User:Sol Pacificus/Assassin philosophy

Philosophy and goals

"To recognize nothing is true and everything is permitted. That laws arise not from divinity, but reason. I understand now that our Creed does not command us to be free. It commands us to be wise."

―Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad, 1191

Origins

Since its earliest beginnings, the Assassin Order has taken it upon themselves to be a force for the protection of humanity against social injustice, abuses of power, state terror, and enslavement. They have prided themselves on sacrificing their lives to "champion the poor and powerless" while embracing human rights ideals such as equality, liberty, justice, and welfare. This premise can be traced back to the order's founding as the Hidden Ones by the last Medjay of Egypt, Bayek, and his wife Amunet. Recognizing that their sworn enemies, the Order of the Ancients, "work[ed] in the shadows of kings and queens" to control nations for their whims, Bayek advocated that there needed to be those who "work in the shadows. . .to defend the free will of the people". True to his Medjay roots, Bayek was bringing to the fledgling group the principle of ma'at he had lived by in his service to Egypt. His ardent belief was that the Medjay was not merely the protector of the pharaoh but the protector of the Egyptian people as well, especially the downtrodden among them. Nor did their duty stop at protection; it extended further to the advancement of their well-being. It was the determination of the first Hidden Ones that their society's unity owed not to an exalted leader but in the shared values of their cause, encapsulated in the Creed. An individual-centric, rather than a state-centric, orientation and the concept of peace as self-fulfillment rather than merely security are themes which have echoed through the ages in Assassin political action, undergirding their opposition to coercive authority.

The Creed

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

―Malik al-Sayf to Altaïr Ibn-La'ahad, 1191

Because of its symbolic role for the Assassins' values, the Creed, consisting of a central maxim and three proscriptive tenets, has served as the highest authority guiding the ethics of their actions and as their foundational code. It has often been misinterpreted literally by their Templar enemies and third-parties alike to prescribe moral nihilism, enable wanton hedonism, and propagate the pursuit of absolute individual freedoms without a mind to the risk of "chaos". While certain Assassins across history, such as Spanish Assassins María and Aguilar de Nerha, have been more dogmatic in their obeisance to it than others, the Creed's maxim is fundamentally a descriptive claim about the nature of reality to be contemplated and not a doctrine to be followed. For all their idealism, the Assassins' philosophy begins with epistemological principles and not normative ethics.

"Nothing is true, everything is permitted."

This claim pertains to philosophical skepticism and moral relativism. "Nothing is true" is an affirmation that Truth, as an absolute, flawless worldview applicable to all contexts, does not exist—or if it does, then human beings lack the capacity to know it. As the Mentor Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad reflected in his Codex, perfect objectivity is unachievable because the sheer amount of variables and formulae needed to construct an ideal paradigm for our world's quandaries and travails is infinitely great. The intricate depths of reality is awe-inspiring and fathomless, and its labyrinthine web of interconnections are impossible to thoroughly unravel. Humans can reach for perfection by employing the empirical process of information-gathering, thereby becoming ever more and more objective in our understandings, but Truth behaves asymptotically—it shall always remain elusive and just beyond our grasp.

These limits of empiricism are given expression in the line "everything is permitted", which serves as a reminder that it is fallacious to presume the uniformity of nature. Patterns of the present are not proofs of the future, which can always be radically different from all that has preceded it. As teased by a message left by the Isu for humanity in Oun-mAa Niye Ressoot, all the regularities of sentient beings' lifelong experiences, too, cannot falsify the possibility that they exist only within a "masterfully crafted simulation" or a "dream within a dream".

