User:Sol Pacificus/Assassin philosophy

Relativism

"You cannot know anything. Only suspect. You must expect to be wrong, to have overlooked something."

―Malik al-Sayf to Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad

Throughout its long existence, the Assassin Order has opposed tyrants and oppressors alike, priding itself as a "champion of the poor" and downtrodden, while assuming ideals such as equality and freedom and other principles associated with human rights. Though these principles may encourage the view that the Assassins are, like their sworn enemies the Templars, founded on a distinct set of ideals, at its roots, the Assassins' philosophy is grounded not in idealism, but in rationalism and epistemology, with the unique viewpoint that before one devises a specific code of ethics or belief system, one must first approach the world from a chiefly scientific standpoint, un-tempered by biases or such subjective products as morality or faith. To an Assassin, knowledge should be obtained first and foremost through strict objective reasoning, but this method is disrupted by each individual's fundamental dependency on his or her own senses to acquire information. These senses can be deceived in some measure, or otherwise will never convey the precise intrinsic quality of an object. Consequently, they are rendered unreliable, with the end result being that "true" or "full" objectivity is, as Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad argued, unreachable. The driving theory behind the Assassin's creed is thus that "one can only know that one knows nothing," a handicap corroborated by the Precursor Juno, who cited this as a defect of humans.

From this skepticism arises the Assassins' maxim that "nothing is true, everything is permitted," a relativistic assertion designed to provide an answer to the vastly disparate convictions over the perfect solution for humanity's ills: that there is no Truth and any attempted application of a singular ideal on a universal scale is first and foremost unrealistic. Moderation is therefore an inherent principle of the Assassins, who shun extremism as destructive to society,. To treat one belief as absolute is to not only submit oneself to the irrationality of blind faith, but also to alienate inevitable dissenters. These perspectives must always be taken into account, not only in one's outlook of society and life, but also in aspects of one's work, which manifests in the Assassins' emphasis on precision and stealth, and has been referred to by Assassins such as Altaïr and Pierre Bellec as "variables."

The second component of the creed, "everything is permitted" is an extension of this principle of uncertainty. Because the quantity of variables is infinite, it follows that theoretically, anything within nature is possible, for as long as there is no absolute answer to any query, no impossibility can be ascertained, and therefore, one must remain vigilantly open-minded to the unexpected and unknown, without ever drawing a conclusion without being conscious of that conclusion's plausibility of error. Beyond being a further vessel for pluralism, Assassins are taught to be mindful of pretensions and their own capability to achieve either great dreams or great destruction. In essence, this corollary commands one to take responsibility for one's actions towards oneself and society at large."

Though the maxim as a whole is actually meant to be descriptive, nor normative, it nevertheless serves as the threshold into Assassin ethos, wherein reason, not divinity or society, is the source for guidance; dogmatism is discouraged for its potential to brew prejudice and violence,, and

According to Haytham Kenway, the Templar Order was "born of a realization" that humanity is fundamentally corrupt, necessitating strenuous control for it to be guided to peace. From the Assassin perspective, their brotherhood was born of the "realization" that to be wise, one must first liberate one's mind from the assumption of having acquired true knowledge.

Liberalism

"Twenty-two years ago, I stood where I stand now – and watched my loved ones die, betrayed by those I had called friends. Vengeance clouded my mind. It would have consumed me, were it not for the wisdom of a few strangers, who taught me to look past my instincts. They never preached answers, but guided me to learn from myself. We don't need anyone to tell us what to do; not Savonarola, not the Medici. We are free to follow our own path. There are those who will take that freedom from us, and too many of you gladly give it. But it is our ability to choose – whatever you think is true – that makes us human... There is no book or teacher to give you the answers, to show you the path. Choose your own way! Do not follow me, or anyone else"

―Ezio Auditore da Firenze

Though the Assassins' philosophy begins with a purely empirical assessment of life that seemingly verges on nihilism, their order is profoundly idealistic, with a deep sentiment for principles of social justice, humanitarianism, egalitarianism, and liberty.

