how would events have panned out up til now if robert hadnt come north to ned after jon arryns death, if he'd simply appointed Jaime like cersei wanted him to?
Jaime would have killed Robert. War. North probably would win against the lanisters. End.
This is why I'm relieved that I don't have free will. "What if I had done this? If I had done that then maybe my life wouldn't be so shit." Knowledge of determinism has saved me from all that anxiety.
>>69874548
I knew you were gonna say that.
Doesn't game of plebs have a containment thread?
Fuck off there, redditor
Stannis probably would have been hand. Robert would have eventually sent the north against mance raider
>>69874718
Robert didn't like Stannis.
>Ned gets the raven from crazy cunt Tully but doesn't buy into it because he knows she's fucking crazy
>Robert dies and Ned gets a bit suspicious but ultimately doesn't have enough data to act upon
>Joffrey becomes king
>Without a war and the political tension caused by Ned's execution and Renly and Stannis rising up to claim the throne Tywin quickly steps in to whip Joffrey in line
>Westeros isn't ravaged by war and is stocked up on resources and man power for winter
>Able to put up a strong military resistance when the white walkers invade
>Danaerys is assassinated with much rejoicing
>>69873893
Cersei would've eventually had Robert killed so Joffrey could take over. Stannis would've continued his rebellion, likely gaining the support of the Starks with his claim. Without Robb proclaiming himself King of the North, Ned would've pledged the North to Stannis, and the war would've been over fast.
>>69875880
The only reason Stannis went to war against Joffrey was because Ned Stark told him that he was Roberts true heir. He never would have rose up in the first place.
>>69874202
I don't think the northerners would have fought all the way down to king's landing. Or at least once they killed all of House Lannister, I don't think they'd stay there. The south fucking blows.
>>69873893
the war still happens just much later
joffery being king in his own right, cersei machinations and varys actively destablizing westeros makes the war inevitable
>>69874548
>free will doesn't exist
By choosing to get off /tv/ and going for a run to reduce your man titties, you would be practicing free will.
>>69877194
>going for a run
Are you a woman or a twink?
>>69877194
>reduce your man titties
why would I sacrifice my voluptuous bosoms anon?
they're a gift
>>69877194
1. I'm fit
2. Free will doesn't necessarily follow from your hypothetical. After all, the particles in my brain are still restricted to the laws of physics and my behavior follows from the movement of those particles.
>>69874202
>Jaime would have killed Robert.
Showfag? Or do you just know nothing about Jaime's character at all?
Killing Aerys is probably his biggest regret, even though he believes it was the right thing to do. He would have never killed Robert. Cersei would have continued her scheming until she had him killed somehow, but Jaime certainly wouldn't have been a part of it.
>>69877548
Yes, but you're the one directing those particles in your brain.
hold the door
>>69877694
No, the laws of physics are.
>>69877797
So the laws of physics is the one telling you to make a banepost on /tv/? It's not your own decision?
>>69877032
No, he knew about the incest so he would claim the throne anyway
>>69877851
if you're a hard determinist, yes. there is an unbroken chain of causal events going back to the formation of the universe that resulted in a shitpost on 4chan. it's inevitable.
>>69877662
pre-capture jaime would have had no problems killing robert. if he had walked in at the wrong time and caught robert beating cersei he would killed him in an instant.
>>69877662
That subplot is explained in both versions. Anyway, if Jaime kills Robert something would happen. Otherwise it would be
>Robert goes home
>Dies hunting
>Nothing of value
>End
>>69878216
kek
>>69877851
>telling you to make a banepost
No, it's not whispering commands into my ear. It's dictating my behavior, though.
>It's not your own decision?
You're trying to be tricky with the words you're using. Just because physics ultimately dictates my behavior doesn't mean that behavior of my body can't be called mine. Also, it doesn't necessarily mean that decisions don't exist.
Since this is board is designated for movie/tv discussion, I'll use a relevant example. At the end of Alien, Ripley decides to blow up the Nostromo. It was Ripley's own decision to blow up the vessel.
Of course, from an outside an objective point of view it was the screenwriter's decision to have her blow up the ship. However, from Ripley's perspective it was her own decision. Within the context of the movie's universe she is making her own decisions. The same can be said about our decisions in this existence.
>>69874548
>there are people who literally believe in either free will or determinism
>nobody follows based and true compatibilism
You're a fucking idiot, you know that? Every can be said to be "determined" when you look at higher dimensions of existences but in this plane of time and existence you DO have free will with a mix of determinism caused by higher dimensions and your instincts.
>>69873893
I imagine they'd have eventually been invaded by Ramsey and Twen'tey Goodman.
