeks to get over this yall know how much I love him

Im SO EXCITED

Do not repost/trace/steal

Click for better quality

Pls reblog

watch out for that temper, boy

Shout out to return of the Jam for feeding my AU obsession four times overs

mood

Behold, the scene that tore my heart out

logan's star

[id: a drawing of logan from sanders sides. he is a light skinned person with long brown hair in a loose ponytail and brown eyes. he wears his normal outfit, and sits crisscross on the floor, looking up at an 8 pointed star, which hovers above his head. he has a hand hovering next to it. the star is the only light source, bathing logan in a golden light. end id.]

now on my redbubble! thought it'd be fun to do a series of the sides interacting with little light things :o)

please reblog 2 support my work!