Jump to content

R+L=J v.122

Jon Weirgaryen

By Jon Weirgaryen,
in General (ASoIaF)

Recommended Posts

Jon Weirgaryen Council Member

Jon Weirgaryen

Posted
Posted

Reference guide

The Tower of the Hand has an excellent analysis of this theory:
Jon Snow's Parents

And Westeros' Citadel also provides a summary:
Jon Snow's Parents

A Wiki of Ice and Fire:
Jon Snow Theories

Frequently Asked Questions:

How can Jon be a Targaryen if he has a burned hand?
Targaryens are not immune to fire. Aerion Brightflame died drinking wildfire. Aegon V and his son Duncan are thought to have died in a fire-related event at Summerhall. Rhaenyra was eaten by Aegon II's dragon, presumably roasted by fire before the dragon took a bite. Viserys died when he was crowned with molten gold. Dany suffered burns from the fire pit incident at the end of A Dance with Dragons. Finally, the author has stated outright that Targaryens are not immune to fire. Jon's burned hand does not mean he is ineligible to be part Targaryen. For more information about the myth of Targaryen fire immunity, see this thread.

How can Jon be a Targ if he doesn't have silver hair and purple eyes?
Not all Targaryens had the typical Valyrian look. Alysanne had blue eyes. Baelor Breakspear and his son(s) had the Dornish look. Some of the Great Bastards did not have typical Valyrian features. Jon's own half-sister Rhaenys had her mother's Dornish look.

If Jon isn't Ned's son, then why does he look so much like him?
Much is made over the fact that Arya looks like Lyanna, and Jon looks like Arya. Ned and Lyanna shared similar looks.

How can Jon be half-Targ if he has a direwolf?
Ned's trueborn children are half Stark and half Tully. Being half Tully didn't prevent them from having a direwolf so there is no reason to think being half Targaryen would prevent Jon from having a direwolf. If Lyanna is his mother, then he's still half Stark. Furthermore, there is already a character who is half Targaryen and half blood of the First Men and was a skinchanger: Bloodraven.

Since Rhaegar was already married, wouldn't Jon still be a bastard?
The evidence that Jon is legitimate is that Targaryens have a history of polygamous marriages which makes it a possibility that Rhaegar had two wives. Three Kingsguards were present at the Tower of Joy when Ned arrived. Even after Ned said that Aerys was dead and Viserys had fled to Dragonstone, the Kingsguard opted to stay at the Tower of Joy stating they were obeying their Kingsguard vow. The heart of a Kingsguard's vow is to protect the king. With Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon dead, the new king would have been Viserys, unless Lyanna's child was legitimate making him the new king of the Targaryen dynasty. For a comprehensive analysis of Jon's legitimacy, see the detailed explanations in the two linked articles.

But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?
It seems the practise of polygamy among Targaryens was never made illegal. Aegon I and Maegor I practised polygamy. It is rumoured that Aegon IV and Daemon Blackfyre considered it as an option for Daemon, and Jorah Mormont suggested it to Dany as a viable option. Daenerys later made the same statement against Quentyn Martell. There is also this SSM predating the worldbook.


Weren't the Kingsguard at Tower of Joy on the basis of an order from Aerys, to guard Lyanna as a hostage?
Aerys was sane enough to realize how taking someone hostage works even at the end of the Rebellion, and he would hardly miss the opportunity to bring Ned and Robert in line any time after the situation started to look really serious. Furthermore, regardless of on whose order the Kingsguard might have stayed at Tower of Joy, they would still be in dereliction of their duty to guard the new king.
Frequently suggested readings: At the tower of joy by MtnLion and support of the toj analysis by Ygrain

This theory is too obvious and too many people believe it to be fact. How can it be true?
The theory is not obvious to the majority of readers. Some will get it on first read, most will not. Keep in mind that readers who go to online fan forums, such as this one, represent a very small minority of the A Song of Ice and Fire readership. Also, A Game of Thrones has been out since 1996. That's more than 18 years of readers being able to piece together this mystery.