If they even survived that long.
>>69879008
>Twen'tey Goodman
Has there ever been a more prominent off screen character?
hehhe
>>69879063
People love to make fun of the idea that 20 good men could raid Stannis' camp but lets look at the situation objectively and with historic context. The 20 Bolton man are Northerners. They are probably all professional hunters with winter gear, effective winter camo, and winter training. The camp they are raiding is a bunch of freezing people who are not used to the cold and don't know the land. Remember people are constantly deserting the camp to so it is even possible those assigned to guard duty used it as an opportunity to run away.
We know from history it is possible for well trained people to sneak into enemy camps. Among the plain Indians sneaking into enemy camps at night to steal horses or weapons was a common way of counting coup. In medieval warfare besieged castles would send out small sorties to try to set fire to enemy equipment and supplies. Trying to secret set fire to their enemy's camp was a common enough tactic that it is mentioned in the Art of War and there is a story about it in the Bible, Gideon using only 300 men to sneak into the enemy camp to set them on fire. (Judges book 7)
Bolton's men would not even needed to be all that sneaky. They could taken dozens of horse to the edge of camp covered them straw and tar. They light them on fire and send them running forward. Or they could have come to the edge of camp fired a few volleys of flaming arrows and just run away. In heavy snow men with snow shoes or skis can easily outrun horse or people on foot.
Since Stannis was already running low on supplies they didn't need to burn all the food. Even burning a few carts and tents of full of supplies would be a big set back.
>t. Reddit
>>69875714
>Daenerys is assassinated
Best timeline desu
>>69875880
For what reason would Ned support Stannis?
Ned would've never left Winterfell, so no meeting the bastards, no finding the lineage book, no black of hair realization
>>69879113
Enjoy your ban
>>69878216
>if you're a hard determinist, yes
Hard determinism doesn't necessarily have to be true for free will not to exist. Soft determinism would rule out free will and under that view the shitposts were necessarily inevitable.
>>69878830
Yesterday I went to Baskin-Robbins and got an ice cream cone. I had the tough decision of choosing between chocolate and vanilla. Ultimately I chose vanilla. Now, if I went back in time and redid that moment I would choose vanilla again. If I went back once more I would do the same thing again. I would never not choose vanilla in that moment. My decision was entirely dependent on my knowledge/rationale in that moment. I chose vanilla because I knew certain things and I felt a certain way. As long as that knowledge/rational remained constant, my decision would remain constant. Our decisions are ultimately dependent on what we know and how we feel about the world in a given moment. We cannot control this no matter how much compatibilist bullshit you spout.
>>69879114
>autism
More likely Ramsay got the mercenaries to switch up on Stannis and work for him instead.
>>69879566
My exact thoughts about determinism.
If you take all your life experience, you cannot behave in the same situation any other way than you did when it happened. You were either too afraid, or too sure about yourself, you didn't have enough money or you just didn't feel like doing something, in that precise moment and situation.
>>69879566
>Now, if I went back in time
Kek what a bunch of bullshit. Obviously if you went back in time without knowledge you traveled back in time you'd make the same decision again, that doesn't give weight to either determinism or free will when you build up a hypothetical like that.
Like I said again, you have free will in the moment, but ultimately your free will is already "determined" by higher planes of existence.
>>69879844
And that's not including just how susceptible we are to our own brain and instincts.
>>69875714
don't forget that dorne would come up with 3 girls and kill everyone
Renly and Stannis would've risen up anyway without Ned in Kings Landing. Then it would've been a more serious war with Lannisters vs Baratheons-Tyrells I guess.
>>69879566
>Our decisions are ultimately dependent on what we know and how we feel about the world in a given moment.
That has nothing to do with determinism.
>>69879844
>that doesn't give weight to either determinism or free will when you build up a hypothetical like that
Yes it does. It points out that we are ultimately not in control of our futures, forces external to us are. Being able to control one's future is the most significant question in the realm of justice and it's the question most people are asking when they ask "do I have free will."
>>69880401
Yes it does.
>pic related
>inb4 muh libertarian definition
>>69874548
>believes we live in a deterministic universe
I've got some bad news you for you...
>>69880057
Bad poosi slays all
>>69880963
>implying I'm espousing hard determinism
I've got some bad news you for you...
>>69880963
Deliver them I'm eager
>>69875714
>Danaerys is assassinated
This should happen book 1 in every timeline to be honest
>>69877194
>>69877694
>>69877851
>>69879844
>>69880401
>>69880963
>>69878830
Holy shit, free willers BTFO
>>69874202
Why on Earth would Jaime have killed Robert?