Confronted by this complexity of reality, humans are compelled to simplify it into comprehensible models, but some react with a more intense impulse: insecurity in the face of uncertainty. With this insecurity comes the desire to resolve it through the assumption of a truth and obtain a measure of certainty, a certainty that is inherently self-deceptive. A danger arises when an individual, in their fixation on their truth, becomes convinced of its universality and strives to impose it onto the world as the grand solution, a project that inevitably involves the violent erasure of other epistemic communities. Replication of this imaginary truth across the ages in the form of harmful discursive practices and repression of dissent can cement it in societal consciousness as a self-evident Truth—a "realization"—but it will always remain fundamentally a falsehood. The Assassins identify this progression from fear of uncertainty to the cloaking of an illusion as Truth to be a destructive force to humanity and a recurring theme among authoritarians like their sworn enemies, the Templars. When Al Mualim betrayed the Assassins in 1191, Altaïr recognized that their own leader had succumbed to this same temptation.

As a result, Assassins teach their pupils that complex answers to life should be embraced, and uncertainty should be accepted as natural. Wisdom begins with uncertainty and not from self-assurance. While this pedagogical practice, alongside anti-authoritarianism, gives the Creed a normative slant, the starting Assassin premise against Templar ideology rests still on epistemic grounds. Many of the leading Assassins throughout history, such as Altaïr Ibn-La'ahad and Ezio Auditore reify their moral convictions to pluralism, humanitarianism, and egalitarianism by reference to the Creed, but the Creed itself may not necessarily entail these political stances. Its core argument remains that sentient beings do not truly know anything and that no single norm is correct for every individual and every culture in all contexts. In the Assassin's eyes, if the Templars are in error, that error lies not just in their deeds' inhumane outcomes but also in their self-denial that their own truth does not amount to universal reality, for it is not any more or less objective than the Assassins' own ethical values. The classic Templar conception of their perennial conflict with the Assassins hinges on false binaries such as "order" vs. "freedom", presupposing parity in incommensurable first-order claims. This narrative actually elides the proposition of fallibility central to Assassin thought, the admission that even the Assassin way is not absolute. Unlike the Templars, the Assassins engage in higher-order questions of meta-ethics.

The introspective quality of Assassin philosophy is evinced in the self-awareness by Rebecca Crane and Shaun Hastings that to be Assassins does not necessarily mean to be the "good guys"; they make no claims that they are a force of flawless, moral good, only that their way of life is chosen because they believe it is the best they can do to prevent greater harm to humanity. The introspection is again apparent in Altaïr's reflections of the "ironies" in their order's practices: that they murder while seeking to promote peace, that they mandate discipline to a code of rules while seeking to open minds, and that they embody ideals requiring leaps in faith despite warning against blind faith. To be an Assassin is to recognize that nothing is absolute, and yet to be an Assassin means to cherish the sanctity of life. They cherish this sanctity, yet punish those who do not, employing violence against life in doing so.

The paradoxes between their theory and practice has not been lost on Assassins through the ages. To meditate on one's own internal contradictions, on the possibility of hypocrisy, is a central facet of their philosophy. In answering his own charge, Altaïr hazards to circle back to the Creed, for contained within it is the perception that polar opposites may be true simultaneously. The nature of reality is paradoxical and that is why it is complex and full of uncertainties. When queried by the Maya Mentor Ah Tabai, Edward Kenway offered the insight that the Creed was "only the beginning of wisdom, and not its final form". The descriptive affirmation that "nothing is true, everything is permitted" does not prevent an individual from developing their own value and belief system, but the Assassins hold that without prior acknowledgement of the subjective source of those convictions, there can be no wisdom no matter the content of those principles. Were the maxim the "final form" of wisdom, i.e. doctrine in itself, one might be forgiven for assuming that "nothing is true" entails ethical nihilism and "everything is permitted" entails hedonism, but it is actually altogether a warning against fanaticism.

In asking for awareness that nothing in nature is forbidden, it does not prescribe any particular lifestyle. What an individual chooses to do with this understanding of reality is pursuant to their own will. Newcomers to the order, such as Parisian Assassin Arno Dorian, typically undergo a self-journey before realizing this meaning behind the Creed. Others, such as his hardline master Pierre Bellec, who murdered their Mentor Honoré Mirabeau for extending goodwill to Templars, never did. In the time of Altaïr, he observed that many recruits were "driven mad" as the "revelation undoes them".