Why doesn't Ned ever think about Lyanna being Jon's mother?
Ned doesn't think about anyone as being his mother. He says the name 'Wylla' to Robert, but does not actively think that Wylla is the mother. He also doesn't think of Jon as his son. There are numerous mysteries in the series, and Jon's parentage is one of those. If Ned thought about Jon being Lyanna's son, it would not be a mystery.

Why should we care who Jon's parents are? Will Jon care? Who cares if he's legitimate?
Once one accepts that the evidence is conclusive and that Jon's parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna and that he is most probably legitimate, these become the important questions.

Since this theory has been refined so well, will Martin change the outcome of the story to surprise his fans?
No, he said he won't change the outcome of the story only because some people have put together all the clues and solved the puzzle.

Previous editions:

Please click on the spoiler below to reveal links to all previous editions of this thread.

“Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread one)

“Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread two)

“The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III)” (thread three)

“The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part IV)” (thread four)

“The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part V)” (thread five)

“The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part VI)” (thread six)

“The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread Part VII” (thread seven)

“The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII” (thread eight)

“The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part IX” (thread nine)

“The Rhaegar + Lyanna =Jon Thread, Part X”(thread ten)

“The R+L=J thread, part XI” (thread eleven)

“The R+L=J thread, part XII” (thread twelve)

“R+L=J Part XXIII” (thread thirteen)

“R+L=J Part XXIV” (thread fourteen)

“R+L=J XXV” (thread fifteen)

“R+L=J v.16” (thread sixteen)

“R+L=J v.17” (thread seventeen)

“R+L=J v.18” (thread eighteen)

“R+L=J v.19” (thread nineteen)

“R+L=J v.20” (thread twenty)

“R+L=J v.21” (thread twenty-one)

“R+L=J v.22” (thread twenty-two)

“R+L=J v.22a” (thread twenty-two (a))

“R+L=J v.23” (thread twenty-three)

“R+L=J v.24” (thread twenty-four)

“R+L=J v.25” (thread twenty-five)

“R+L=J v.26” (thread twenty-six)

“R+L=J v.27” (thread twenty-seven)

“R+L=J v.28” (thread twenty-eight)

“R+L=J v.29” (thread twenty-nine)

“R+L=J v.30” (thread thirty)

“R+L=J v.31” (thread thirty-one)

“R+L=J v.32” (thread thirty-two)

“R+L=J v.33” (thread thirty-three)

“R+L=J v.34” (thread thirty-four)

“R+L=J v.35” (thread thirty-five)

“R+L=J v.36” (thread thirty-six)

“R+L=J v.37” (thread thirty-seven)

“R+L=J v.38” (thread thirty-eight)

“R+L=J v.39” (thread thirty-nine)

"R+L=J v.40" (thread forty)

"R+L=J v.41" (thread forty-one)

"R+L=J v.42" (thread forty-two)

"R+L=J v.43" (thread forty-three)

"R+L=J v.44" (thread forty-four)

"R+L=J v.45" (thread forty-five)

"R+L=J v.46" (thread forty-six)

"R+L=J v.47" (thread forty-seven)

"R+L=J v.48" (thread forty-eight)

"R+L=J v.49" (thread forty-nine)

"R+L=J v.50" (thread fifty)

"R+L=J v.51" (thread fifty-one)

"R+L=J v.52" (thread fifty-two)

"R+L=J v.53" (thread fifty-three)

"R+L=J v.54" (thread fifty-four)

"R+L=J v.55" (thread fifty-five)

"R+L=J v.56" (thread fifty-six)

"R+L=J v.57" (thread fifty-seven)

"R+L=J v.58" (thread fifty-eight)

"R+L=J v.59" (thread fifty-nine)

"R+L=J v.60" (thread sixty)

