How does a man hunt Monsters without becoming a Monster himself?

Why would you be hunting friendly, cuddly things?

that isn't even remotely true, go back to retarddit

By doing a little dance after killing each monster.

By wearing a comdom

Yea, you monster!

>What is ISIS

>ISIS
>Compared to litterally 10000 years of constant permanent warfare

The syrian/irak civil war with only 500.000 victims at best is child play compared to other shit.

By killing to protect others instead of selfish reasons.

If I kill others to protect my guilty brother from going to jail for murder, am I not a monster?

You can't become a monster if you are already one.

Why care? You don't decide if you're a monster, that's for others to claim. And if they claim so it doesn't matter how lawful or righteous you are, you will be hunted.

Hunt as you see fit and die at the claw of a worthy predator before an insidious little shit has it in them to backstab you.

By being Lawful Good.

Depends on the setting.

>How does a man hunt Monsters without becoming a Monster himself?

Have a hobby on the side to keep you from becoming compulsive about work.
Take up gardening, get a dog, maybe pursue an interest in organized religion, read and collect illustrated (or if your time period permits, photographic) pornography, something that you can do in your spare time that you enjoy to round out your psyche.

>t. soyboy
yeah how bad these guys your (((social media))) tells you they were bad were.

>WWII Japan and German
>Stalin
>Genghis Khan

All devout I'm sure.

I never said Faith had a monopoly on Monsters, but to say it hasn't made it's own share of monsters is foolish.

Also, Genghis Khan was religious in the "You can pray to whatever God you want, but you have to say a prayer for him/her/them to watch over your Khan" sense.

Just be yourself.

By being someone with a conscience and not a deus vulting genocidal retard.

To hug them.

>Having to cleanse the woodlands of thieving, inbred wombles
>Going full purgation mode on hives of disgusting, homo communist smurfs
>Don't even fucking start on Sesame street and the horrors in that urban hell

By not being a relativist pseudo-intellectual and realizing there is a vast difference between hunting eldritch abominations whose sole purpose in existing is to cause terror and death and actually being such a thing.

Like, this isn't fucking hard. The guy who throws the switch on the electric chair is killing someone, but he isn't a murderer. The cop who is forced to kill in the line of duty has killed someone, but they aren't a murderer. A soldier who fights a war will likely kill people, but probably won't have murdered any of those people. All murdered things die, not all things that die have been murdered.

This isn't a difficult question unless you've only learned about relativist philosophy through pop-culture. Not all killing is intrinsically wrong.

>The guy who throws the switch on the electric chair is killing someone, but he isn't a murderer.

But he is?

>japan still believed emperor had a divine right to rule during ww2, highly spiritual culture to this day
>nazi germany supported by clergy in their own country
>genghis khan, a man who lived centuries before mass secularization in a culture that is still highly spiritual today and is literally quoted as saying "I am the punishment of God"
>no faith involved, im sure

You're kind of fucking dumb, aren't you?

But he isn't? There is a chasm between "wantonly killing someone, or killing some for personal desire or out of individual malice" and "punishing a criminal who has received a verdict from a jury of his peers through a construction that is wielding the will of society at large".

They literally are not comparable, unless you're an idiot.

To a pacifist, it's all the same thing. There are no varying levels of killing where some are okay and some are not.

All killings are wrong.

why is it bad to become a monster?
the real problem is to become annoying, or degenerate

>in my purpose built mental gymnasium, im a priori right

Truth is determined by wide-scale social arbitration, not individual feelings or opinions. If you want "all killings are wrong" to be true, go convince the world of that. Until then, it's strictly sophistry, and overly-sententious sophistry as that.

Carefully.

...

Not really, truth is a very personal thing when it comes to philosophy or moralising. He's free to believe that all killing is wrong. Changing the opinion of others would help make it a social more or a full on law but as far as 'Truth' is concerned, that's his own decision.

>purpose built metal gymnasium

Absolute Pacifism is a well-established field of philosophical belief with practitioners and sects throughout history.

Individual truth holds no merit external to the individual, so an idea like "all killings are wrong" means nothing unless a majority of society all believes that and is willing to impose that belief. He can believe what he wants, but it has absolutely no authority unless most of everyone else believes it to.

That's great, but not all philosophers or cultures have been pacifists, and relativism's ultimate revelation is that truth and authority are created via social arbitration. In his case of
>to a pacifist
it is absolutely boxing in the argument so he can be right without having to consider the wider moral and social argument about killing. There have existed and continue to exist not only a plurality but also a majority of societies and individuals who recognize that not only are not all killings wrong, but also that violence can be justified in many ways.

So the idea that "all killings are wrong" is a universally recognized truth that has universal authority is complete non-sense. It will only be true and hold merit when a majority of people feel that way.