[This introspective quality... example of Shaun and Rebecca remarking on the ethical dilemma of assassinations?] [Need to explain: rejection of innate knowledge & divinity, fallibility principle, impossibility of knowledge citing limits of senses]

The classic Templar conception of their perennial conflict with the Assassins is the incommensurability of their political beliefs. The former believes it to be a given that the corruptibility of human nature requires that lasting peace can only be achieved by an enlightened few establishing "order" (à la monopolizing global power); the latter naïvely maintains a faith in humanity's potential to foster peace by permitting their "freedom". While this broadly speaks true to their platforms, the false binary masks a critical difference in the nature of their philosophies. Templar thought revolves solely around first-order normative claims while the Creed deals in higher-order questions of meta-ethics.

The classic Templar conception of their perennial conflict with the Assassins is the incommensurability of their political beliefs vis-à-vis pessimistic vs. optimistic views of human nature and "order" vs. "freedom", but these false binaries elide the proposition of fallibility central to Assassin thought. Unlike the exclusively first-order claims of Templar thought, the Assassins engage higher-order questions of meta-ethics.

Its core argument remains that humans do not truly know anything and that no perspective is infallible. To the Assassins, the error of those who impose their worldviews as Truth lies not merely in the harmful consequences but also in the very denial of its real fallibility. The classic Templar conception of their perennial conflict with the Assassins is the incommensurability of their political beliefs vis-à-vis pessimism vs. optimism towards human nature and "order" vs. "freedom", but these false binaries elide this proposition of fallibility central to Assassin thought.

They identify their foes' error in the very denial of the reality that all perspectives are fallible and not just from the ethical opprobrium against the inhumane consequences of their actions.

Unlike the exclusively first-order claims of Templar thought, the Assassins thus engage in higher-order questions of meta-ethics.

To the Assassins, the Templars' error is not just in the inhumane consequences of their thoughts and actions but also in their very unwillingness to admit to that truths are unknowable.

The core argument remains that sentient beings do not truly know anything and if the Templars are in error, that error lies not just in the inhumane consequences of their deeds but also in their self-denial that their own truth does not amount to reality, for it is not any less objective than the Assassins' own ethical values.

While Assassins recognize the limits to empiricism, they also reject the belief in innate knowledge. They reject appeals to innate knowledge or divinity and claims to a priori truths, leaving empirical reasoning, for all its limits, as the best and sole recourse to understanding. [Does not reject pursuit of knowledge despite their belief it is not truly attainable].

[Thus, the difference between the Templars and Assassins is that the former denies the fallibility of their beliefs, treating it as absolute, while the latter teaches that ultimately, an Assassin must be prepared even to admit that the Assassin way is fallible.] [Note Shaun & Rebecca correcting Desmond that because they kill, they are not necessarily good guys.]

[End with Edward's answer that the Creed is the beginning of wisdom and not its final form].

Outline: Assassin philosophy

“Nothing is true, everything is permitted”

• The meaning cannot possibly be so straightforward since it would contradict Altaïr and Ezio’s profound sense of moral integrity and altruism