"R+L=J v.61" (thread sixty-one)

"R+L=J v.62" (thread sixty-two)

"R+L=J v.63" (thread sixty-three)

"R+L=J v.64" (thread sixty-four)

"R+L=J v.65" (thread sixty-five)

"R+L=J v.66" (thread sixty-six)

"R+L=J v.67" (thread sixty-seven)

"R+L=J v.68" (thread sixty-eight)

"R+L=J v.69" (thread sixty-nine)

"R+L=J v.70" (thread seventy)

"R+L=J v.71" (thread seventy-one)

"R+L=J v.72" (thread seventy-two)

"R+L=J v.73" (thread seventy-three)

"R+L=J v.74" (thread seventy-four)

"R+L=J v.75" (thread seventy-five)

"R+L=J v.76" (thread seventy-six)

"R+L=J v.77" (thread seventy-seven)

"R+L=J v.78" (thread seventy-eight)

"R+L=J v.79" (thread seventy-nine)

"R+L=J v.80" (thread eighty)

"R+L=J v.81" (thread eighty-one)

"R+L=J v.82" (thread eighty-two)

"R+L=J v.83" (thread eighty-three)

"R+L=J v.84" (thread eighty-four)

"R+L=J v.85" (thread eighty-five)

"R+L=J v.86" (thread eighty-six)

"R+L=J v.87" (thread eighty-seven)

"R+L=J v.88" (thread eighty-eight)

"R+L=J v.89" (thread eighty-nine)

"R+L=J v.90" (thread ninety)

"R+L=J v.91" (thread ninety-one)

"R+L=J v.92" (thread ninety-two)

"R+L=J v.93" (thread ninety-three)

"R+L=J v.94" (thread ninety-four)

"R+L=J v.95" (thread ninety-five)

"R+L=J v.96" (thread ninety-six)

"R+L=J v.97" (thread ninety-seven)

"R+L=J v.98" (thread ninety-eight)

"R+L=J v.99" (thread ninety-nine)

"R+L=J v.100" (thread one hundred)

"R+L=J v.101" (thread one hundred one)

"R+L=J v.102" (thread one hundred two)

"R+L=J v.103" (thread one hundred three)

"R+L=J v.104" (thread one hundred four)

"R+L=J v.105" (thread one hundred five)

"R+L=J v.106" (thread one hundred six)

"R+L=J v.107" (thread one hundred seven)

"R+L=J v.108" (thread one hundred eight)

"R+L=J v.109" (thread one hundred nine)

"R+L=J v.110" (thread one hundred ten)

"R+L=J v.111" (thread one hundred eleven)

"R+L=J v.112" (thread one hundred twelve)

"R+L=J v.113" (thread one hundred thirteen)

"R+L=J v.114" (thread one hundred fourteen)

The "[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J" threads were used to openly discuss spoilers from TWoIaF at the time we needed to protect that information.

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.1"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.2"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.3"

"R+L=J v.115" (thread one hundred fifteen)

"R+L=J v.116" (thread one hundred sixteen)

"R+L=J v.117" (thread one hundred seventeen)

"R+L=J v.118" (thread one hundred eighteen)

"R+L=J v.119" (thread one hundred nineteen)

"R+L=J v.120" (thread one hundred twenty)

"R+L=J v.121" (thread one hundred twenty one)

eta: updates from the current discussion to the faq sections

  • Since Rhaegar was already married, wouldn't Jon still be a bastard?
  • But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Twinslayer Council Member

The Twinslayer

Posted
Posted

The evidence that Jon is legitimate is that Targaryens have a history of polygamous marriages which makes it a possibility that Rhaegar had two wives. Three Kingsguards were present at the Tower of Joy when Ned arrived. Even after Ned said that Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon were dead and Viserys had fled to Dragonstone, the Kingsguard opted to stay at the Tower of Joy stating they were obeying their Kingsguard vow. The heart of a Kingsguard's vow is to protect the king. With Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon dead, the new king would have been Viserys, unless Lyanna's child was legitimate making him the new king of the Targaryen dynasty. For a comprehensive analysis of Jon's legitimacy, see the detailed explanations in the two linked articles.But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?The practice was never made illegal and there may have been some less prominent examples after Maegor, as stated in this SSM. Furthermore, Jorah suggests it to Dany as a viable option. Weren't the Kingsguard at Tower of Joy on the basis of an order from Aerys, to guard Lyanna as a hostage?

