In This, The End of All Things, I Come Out of Lurking

[Kindler]

So... you now agreeing Susan had soul or are you trying to double standardize a fact into a statistic?

Going back to the well accepted Soul of Human= Freedom of Will, no, Molly doesn't have it anymore, she might think she does, she might continue on and behave in the same way she would have, but she's not going to change in that behavior. Her Humanity has fled her.
*which jives with Woj Lily was simply deluded into thinking she was still human.

I don't think we know enough about the process of turning into a Red Court vampire. I think it's possible that turning kills the person, and they're replaced by something else with the same memories. So I think Susan didn't lose her soul; she died with it. But the Red Court vampire who burst from her skeleton didn't have one. I think the same thing about Black Court vamps.

[jonas]

I don't think we know enough about the process of turning into a Red Court vampire. I think it's possible that turning kills the person, and they're replaced by something else with the same memories. So I think Susan didn't lose her soul; she died with it. But the Red Court vampire who burst from her skeleton didn't have one. I think the same thing about Black Court vamps.

That's said mainly and directly about the black court in  comparison to the other two. I don't think Red's change more than the superficial outer layer, directly impacting their literal food/ hunger) but as it's a transmogrification it slowly becomes more permanent, with the end result being a blood slave. So all those whom maintain themselves, remain themselves.

[Kindler]

That's said mainly and directly about the black court in  comparison to the other two. I don't think Red's change more than the superficial outer layer, directly impacting their literal food/ hunger) but as it's a transmogrification it slowly becomes more permanent, with the end result being a blood slave. So all those whom maintain themselves, remain themselves.

They explicitly form flesh masks, though; they are the flabby bat-things, but make a mask to hide that. They all make attractive ones, too, and I find it unlikely that every turned Red Court vamp was attractive. Didn't one of the Eebs make one that looked like Susan in Changes to hire that hitter to kill Dresden in the Church?

Also, "remaining themselves" is subjective; is that like ghosts, as explained by Mort? They have that person's memories and think they're that person, only changed, but are something else entirely?

[jonas]

They explicitly form flesh masks, though; they are the flabby bat-things, but make a mask to hide that. They all make attractive ones, too, and I find it unlikely that every turned Red Court vamp was attractive. Didn't one of the Eebs make one that looked like Susan in Changes to hire that hitter to kill Dresden in the Church?

Also, "remaining themselves" is subjective; is that like ghosts, as explained by Mort? They have that person's memories and think they're that person, only changed, but are something else entirely?

They form flesh masks, over their true form, they specifically change into gigantic bat creatures. Of course it's subjective, everything's subjective. however we have direct woj dealing with the differences which do not say they simply become something else like BCV's do. The de evolution through transmogrification theory has only to compare the slow degradation into the mindset of the physical form, and the ability to resist this effect through strong willpower.

[Rasins]

So... you now agreeing Susan had soul or are you trying to double standardize a fact into a statistic?

Going back to the well accepted Soul of Human= Freedom of Will, no, Molly doesn't have it anymore, she might think she does, she might continue on and behave in the same way she would have, but she's not going to change in that behavior. Her Humanity has fled her.
*which jives with Woj Lily was simply deluded into thinking she was still human.

Of course Susan had a soul.  I don't believe that the Rampire that took over has a soul though.  Once Susan killed Martin, that effectively killed her too and the Rampire demon took over.

They explicitly form flesh masks, though; they are the flabby bat-things, but make a mask to hide that. They all make attractive ones, too, and I find it unlikely that every turned Red Court vamp was attractive. Didn't one of the Eebs make one that looked like Susan in Changes to hire that hitter to kill Dresden in the Church?

Also, "remaining themselves" is subjective; is that like ghosts, as explained by Mort? They have that person's memories and think they're that person, only changed, but are something else entirely?

They form flesh masks, over their true form, they specifically change into gigantic bat creatures. Of course it's subjective, everything's subjective. however we have direct woj dealing with the differences which do not say they simply become something else like BCV's do. The de evolution through transmogrification theory has only to compare the slow degradation into the mindset of the physical form, and the ability to resist this effect through strong willpower.

AND they can change the way they appear.  Ariana in Edinburgh did not appear the same as she did in Chichen Itza.  Harry even comments on it.  So a Full Rampire can change their flesh mask.  They are not stuck in one shape, like us mere humans.

[jonas]

AND they can change the way they appear.  Ariana in Edinburgh did not appear the same as she did in Chichen Itza.  Harry even comments on it.  So a Full Rampire can change their flesh mask.  They are not stuck in one shape, like us mere humans.