It is aforementioned that the Assassins' justify perspectivalism with the view that it is logical and realistic, but it is further reinforced ethically by their ardent belief in the "sanctity of life" and each individual's humanity. This, in conjunction with moral relativism, are the guiding motives behind their support for cultural diversity and free will. Assassins perceive societal norms and conventions as artificial structures that can hinder one's partiality and lead to prejudices. These false boundaries include but are not limited to national borders, gender, ethnicity, social class, and race. As a result, Assassins oppose discrimination of virtually every kind, with physical abuse and slavery being especially abhorrent.

Their fierce stance against authoritarianism manifests as well into

[...]

Goals & Motivations

"Man seeks dominion over all that he encounters. I suppose it is a natural tendency for us to aspire towards mastery of our surroundings. But this should not include other human beings. Every day more and more are pressed into service – by deception or by force. Others, though not so firmly imprisoned, are made to feel as if their lives are worthless. I have seen the ways in which men persecute women. Heard the cruel words hurled at those who come here from other lands. Watched as those who believe or act differently are made to suffer...
We discuss such things often – watching as we do from the spires of Masyaf. What can be done to stop this? To encourage tolerance and equality? Some days we speak of education, believing that knowledge will free us from immorality. But as I walk the streets and see slaves sent off to auction – my heart grows cold. When I see the husband hurl abuses and stones at his wife, insisting she exists only to serve him – my fists clench. And when I see children torn from their parents so that another man might profit – sent off to suffer beneath the desert sun and die...
...On these days, I do not think that dialogue will make a difference. On these days, I can think only of how the perpetrators need to die"

―Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad

In light of their antipathy for authoritarianism, the Assassins throughout history fought under the banner of liberation for oppressed peoples. In spite of this, freedom was not at the core heart genesis of what essentially amounts to utopia. Their incompatible visions of the means by which such utopia could be achieved dismantled this common spirit. Unlike the Templars, who condemned humanity as irredeemably weak-minded and corrupt, the Assassins upheld faith, even love, in humanity as one of its core ideals. Their fundamentally skeptic creed neither justified the defeatist attitude that was the hallmark of Templar ideology, nor endorsed the notion that a single group could be wise enough to impress a correct way of life or belief on the people at large. Consequently, they scorned the notion that a short-cut to universal peace, especially in the form of global enslavement or elitist control, could be suitable as a solution to society's ills. Instead, they argued that humanity must be permitted to undergo the slow and arduous journey of developing tolerance for their myriad differences, a process derided as unrealistic and impossible by the Templars. In the Assassin view, peace is a product of education, not force, and this was only possible without the stringent control over information and society that authoritarians advocated. For this reason, Assassins over the centuries became increasingly identified with the ideals of liberty, to the extent that by the American Revolution, many Templars, notably Grand Master Haytham Kenway, believed that the Assassins had abandoned their goal of peace in favor of freedom as an ends, even accusing them of anarchism, although the Assassins supported democracy, not the abolition of order and government.

Ironically, in spite of the Assassins' optimistic view of humanity as a whole, they did not always retain the same faith for adversaries of human rights. This is the guiding force behind their operations, of which assassinations take primacy. Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad could not help but doubt the efficacy of persuasion, lamenting that many abusers were far too cemented in their ways to be redeemed through dialogue. Echoing Altaïr's sentiment, Rebecca Crane once explained to Desmond Miles that sometimes, "there's no other way." To protect the lives of innocents, the Assassins believed that realistically, an ideal, noble resolution was not always possible (i.e. one may have to kill a perpetrator to save an innocent). For many members, compassion was a key motivation that paradoxically translated into objectives that very often revolved around murder. Perhaps most critically, social justice was a unifying theme among Assassins, and in this capacity, they served as a reactionary force against perceived oppression, tyranny, and abuses against humanity, becoming the mortal enemies of the Templars.

