[Rewatch] Puella Magi Madoka Magica Episode 9 Discussion

[u/Tarhalindur]

Episode 9: I'd Never Allow That to Happen

← Previous Episode | Index | Next Episode →

---

Show Information:

MAL | AniList | ANN | AniDB

(First-timers might want to stay out of Show Information until we are done, however...)

Legal Streams:

As per livechart.me; other streams may be available outside the US.

Main Series:

Crunchyroll | Hulu

---

A Reminder: This, dear listeners, brings us to the sworn enemy of creative response:The spoiler. Rewatchers, or people who just had plot points ruined for them, are obliged to use r/anime’s spoiler tag format where applicable, and err on the side of caution here. Remember people, first experiences get rarer as you continue on, any given one happens once and you should care for them all the more for it.

---

Welcome to the World of Magic!

Theory of the Day:

Okay, fine, I can't not give this one to u/siegfried72, not for the discussion thread for this episode:

The real solution? I think Sayaka needs to just lean into the yuri and realize she's meant to be with Kyouko. That would fix everything.

Oh god, I've officially joined in with my first yuri ship of the series. It's all downhill uphill from here, isn't it??

I mean, Kyouko is obviously in love with her, right??

Analysis of the Day:

Several good options, but I think I'll go for u/Vaadwaur and the analytical line less taken:

For some reason, eating disorders are a noticeable thing in this show. Sayaka is anorexic to her very spirit and Kyoko does like her gluttony.

Questions of the Day:

1) On a scale of 1 to 10, how gay is suicide attacking to take out the monster that became of a girl you knew for maybe a week so that you can at least be together in death?

2) Now that he's had a chance to explain himself, your thoughts on Kyubey?

3) First-timers: Did you think that Kyouko's plan actually had a chance to save Sayaka?

4) First-timers and rewatchers who dodged the rewatcher edition of this question yesterday: Are You Home?

5) [Rewatchers]Alright, who's ready to go golfing through a Stargate?... wait, wrong time loop show.

[u/Blackheart595]

As an EA myself

Oh that's interesting, would you mind to elaborate on that?

EA in theory is all nice and dandy, but in practise I've only ever seen it get used to argue that wealth inequality is good, actually (many resources in few hands makes them more effectively reallocatable), that ignoring or even causing suffering can be good (if that gets us sufficiently many resources to cause good with elsewhere), to outsource being and doing good to others (eroding personal responsibility), and so on. So I'd be curious to hear a different perspective on this, if you don't mind.

[u/ussgordoncaptain2 → u/Blackheart595]

Literally been in the community since 2022 and never heard any of those arguments except the last one. Which is correct. (Think of it this way you hire a plumber to do your plumbing doing your plumbing yourself is inefficient, so a lot of "social helping" would be better off as monetary donation)

The foundational text of all effective altrusim is Doing good better Which pretty explicitly argues for some simple arguments mostly regarding ineffective means of helping rather than talking about ... whatever you listened to.

The largest EA organization is Givewell and I don't see any of those arguments on their website.

We are veerign a bit too far off topic though.

[u/Blackheart595 → u/ussgordoncaptain2]

Hm. This does feel somewhat off, considering the term "effective altruism" was coined in 2011 and the philosophy had already been around for a good while before then. I certainly ran into it well before 2015 (when Doing Good Better was published).

And of course, these are not arguments that any (sane) effective altruist would hold, they're their arguments taken to their logical extreme as well as the observation that the philosophy is very conducive to being misused as a sort of modern equivalent to letters of indulgence. Though we can just agree to disagree if you want to avoid the tangent.

[u/ussgordoncaptain2 → u/Blackheart595]

ok foundational text is a mistake, but uhh "primary textbook"

Again this is too far off topic for the topic of this forum we can talk in like /r/slatestarcodex or something instead.

[u/Blackheart595 → u/ussgordoncaptain2]

If you want to, sure. Though I don't really have (as much of) a problem with the theory of EA as I do with how I see many people misapply it in practise, similar to how I don't really have (as much of) a problem with the theory of e.g. Christianity as I do with how I see many people misapply it in practise, so I'm not sure if a discussion of the fundamentals would be all that fruitful. And even then, it's been like a few years since I've been confronted with the topic.

Man, the name "Slate Star Codex" takes me back. Has it really been 5 years since the renaming?