Nothing is true

Meaning: There is no Truth

• No true objectivity, limits of knowledge

Normative corollaries

1. Be wary of extremism and dogmatism
2. Perspectivism – be mindful and respectful of different perspectives
3. Pluralism – cherishing diversity of beliefs, cultures, and peoples
4. The world is ever uncertain and infinitely complex, accept it and embrace it, do not be insecure because of it. Do not glorify simplicity.
5. Self-fallibility – certainty leads to stagnation, even the greatest genius will begin to decline the moment they become certain (cf. Socrates)
6. Absolutism leads to this very inevitable stagnation and decline of a country
7. Just as there is no true objectivity, perfection is unreachable
8. It does not follow that since perfection is unreachable, one ought not to strive for betterment (or to “reach” for that perfection)
9. Order increases margins of error, costing accuracy, but it is necessary for human beings to grasp and process some of the world*
10. Self-cultivation & education: Therefore, even as we acknowledge that perfection is unreachable, we can still strive to reach as far as we can for it, so that the world and our lives can be as best as they can be (cf. Confucianism)
11. Progressivism: This cultivation entails ever refining and fine-tuning our understandings and models.
12. By these above principles, this fine-tuned cultivation requires free exchange of ideas, values, beliefs, and criticism, so as to account for all cases of structural violence as much as possible.
13. This cultivation entails beginning from uncertainty and inducing order where necessary, not beginning from certainty and inducing order on presumption of necessity and then inviting whatever chaos in service to that artificial certainty (contrast: Templars)
14. Libertarianism: By these above principles, the ideal society is one where hierarchies are non-existent, or failing that, a society where hierarchies exist the most minimally, constructed only where necessary.
15. Precision: By these above principles, order where necessary to be induced should be fine-tuned for the greatest possible precision, so as to minimalize error both intellectually (e.g. over-generalizations, projection, false binaries) and in practice (i.e. collateral damage, miscarriage of justice, reverberations of violence)‡
16. Political realism is fallacious. (Because it entails sweeping over-generalizations and presumptions, such as the state being the only meaningful unit of analysis, not individuals or social groups, and the reduction of human nature to the singular quality of being "selfish" and "prone to corruption".)

*Clarification: These margins of error include among them abuses of power, collateral damage to innocent lives, injustice wrought even where the application of law is just, etc.

†Depending on one's interpretation of necessity, necessary order and fine-tuning of society may entail the development of institutional checks and balances to collectively constrain acts of violence (∴ democracy). However, as we see from the failures of the United Nations, institutional constraints on international violence can help to perpetuate acts of state terrorism.

‡Contrast with Templars, whose methodology is defined by brazen acts of chaos and lack of discipline. To date, Evie Frye is one of the best examples of an Assassin who diligently respects this principle of precision. By this last principle, correlating the Assassins and Templars to freedom/chaos and order is definitively wrong and a meta-example of a false binary. To be an Assassin means to be wary of false binaries – even that of Assassins vs. Templars, freedom vs. order. (cf. Hypocrisy of Pierre Bellec)

Everything is permitted

• Anything is possible, perhaps not within physical constraints, but the possibility of anything being possible is possible (e.g. the world is just a simulation)
• It is fallacious to assume a dream cannot be achieved by virtue of its improbability of success, the colossal challenges before it, or it having never yet been achieved
• The most miraculous success can occur for the hopeless; the most unimaginable tragedy can befall the seemingly invincible—whether gradually or suddenly
• Because – It is fallacious to assume the uniformity of nature (cf. David Hume)
• To "follow the way of nature" and to "go with the flow" is prescriptively hollow; every way that is walked is permitted by nature by virtue of existing (cf. Zhuangzi)
• Paradoxical philosophical positions and antithetical political beliefs may only be reconcilable at the plane of nature, but they may be irreconcilable at the plane of humanity

Normative corollaries

• Be open-minded. There are always possibilities about a situation and other people we may not have considered.
• We should not give up on aspiring for our dreams and for change, no matter how hopeless them may seem.
• We should not be dismissive of the dreams of others on the basis of their improbability of success.
• We must take responsibility for our own lives, successes, and failure, for we are the "architects of our actions"...
• ...but not forget that by the same token, we are responsible for (i.e. complicit in) the salvation, glories, and tragedies of others to some extent, whether we would like to recognize it or not—Responsibility is not an obligation we are forced to act upon; it is the humble recognition of cause and effect.
• No individual exists in vacuum. We all live in an interconnected world where our actions can have effects on other lives and the environment—sometimes even drastic and life-changing—for good or ill. Everything is permitted means that our actions are not confined to isolation. (recall: principle of precision, wariness of collateral damage)
• Being responsible means to understand that we are most directly responsible to our own lives first and foremost but that self-responsibility does not excuse mindfulness of responsibility for others in an expanding ring around us.
• Being mindful of complicity towards the fates of others and taking responsibility for it does not mean that we should rule their lives. Rather it only means that we should live our lives considerate of the potential effects our actions and words have on others.