It's a flesh mask, not a full transformation into a human duplicate. Hell having gained partial transmutation ability is actually more in line with them being the result of breaking shapeshifting laws of magic, as it's clearly a direct result of the transformation and its inherent qualities.

Of course Susan had a soul.  I don't believe that the Rampire that took over has a soul though.  Once Susan killed Martin, that effectively killed her too and the Rampire demon took over.

Then of course Molly had a soul, and then she got a Mantle and that took over, effectively stopping her ability to choose and use Mortal magic. can't hypocritically be both. (cause that means there IS a disconnect where the ego wants to be right instead of correct, and I don't abide easily by such logical fallicy -.- statisticalizing facts...)
the degradation of self between Rampire and that as ascribed to Queen Mab are pretty much the same experience with the same end, loss of self into what you've become. As is who they are going into it dictating who they become afterwards as Susan is a prime example of.

[Kindler]

But you're equating mantle acquisition with transfiguration. They're objectively different processes.

And flesh masks isn't shapeshifting, they're created separately from the body—elder Red Court vamps can hide from the sun in the shadow of their flesh masks, which they wouldn't be able to do if they were turning into something else.

I'm stating that the transformation process of turning into a Red Court vampire isn't a gradual process; it's one that has a definable beginning and end. Half-vampires are the middle of that. Once they turn, their human self is destroyed and supplanted by the vampire. It's represented by their physical body changing. There is simply no way their human self could survive the stress of turning, aside from the implications of the vampire consuming it. Because they die, their soul remains intact. Again, when you see a vampire, "you aren't seeing your friend; you're seeing the thing that killed them."

[jonas]

But you're equating mantle acquisition with transfiguration. They're objectively different processes.

And subjectively the same, it's the same world mechanics acting in a streamlined fashion, on the jim butcher appreciation community on FB Jim wojed recently to someone asking about if Archangeldom was a mantle his reply was to the effect of,"it's almost like the rules work consistently in the DF" I can point out these consistencies and the why forth of it usually. Mantles and angels being similar, even other ranks of angels we are unfamiliar with all aligns with the beacon/possession/replacement process as seen in Rasmussen. Possession being the most damaging in it's relation to free will. But the original beacon is always at work, even Kravos came in through the Dream realm, through the mind.
Moving on from some things I've explained before, Rampires work the same but manifest differently. Instead of a shadowy hunger being born through you in your mind/soul, the damage is used to create the mirror directly through said transmogrification effect. they don't directly replace said person, but the mirroring in form and in hunger allow the continued assault by their personal demon/shadow mirror. Where as Blamps simply invert the mirror along the lines of an angelic choice. They are as they are because the penumbral focus is very precisely one person lving person wide, and they appear in a dark mirroring of life as undeath that consumes life directly because of this, also why they grow in strength with every feed/kill, they are true immortals in their own rite.

And flesh masks isn't shapeshifting, they're created separately from the body—elder Red Court vamps can hide from the sun in the shadow of their flesh masks, which they wouldn't be able to do if they were turning into something else.

Causing manifestation of a foreign body part that is not actually of the self(ergo the ability to hide in it's shadow) is actually quite the same as the transformatives done by grey, expand your concept of shapeshifting.

I'm stating that the transformation process of turning into a Red Court vampire isn't a gradual process; it's one that has a definable beginning and end. Half-vampires are the middle of that. Once they turn, their human self is destroyed and supplanted by the vampire. It's represented by their physical body changing. There is simply no way their human self could survive the stress of turning, aside from the implications of the vampire consuming it. Because they die, their soul remains intact. Again, when you see a vampire, "you aren't seeing your friend; you're seeing the thing that killed them."

Nope, Blood slaves are the end of the transformation process, the ability to hold onto your own will, ergo resisting this complete deevlolution into the thing you came to embody is their key to 'royalty'/position. Also how Mab is said to maintain any of who she is, Who you are going in is directly culpable in both regards, ergo Susan's continued love for her child so as to Sacrifice herself for her. Makes her mortal enough for me, as it does my Lawyer Mab
*also directly contradictory to woj on Blamps vs whites and reds. Blamps aren't what used to be human.

[Rasins]

Then of course Molly had a soul, and then she got a Mantle and that took over, effectively stopping her ability to choose and use Mortal magic. can't hypocritically be both. (cause that means there IS a disconnect where the ego wants to be right instead of correct, and I don't abide easily by such logical fallicy -.- statisticalizing facts...)
the degradation of self between Rampire and that as ascribed to Queen Mab are pretty much the same experience with the same end, loss of self into what you've become. As is who they are going into it dictating who they become afterwards as Susan is a prime example of.

