I'd need to play the game to say for sure one way or another, but at the very least if it's trying to evoke Izanami then Blue-and-Orange Morality might be a better fit.
Played some of it. I'm now partway through the second chapter, and I will confidently state that the trope should *not* be deleted. Yu's analysis holds that, in its own mind, it is doing the right thing. That is the first and foremost criteria for the trope in question.
I've played all of it, and that impression doesn't stick. They later say that it knows it's wrong, as stated earlier in the entry. This happens around the times when Nozomin/Tomomin are rescued and "Kanami??" appears. It also flat-out refuses, and says it will continue to refuse, sense from not only the Investigation Team, but the people it entraps at the end of the game, who defy its bond. Spoiler tagged for your convenience.
Edited by SilenceInTheLibrary
There is a lot of talking in this game—I mean seriously, a lot of talking. I wouldn't try to be separatist about it, but I would strongly advise completing the game before going on to label Mikuratana-no-Kami a carbon copy of Izanami. All deistic figures in the Persona series so far fit her mold: insist that they are doing their evil deeds because it's what humanity wants, and insist that they are an abstract concept personified. That doesn't mean they are all exactly alike, though.
I wasn't planning on it. If nothing else, it's a shitload more proactive than Izanami ever was. I'm still not convinced it doesn't fit, but we'll see.
I would like to argue for the removal of Well-Intentioned Extremist from the Mikuratana-no-Kami entry. My basis for this is that its connection is neither good nor helpful in any sense and it doesn't care that people don't want it, it just forces it on them if they don't. Note that unlike with Izanami, the Investigation Team don't try to give it any leeway with its logic, they already know it's a liar.
Even if it really did think people wanted the painless bond it offered, there's still room to say it wouldn't apply. It's the same principle as giving a terrorist group nuclear weapons—they may want those weapons, but you giving the weapons to them does not make you a well-intentioned extremist because you're giving them what they want. The extreme does not equal the good intention.
Hide / Show Replies