Methods

Precision and Stealth

Throughout the long centuries of war between the Assassins and Templars, members of both factions often mused on the similarity of their goals and the contrast between their means. Even so, it was a frequent contention of Templars that the Assassins' methods were identical to their own in principle: "a minor evil, for a greater good." Indeed, the Assassins extensively hunted and murdered key individuals they perceived to be corrupt or a danger to humanity, and this became one of their defining attributes. A critical distinction, however, lied in the strict tenet that an Assassin must refrain from harming an innocent. As Altaïr reflected, the Templars were brutal and lacked precision in their methods: burning books wholesale, committing grand massacres, and in later histories, instigating nation-wide purges.

Accordingly, precision was a guiding principle behind the Assassins' technique and a factor behind their focus on stealth and discretion. By reducing collateral damage and the chance of open conflict, casualties would be minimized. Such a tactic aligned with their traditional respect for humanity and life, and in theory (though not always in practice), assassinations were to be carried out only in cases of utmost necessity. Once a target had been killed, agents were dissuaded from rejoicing in the death, and some even adopted the practice of paying last respects, no matter how vile they held them to be.

Although not every Assassin operated on the level of perfectionism exhibited by Francesco Vecellio,, prodigious information was expected to be gathered before an assassination is attempted. Failure to do so could yield catastrophic errors, such as Arno Dorian's mistaken murder of the Templar ally Chrétien Lafrenière. For their investigations, Assassins referred to a variety of means including but not limited to: espionage, theft of documents, and mingling with locals.

In some ways, the reforms of Altaïr promoted a greater level of stealth than under the tenure of his predecessor, Rashid ad-din Sinan. Previously, it was common practice for the Levantine Assassins to perform high-risk, near suicidal, yet awe-inspiring assassinations in crowded, public areas. This tactic relied on shock to impress power—through fear—in the public imagination. Under Altaïr's direction, the Assassins retreated further into the shadows, and this approach was generally discouraged, if not outright abolished, and restrictions on formerly banned methods such as poison were lifted. While some members were impatient with the secrecy demanded by the brotherhood, feeling that it hampered progress and influence, Altaïr feared the great risks of exposure to public society. Ever mindful that Assassins could be branded as madmen and destroyed if they remained an open target, as evident in the Fall of Masyaf to the Mongol Empire, Altaïr withdrew the brotherhood further into secrecy. Thus, security was another reason for the Assassins' policy of stealth.

Despite this, it was not unknown for Assassins even after the High Middle Ages to resort to open conflict, and these uncommon tactics could range from the instigation of riots, employment of mercenaries, or even a direct militaristic assault on enemy bases.

Social Reforms

In Altaïr's time, the Assassins were markedly apprehensive that public promotion of their ideals could yield societal reforms. As a result, at first much of their activities revolved only around the elimination or sabotage of those they believed threatened the rights of humanity. With their dream that humanity arrive at utopia through free will, their way of guidance was often indirect, with an emphasis on individuals learning through self-experience. For instance, their way of teaching Ezio against the path of vengeance involved allowing him to experience that journey personally.

Over time, the brotherhood's policies evolved and during the Italian Renaissance, the Assassins under the leadership of Ezio Auditore became more active at winning the hearts of the public. It was Ezio's conviction that the strength of the Assassins derived from the strength of the common people, a sentiment initially rebuffed by the cynical Mentor Niccolò Machiavelli. Accordingly, the Assassins' campaign in Rome was prolific in rehabilitating a city crumbling under the weight of Borgia corruption, such as funding renovations, sponsoring merchants, and rescuing civilians.

The order continued to adapt and reform gradually through the centuries, and by the 20th century, their activities began to shift over to non-violent social reforms rather than aggressive enforcement. The transition was tenuous: certain branches, such as the fledgling branch established in North America by Achilles Davenport and the Assassin-sponsored movement Narodnaya Volya engaged in operations smacking of terrorism. It was only after World War II that the Assassins definitively refocused their activities towards inspiring change through example. Assassinations became far rarer, and until the Great Purge of 2000, the shadow war with the Templars defused to one waged through covert tampering of political elections instead.<ref name="The Fall Deluxe">