I never suggested that Molly didn't lose her Free-Will.  That was evidenced in her Short Story.  But loss of free will does not mean loss of soul.

[forumghost]

From how I understand it, they're two different things.

Ramps are something that murders you and runs around wearing you like a suit, Faerie Mantles are something that slowly mindrapes you into the shape it wants. Neither are the kind of thing that you want to invite to sunday brunch.

[jonas]

From how I understand it, they're two different things.

Ramps are something that murders you and runs around wearing you like a suit, Faerie Mantles are something that slowly mindrapes you into the shape it wants. Neither are the kind of thing that you want to invite to sunday brunch.

The spirit being the main component of the mantles vs soul being angelic is key, the greater force acts directly upon your will and conscious mind, where as Fae mantles all seem to overflow the underlying id making the subconscious overpower conscious will, as it did when Molly tried to say something too direct. The main difference is the layer of conscious ability the invading force has itself. Angelic forces being most sentient with Outsiders as Fearbringer are pure ego, only a mental perspective of overriding willpower that needs to collect to itself the disparate parts of those things that make a composite insider, body, spirit, soul, ect.

*I somehow got the feeling Jim's been reading people complaints about holes in his system as they see them from their perspective... and he wasn't any happier about them then I've been. So if I seem slightly defensive in insisting on seeing a pattern, it's because I DO, even if it's fan crack patterns, they still exist.

[Kindler]

The spirit being the main component of the mantles vs soul being angelic is key, the greater force acts directly upon your will and conscious mind, where as Fae mantles all seem to overflow the underlying id making the subconscious overpower conscious will, as it did when Molly tried to say something too direct. The main difference is the layer of conscious ability the invading force has itself. Angelic forces being most sentient with Outsiders as Fearbringer are pure ego, only a mental perspective of overriding willpower that needs to collect to itself the disparate parts of those things that make a composite insider, body, spirit, soul, ect.

*I somehow got the feeling Jim's been reading people complaints about holes in his system as they see them from their perspective... and he wasn't any happier about them then I've been. So if I seem slightly defensive in insisting on seeing a pattern, it's because I DO, even if it's fan crack patterns, they still exist.

I don't see these things as the same in any regard. One affects the body and mind, the other the mind and soul. I'd like to know how you got the sense of Jim's disappointment, because maybe that will help convince me.

And be as defensive as you like; patterns are everywhere, even if not everyone sees them. I'd never dream of discouraging you; that's not my intent by disagreeing.

[Cozarkian]

You know this is almost entirely wrong, right?  The questions a prosecutor asks do not put the burden on the accused.  If they ask where I was, and I say at home alone, the burden is still on the prosecution to not only prove that I wasn't at home alone, but that I was at the crime scene. I don't have to prove where I was, because I have the presumption of innocence in my favor.

Now, I can provide proof to help my defense.  But if I left it at, "sorry, I was alone", it's not going to get me convicted.  The evidence proving I was there (assuming there was any) would have to do that.  That's the whole point of innocent-until-proven-guilty.

Also, in the U.S. you can just answer "talk to my lawyer" who will inform them you plead the 5th and they will not be allowed to tell the jury that you refused to give an alibi.

[groinkick]

Also, in the U.S. you can just answer "talk to my lawyer" who will inform them you plead the 5th and they will not be allowed to tell the jury that you refused to give an alibi.

They can still claim the defendant was unable to prove their whereabouts at the time of the crime.

[Kindler]

They can still claim the defendant was unable to prove their whereabouts at the time of the crime.

Alibis are just part of a negative defense (outright denial of the crime). To prove, for example, a murder case beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecution relies on the old three elements: means, motive, and opportunity (which aren't actually enough in and of themselves; you need evidence that the opportunity was seized, for example). Lacking an alibi only means that they had an opportunity to commit the crime; it does nothing to establish means or motive, and not having an alibi does not mean that the opportunity was taken. A defendant doesn't have to prove that they weren't there, because the prosecutor still has to provide evidence that they were—a witness, security footage, bank transaction records, or, scarily, cellphone GPS data, for instance. The only witness providing a statement otherwise is the one who says he was where he was.

A good prosecutor will try to get the defendant to slip up and contradict their previous statements; if they said they were home all night watching TV, and later on they say they ran out to pick up milk, that's a different story altogether. That's evidence that they may have acted on the opportunity.

It doesn't always shake out that way; juries are people, after all. But that's not what the law is for.