In Game of Thrones, at least twice, a character has had gratitude for horrible events in their life because they say it has lead them to meet their soul mate.

In one episode Grey Worm, a soldier, says something along the lines of, "...if I wasn't an unsullied...I wouldn't have met you [girl he likes]". (season 4? episode ?)

In another episode a sell sword says something along the lines of, "My mother sold me to the fighting pits where I gained wealth, bought my own freedom and then met you [girl he likes]" (season 5 episode 1)

To summarize, it sounds like they are saying, "The horrible things I went through led me to this good thing in my life and my exquisite character."

It almost sounds like it justifies or glamorizes the existence of the horrible things or the experience of going through it. And that the horrible thing caused the meeting of the two people. Or that horrible things made someone a better person.

We have no evidence that they are a better person or a worse person or that they would not have met anyway without the experience because we only see one timeline. According to the evidence, many times horrific events lead to PTSD and anxiety disorders.

Are there fallacies in these character's reasoning?

  • 2
    I'd just point out that it's not trauma or hardship per se, but how one manages it, which is actually responsible for character development and leading a person to be in the 'right places at the right times'. Perhaps the characters in GOT were simply being modest? – Bread Oct 28 '18 at 12:20
  • They don't claim to be better people, just lucky in love. However, countless people claim to have become 'better' because of horrible experiences. Indeed. one common explanation for the suffering of the world is that we learn from it. (Your title is muddled and it might benefit from an edit). – user20253 Nov 28 '18 at 10:46

No, it is definitely not a fallacy. A fallacy is generally considered a flaw in an argument or an Invalid argument. However, the characters are not arguing they are merely stating their subjective internalization of events. So no, it is definitely not a fallacy since the statements are not, what we call, logical propositions.

As for the claim that, "we have no evidence," that the events made them a better person. Then, that too, is slightly flawed. Let me ask you, what do you mean by evidence? What kind of evidence would suffice for my claim that I love ice-cream? I could eat an ice-cream, right? But that wouldn't prove I love it. Similarly, the problem with any subjective claim is: it can not be proven via evidence. Therefore, the statements are not fallacious because the statements are subjective, and consequently, they are not logical propositions.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    This downvote was an error. Sorry. – Mark Andrews Oct 29 '18 at 23:28
  • @MarkAndrews no problem, if it was in error, you can undo it. – Bertrand Wittgenstein's Ghost Oct 30 '18 at 4:20
  • Done! Earlier I was told I could not do so. – Mark Andrews Oct 30 '18 at 17:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.