Aerys was sane enough to realize how taking someone hostage works even at the end of the Rebellion, and he would hardly miss the opportunity to bring Ned and Robert in line any time after the situation started to look really serious. Furthermore, regardless of on whose order the Kingsguard might have stayed at Tower of Joy, they would still be in dereliction of their duty to guard the new king.

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (thread one)

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (thread two)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III) (thread three)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part IV) (thread four)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part V) (thread five)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part VI) (thread six)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread Part VII (thread seven)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII (thread eight)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part IX (thread nine)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna =Jon Thread, Part X(thread ten)

The R+L=J thread, part XI (thread eleven)

The R+L=J thread, part XII (thread twelve)

R+L=J Part XXIII (thread thirteen)

R+L=J Part XXIV (thread fourteen)

R+L=J XXV (thread fifteen)

R+L=J v.16 (thread sixteen)

R+L=J v.17 (thread seventeen)

R+L=J v.18 (thread eighteen)

R+L=J v.19 (thread nineteen)

R+L=J v.20 (thread twenty)

R+L=J v.21 (thread twenty-one)

R+L=J v.22 (thread twenty-two)

R+L=J v.22a (thread twenty-two (a))

R+L=J v.23 (thread twenty-three)

R+L=J v.24 (thread twenty-four)

R+L=J v.25 (thread twenty-five)

R+L=J v.26 (thread twenty-six)

R+L=J v.27 (thread twenty-seven)

R+L=J v.28 (thread twenty-eight)

R+L=J v.29 (thread twenty-nine)

R+L=J v.30 (thread thirty)

R+L=J v.31 (thread thirty-one)

R+L=J v.32 (thread thirty-two)

R+L=J v.33 (thread thirty-three)

R+L=J v.34 (thread thirty-four)

R+L=J v.35 (thread thirty-five)

R+L=J v.36 (thread thirty-six)

R+L=J v.37 (thread thirty-seven)

R+L=J v.38 (thread thirty-eight)

R+L=J v.39 (thread thirty-nine)

"R+L=J v.40" (thread forty)

"R+L=J v.41" (thread forty-one)

"R+L=J v.42" (thread forty-two)

"R+L=J v.43" (thread forty-three)

"R+L=J v.44" (thread forty-four)

"R+L=J v.45" (thread forty-five)

"R+L=J v.46" (thread forty-six)

"R+L=J v.47" (thread forty-seven)

"R+L=J v.48" (thread forty-eight)

"R+L=J v.49" (thread forty-nine)

"R+L=J v.50" (thread fifty)

"R+L=J v.51" (thread fifty-one)

"R+L=J v.52" (thread fifty-two)

"R+L=J v.53" (thread fifty-three)

"R+L=J v.54" (thread fifty-four)

"R+L=J v.55" (thread fifty-five)

"R+L=J v.56" (thread fifty-six)

"R+L=J v.57" (thread fifty-seven)"R+L=J v.58" (thread fifty-eight)"R+L=J v.59" (thread fifty-nine)"R+L=J v.60" (thread sixty) "R+L=J v.61" (thread sixty-one)

"R+L=J v.62" (thread sixty-two)

"R+L=J v.63" (thread sixty-three)

"R+L=J v.64" (thread sixty-four)

"R+L=J v.65" (thread sixty-five)

"R+L=J v.66" (thread sixty-six)

"R+L=J v.67" (thread sixty-seven)