Paradoxes & Misconceptions

"What follows are the three great ironies of the Assassin Order: (1) Here we seek to promote peace, but murder is our means. (2) Here we seek to open the minds of men, but require obedience to a master and set of rules. (3) Here we seek to reveal the danger of blind faith, yet we are practitioners ourselves"

―Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad

To laymen and especially Templars, the creed is very often taken literally as a propagation of nihilism, anarchism, and self-gratification. The pirate Edward Kenway, before being inducted into the Assassin Order, is a prime example of this, misconstruing the creed as a suggestion to "chase every desire." The Templar James Wardrop, in his dying words to Shay Cormac, bemoaned that "if everything is permitted, nothing is safe," implying that the maxim is a call for wanton hedonism. Even the scholarly woman Sofia Sartor was apt to remark on the creed's "cynicism" upon first hearing it cited by her future husband, the Mentor Ezio Auditore.

As Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad reported in his codex, it was not an uncommon occurrence that people newly exposed to the creed be waylaid by immorality or driven mad by the disintegration of a sense of security. Experienced Assassins were often obliged to chide their pupils or outsiders for misinterpreting "everything is permitted" as a message to abolish all sense of moral restraint and discipline.

The Assassins' devotion to free will and their assertion of moral relativism can indeed invite questions of whether or not they and their creed are nihilistic or anarchic. Their liberal belief system, along with their support of cultural expression and life, would indicate otherwise. The creed itself, however, implies that all values are meaningless. A contradiction thus arises, which can be summarized as "why do Assassins adhere strictly to beliefs while asserting that none are true?" This can be taken even further into a charge of hypocrisy when one considers that Assassins preach freedom of beliefs and yet use violence to suppress those who reject their own beliefs (of free will), an accusation that the Templars Abu'l Nuqoud and Jubair al Hakim directed upon Altaïr ibn-La'Ahad with their dying words.

While Altaïr at the time noted that he had no "satisfactory answer" to these charges" even expressing fear that "none exist," Ezio Auditore and Edward Kenway both provided insight into how these paradoxes are resolved.

In addressing this paradox, Ezio explained that the creed itself is more akin to that of a scientific theory, rather than a doctrine in itself, and therefore it is not meant to be followed or obeyed, but merely understood. Edward Kenway, upon his induction into the Assassin Order, posed the same questions to the Mentor Ah Tabai. When Ah Tabai redirected them back to him, the former pirate answered that "it might be that this idea is only the beginning of wisdom, and not its final form." In other words, the creed would be call to nihilism--and therefore implicitly the Assassins hypocritical for not adhering wholly to it--if it were the dogma itself. It is not, however, the dogma of the Assassins for it can be said to be the scientific introduction to a belief system, one that formulated only the framework of an ideology, but not the completed complex of ideals itself. As such, while "nothing is true," and all beliefs and moral values are false from an objective standpoint, it does not follow that morals and beliefs should be treated as false from an ethical standpoint, only understood as such. While "everything is permitted" from a rational standpoint, it does not follow that everything should be permitted ethically. The Assassins regard the creed as an exposition to their concept of wisdom, in that they believe that one must first understand the subjective origins of all beliefs and values before devising his or her own ideology, so as to remain open-minded and unprejudiced, but the relativity of beliefs does not make beliefs insignificant.

While explaining why the creed is not meant to support nihilism or anarchism, it does not resolve the paradox that Assassins murder in the name of peace or kill those that disagree with their own ideals in the name of free will. Altaïr, in attempting to provide an answer, suggested that the creed incorporates an even deeper meaning: that paradoxes exist and are not impossible, or rather that it is because paradoxes exist and cannot be avoided, that "nothing is true.

_________________
[Should this explanation be included?]
For instance, when one believes in free will, one by extension, disbelieves in the antithesis: the repression of free will. In opposing the repression of free will, one would therefore be opposing the free will of a party (i.e. the party that represses free will), but this opposition of the free will of this party originates from the belief in free will. [It is fundamentally impossible to not be "hypocritical" when supporting freedom of beliefs, because this support is a belief in itself. ~ think this wording over]