Murder: The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another

By definition, judicial death sentences are not murder because they are lawful. They're executions, not murders.

>Legal Definition

FTFY

In some lands, abortions are considered murder. Which land has the truth?

with a gun

One person amidst a sea of c students gets it.

That was just dictionary definition. If you're killing a person unlawfully, it's murder. If you consider a fetus of whatever age a person, and abortions are illegal, then yes aborting it is murder. This isn't complicated.

>It's murder here
>But if we walk three steps forward, over the border, it's no longer murder

Correct. This is how laws work, they're different in different places.

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

And which one is the Truth?

How does a man hunt a bear without becoming a bear himself?

Not drinking their weird corrupted blood probably helps.

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

Animal Hunters often find themselves knowing things only the animal knows from birth. The longer you hunt something, the more you take on its traits, unknowingly or not.

Neither? Both? Who said there was a "Truth"? It's like it being sunny in one country and rainy in another- What is the "True Weather"? It's a meaningless question. The weather varies based on location and what constitutes murder is based on location.

Note that "murder" has no inherent moral qualities, beyond that it involves killing a person and that killing being unlawful (most people find both killing and unlawful acts reprehensible on some level). You can certainly have killings which are lawful that are very very wrong (If your state says it's okay, torturing someone to death could be not-murder, even if most people would agree it was morally reprehensible).

All "murder" means is "unlawful killing". It makes no statement as to the absolute moral qualities of the action at hand. Because it is defined by local laws, what constitutes murder can vary from place to place.

>And which one is the Truth?

It depends on who you ask.

And for an Absolute Pacifist, who finds all killing wrong, it would not be incorrect for him to believe all who take life is murder, yeah?

This actually sounds like an interesting premise; reminds me of pokemon IVs. When you kill something, you have a chance to get an increase in its highest stat, a point in one of its skills, or get one of its abilities. Hunting game, where players get stronger by taking down increasingly exotic monsters to become super-humans.

The only reason god hasn’t killed niggers is cause we’re supposed to rape themSoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

It would be incorrect to other people.

I didn't ask about other people, I asked about the Absolute Pacifism, because of

An absolute pacifist would be wrong to view all taking of life as murder. Again, murder is defined as unlawful killing. Not all killing is unlawful, thus not all killing is murder. Finding something wrong doesn't make it unlawful, and doesn't make it murder. Murder is not "killing you disapprove of".

We would, however, expect the pacifist to disapprove of forms of killing which aren't murder (in addition to murder). Executions, as previously discussed, are not murder, but are still abhorrent to the pacifist.

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

Only faggots don’t believe in god why are you all such faggots hahahahahahahahahhaSoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

>Truth is determined by wide-scale social arbitration
This is not how truth works. If you convince the entire population that we can fly, that doesn't make it true. Truth exists independent of our existence and beliefs.

Again, you're making "Right/Wrong" (in the sense of Truth) to be synonymous with "Lawful/Unlawful"

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The definition of murder is unlawful killing. So yes, what constitutes murder is based on the law. Calling something murder or not does not mean you're calling it morally wrong or right, only that you're calling it unlawful killing or not, because that's all the word "murder" means.

Soy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boySoy boy soy boy soy boy soy boy

And an Absolute Pacifist believes that all killing should be unlawful.

That doesn't make him right or wrong in the sense of Truth, only a conservative or a progressive depending on which country he resides in. Either way, in each country, he is still, according to his Truth, right.

Believing something should or should not be unlawful does not make it so. The pacifist does not determine what is murder, the local legislature does. Your personal beliefs do not have any bearing on what constitutes murder.

If you do something illegal which you think should not be, you still did an illegal thing. It isn't your decision to make. It being legal somewhere else doesn't change the fact that it is illegal here. There is no "True" answer to whether the act is legal or not.

How does a man hunt deer without becoming a deer himself

MAKING SURE TO EAT YOUR VEGGIES (MEAT)

Like killing communists, thanks user.

Humans are monstrous by nature

By killing all of the monsters.

If you kill all of the monsters, then there are obviouslly no monsters left.
If there are no monsters left, then you are evidently not a monster.

9/11

By shooting blindly. Because the only other option is to think a bit like the deer and estimate their behaviour.

Check, mate.

Chosen Undead>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Artorias the Abyssdrowner
Probably the best fight in the series though, albeit possibly tied first with a few others

>has it in them to backstab you
>being in a team or group environment
>"hunter"

Joke's on you: as the teaching assistant I don't need to pass this subject.

OP, I'll spare you the joke answers.

By being worse than the monsters you hunt.

