Merlin's Upcoming Conversation with Thirsk

StealthSeeker wrote:The more I think about it the more I believe that Merlin can not open the conversation with Thirsk by telling him that his family is safe. That's because as soon as Merlin tells him that he has his family, the family becomes an inherent took of manipulation in the conversation.

I think Merlin will have to first form a discussion based on the situation that Thirsk finds himself in. The fact that the CoGA doesn't trust him, or they wouldn't have taken his family. (for a vacation) Then continue with the fact that now that the CoGA has no lever on him his most likely going to be killed by the CoGA. He can detail for him the coming destruction of the RDN, throwing in some info about the "City" class iron side with a promise that better was coming. Try to put forth argument about how there might be possibilities to make Dholar's defeat/surrender less bloody.

Then once Thirsk has made up his mind as to what he wants to do, then he can be told that his family is safe and asked if he has any messages he would like to send to them or has any preference as to where he would like them to live. He could then let him look at any letters from them or what ever he may have to prove that they are alive. Maybe the knowledge that they are alive will make a difference in what he wants to do, maybe it wont.

I don't think Merlin will have to worry to much about Thirsk trying to tell others that Merlin was there as that would get people looking at him sideways as it were. Wondering how crazy his family situation had made him. Same goes for any naval information that may be reveled.

PeterZ wrote:@CJK

The King Haaralds will persuade Dohlar to leave the jihad not because they show Charisian invincibility, but because they offer massive evidence that God does not disapprove of Charis. If that is true, than the jihad and the Inquisition are wrong. Loyal children of God cannot support what God himself does not.

n7axw wrote:
Quite to the contrary, Thirsk must be told that his family survives immediately if for no other reason than to get him to stop drinking himself into oblivion. He needs hope and a reason to continue. Withholding that info would be acting in bad faith and have a poor result later. In his shoes, I know I would be pissed off.

Don

StealthSeeker wrote:

n7axw wrote:
Quite to the contrary, Thirsk must be told that his family survives immediately if for no other reason than to get him to stop drinking himself into oblivion. He needs hope and a reason to continue. Withholding that info would be acting in bad faith and have a poor result later. In his shoes, I know I would be pissed off.

Don

So, you are telling me that if the first thing I told you was that I had your whole family, your every thought there after wouldn't be some version of what you had to do for their captors to keep them safe? You wouldn't feel as though your family wasn't being used as a lever to persuade you to make very agreeable choices for their captors? You wouldn't feel that you were being badly manipulated?

No. To live up to the promise to the children, that they would not be used to manipulate their father, you could not tell Thirsk that they were alive as the first thing in your conversation.

StealthSeeker wrote:

n7axw wrote:
Quite to the contrary, Thirsk must be told that his family survives immediately if for no other reason than to get him to stop drinking himself into oblivion. He needs hope and a reason to continue. Withholding that info would be acting in bad faith and have a poor result later. In his shoes, I know I would be pissed off.

Don

So, you are telling me that if the first thing I told you was that I had your whole family, your every thought there after wouldn't be some version of what you had to do for their captors to keep them safe? You wouldn't feel as though your family wasn't being used as a lever to persuade you to make very agreeable choices for their captors? You wouldn't feel that you were being badly manipulated?

No. To live up to the promise to the children, that they would not be used to manipulate their father, you could not tell Thirsk that they were alive as the first thing in your conversation.

JeffEngel wrote:

StealthSeeker wrote:

So, you are telling me that if the first thing I told you was that I had your whole family, your every thought there after wouldn't be some version of what you had to do for their captors to keep them safe? You wouldn't feel as though your family wasn't being used as a lever to persuade you to make very agreeable choices for their captors? You wouldn't feel that you were being badly manipulated?

No. To live up to the promise to the children, that they would not be used to manipulate their father, you could not tell Thirsk that they were alive as the first thing in your conversation.

Don's telling you that, before Thirsk will be able to care about the rest, he has to know his family is safe. And in order to trust someone who, while he's made a decent impression the one time they've met, as has the liege he serves, has nevertheless been on the other side of a bitter war for years, Thirsk is going to have to go without hearing about great big obvious things like his family being in Charisian care and protection as something that was kept from him til other stuff was worked out.

It's possible that the shadow of possible manipulation will hover over the rest of the discussion if it is brought up first - granted. But it's necessary to get Thirsk out of a suicidal funk and engaged in life again, so that's a risk to suck up. And he cannot be jerked around by the shock of seeing Merlin, discussions about stuff he's not prepared right now to care about, and then, oh yeah, now that you "trust" us, surprise, your family's fine. He won't trust them after that.

n7axw wrote:

StealthSeeker wrote:
n7axw wrote:
Quite to the contrary, Thirsk must be told that his family survives immediately if for no other reason than to get him to stop drinking himself into oblivion. He needs hope and a reason to continue. Withholding that info would be acting in bad faith and have a poor result later. In his shoes, I know I would be pissed off.

Don


So, you are telling me that if the first thing I told you was that I had your whole family, your every thought there after wouldn't be some version of what you had to do for their captors to keep them safe? You wouldn't feel as though your family wasn't being used as a lever to persuade you to make very agreeable choices for their captors? You wouldn't feel that you were being badly manipulated?

No. To live up to the promise to the children, that they would not be used to manipulate their father, you could not tell Thirsk that they were alive as the first thing in your conversation.

The very first step to behaving honorably is to tell the truth and let the chips fall where they will. Then it is to keep the promises you make. Finally it is to deal fairly with others by keeping your side of a deal.

There is no way that I could imagine his children not wanting their father to know that they along with his grandchildren are safe nor is there anyway that he would not want to know that.

In fact not telling him would be both cruel and manipulative. I know there can be exceptions to what I said above when to tell the truth in the wrong context could bring harm to innocent or vulnerable people. In Thirsk's case knowing that his fanily is safe and out of danger will ease his mind and ernergize him to do what is necessary rather than drinking himself to oblivion.

To avoid being manipulative, Merlin guarantees his family's safety no matter what and invites him to do what his conscience tells him is the right thing to do, including rejoining his family if that is what he wants. I think he could offer Thirsk support from seijins for any choice not detrimental to the EOC.

But the operative point is that Thirsk no longer has to make his choices worrying about his family. They are safe.

Don

Peter2 wrote:

n7axw wrote:
The very first step to behaving honorably is to tell the truth and let the chips fall where they will. Then it is to keep the promises you make. Finally it is to deal fairly with others by keeping your side of a deal.

There is no way that I could imagine his children not wanting their father to know that they along with his grandchildren are safe nor is there anyway that he would not want to know that.

In fact not telling him would be both cruel and manipulative. I know there can be exceptions to what I said above when to tell the truth in the wrong context could bring harm to innocent or vulnerable people. In Thirsk's case knowing that his fanily is safe and out of danger will ease his mind and ernergize him to do what is necessary rather than drinking himself to oblivion.

To avoid being manipulative, Merlin guarantees his family's safety no matter what and invites him to do what his conscience tells him is the right thing to do, including rejoining his family if that is what he wants. I think he could offer Thirsk support from seijins for any choice not detrimental to the EOC.

But the operative point is that Thirsk no longer has to make his choices worrying about his family. They are safe.

Don

Totally agree. Not to tell him would be cruel, manipulative, and dishonest into the bargain. Even worse, it would be counterproductive.

Putting myself in Thirsk's position, I think to myself when I finally find out: "This guy in front of me has my family safe and sound and leaves me thinking they're still dead???!!!" Depending on my self-control, I may or may not make a serious attempt to tear his head off – seijin or not. But for certain sure, I am going to lose respect both for him and everything he stands for.