A beast knows only of its instincts, only the means to perpetuate its existence. But I am human. I have more than mere instinct. I have the capacity to hate, and so long as I may hate my enemies, any harm they may do to me will be revisited upon them a hundredfold. And from this hate, this great inferno of hate, they shall know me not as mere man, but the embodiment of fear itself.

Take pic related for example. He didn't make it his quest to rip and tear demon guts simply because it was his job. Those demon bastards killed his pet bunny, and for that, he didn't just stop the initial invasion on Phobos, he went into Hell to kill them all. When he came out of hell in Doom 2, he continued to fight demons and went right back into Hell when it turned out they started their invasion from his hometown. It takes hate to be Doomguy, and you should strive to be nothing less.

>he is still, according to his beliefs, right.
ftfy
Don't cheapen the word truth, especially when capitalized. The truth is not the same thing as random peoples' possibly fickle beliefs. The truth is reality, largely unknowable to mortal minds, and does not vary depending on who is trying to look at it. The fact that different people have different ideas of what the truth is means only that at least one of them is wrong to some degree, not that there's more than one Truth.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that many people believe that there are universal laws, possibly put in place by God, and killing people is or is not murder according to those laws, no matter who or where it happens. There's also the matter of worldly laws disagreeing with each other about the boundaries of their jurisdictions.

By already being one.

Don't do it, human. Don't become a monster...a monster like me...

By not being a faggot about it.

“He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself; and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

I always liked this quote. Just like being a soldier for too long will break you, so will fighting monsters. There's no way to stay sane for too long, because your job involves the horrors of death and combat on a constant basis. What the job does to you is something that many fear, but the job is too important to leave alone, so men make the sacrifice - usually to seek glory or to make a wage to support their family.

You can play this two ways:
a) people who fight monsters eventually becomes monsters themselves. Either via transformation or mind break that turns them too volatile to keep around people any longer. How they are dealt with may vary. They may be killed, sent to die fighting monsters, or sent to a specialised ward for care in honour of their deeds.
b) in a profession as dangerous as this, monster hunters are forced to become ruthless, cunning, and cold to get the job done effectively. A seasoned monster hunter may know what it takes to get the job done... but you should be wary of an old man in a job where men usually die young. The monster may be closer than you think.

by not hating the monsters, but still hunting them because it's the way to fulfill what you perceive as your true path.

It's tricky and nobody expects you to achieve this state of enlightment permanently.

A good key is to remember that monsters oppose you for one of this reasons:

a) their lifepath opposes yours and only one can prevail; and thus they don't deserve hate, but to be fought and overpowered as part of the natural law.

b) they've been fooled by demons (greed, hate, ignorance), and thus they deserve compassion more than hate

c) you've been fooled by demons, and thus they're right. They don't deserve hate, but to be acknowledged as masters.

d) an entangled mix of all the others.

>le epic angry doom guy
>edgy answer
>reddit spacing
checks out

A monster of god still is nothing but another monster.

Have them be a pillar of the community first and foremost.

It's great how the fucking LotR RPG The One Ring reflects that.

You start out relatively inexperienced with your Hope score way up, and no Shadow score. But as you progress through the campaigns, you'll accumulate Shadow score and slowly lose Hope score. By the end, your character is an experiences and hardened adventurer, but also scarred by their journeys and close to falling to the shadow than they'd been before.

>that spelling
I should do more proof-reading

>The guy who throws the switch on the electric chair is killing someone, but he isn't a murderer.

"I didn't murder him, I just had him strapped down to a chair, looked him in the eye as he knew that his life was about to end, and there was nothing he, or anyone, could do about it. He was alone with no one but himself and his killers. His cries for help would fall on deaf ears. Then when he sat there, gazing into the abyss, waiting for his death that may or may not have be justified (innocent people get executed all the time), I pulled the switch and killed him in a manner most painful. There was no grace in his death. I didn't murder him. I just took his life in the most horrendous way permitted to me, something you would see in a horror movie done by the villain. My conscience is clear."

Sure, if the state tells you to do it, it isn't technically defined as murder. But how is it any better? You could just have shot him in the head when he wasn't looking or poisoned his food. But instead you elected to make a show out of it and prepare him for a ceremony of electrocution, which he may wait a very long time for in a queue before it even happens. All this time he knows he will die, and it's being carried out in the more lethargic way possible. Probably because the prison makes money for having him in captivity. Worse still, he may have been innocent. This happens. And you were never forced to pull the switch. The worst that would happen if you didn't is you get a disciplinary hearing or lose your job, but at least you didn't kill a potentially innocent man in a most gruesome fashion. How was your killing any better than a murder?

Gotta have that work/life balance, bro.

>Just like being a soldier for too long will break you
This is a meme