"R+L=J v.68" (thread sixty-eight)

"R+L=J v.69" (thread sixty-nine)

"R+L=J v.70" (thread seventy)

"R+L=J v.71" (thread seventy-one)

"R+L=J v.72" (thread seventy-two)

"R+L=J v.73" (thread seventy-three)

"R+L=J v.74" (thread seventy-four)

"R+L=J v.75" (thread seventy-five)

"R+L=J v.76" (thread seventy-six)

"R+L=J v.77" (thread seventy-seven)

"R+L=J v.78" (thread seventy-eight)

"R+L=J v.79" (thread seventy-nine)

"R+L=J v.80" (thread eighty)

"R+L=J v.81" (thread eighty-one)

"R+L=J v.82" (thread eighty-two)

"R+L=J v.83" (thread eighty-three)

"R+L=J v.84" (thread eighty-four)

"R+L=J v.85" (thread eighty-five)

"R+L=J v.86" (thread eighty-six)

"R+L=J v.87" (thread eighty-seven)

"R+L=J v.88" (thread eighty-eight)

"R+L=J v.89" (thread eighty-nine)

"R+L=J v.90" (thread ninety)

"R+L=J v.91" (thread ninety-one)

"R+L=J v.92" (thread ninety-two)

"R+L=J v.93" (thread ninety-three)

"R+L=J v.94" (thread ninety-four)

"R+L=J v.95" (thread ninety-five)

"R+L=J v.96" (thread ninety-six)

"R+L=J v.97" (thread ninety-seven)

"R+L=J v.98" (thread ninety-eight)

"R+L=J v.99" (thread ninety-nine)

"R+L=J v.100" (thread one hundred)

"R+L=J v.101" (thread one hundred one)

"R+L=J v.102" (thread one hundred two)

"R+L=J v.103" (thread one hundred three)

"R+L=J v.104" (thread one hundred four)

"R+L=J v.105" (thread one hundred five)

"R+L=J v.106" (thread one hundred six)

"R+L=J v.107" (thread one hundred seven)

"R+L=J v.108" (thread one hundred eight)

"R+L=J v.109" (thread one hundred nine)

"R+L=J v.110" (thread one hundred ten)

"R+L=J v.111" (thread one hundred eleven)

"R+L=J v.112" (thread one hundred twelve)

"R+L=J v.113" (thread one hundred thirteen)

"R+L=J v.114" (thread one hundred fourteen)

The "[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J" threads were used to openly discuss spoilers from TWoIaF at the time we needed to protect that information.

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.1"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.2"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.3"

"R+L=J v.115" (thread one hundred fifteen)

"R+L=J v.116" (thread one hundred sixteen)

"R+L=J v.117" (thread one hundred seventeen)

"R+L=J v.118" (thread one hundred eighteen)

"R+L=J v.119" (thread one hundred nineteen)

"R+L=J v.120" (thread one hundred twenty)

"R+L=J v.121" (thread one hundred twenty one)

There is some good information here, but there are a number of significant errors in this reference guide. For example, the language in bold is just incorrect. Ned never said to the Kingsguard that Aegon was dead. That should be fixed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Snowfyre Chorus Council Member

The Snowfyre Chorus

Posted
Posted

You're right, but it's also a good reason. The presence of Lyanna in Ned's ToJ dream isn't just the dubious scream, which may be an external interjection to the dream, there are also rose petals.

We don't have any secondary corroboration, so of course it's possible Lyanna wasn't there. But nor do we have anything to contradict that fact that Ned's subconscious clearly associates the ToJ encounter and Lyanna's presence. It's not an open and shut case, but without reason to be suspicious of the information, why be so? Plot parsimony is well worth considering here. Literary precedent also points to Lyanna being at the tower, but I won't go into that for fear of BQ's wrath.

I believe that the App does specify the ToJ as Lyanna's place of death, and even Ran's somewhat heretical "Jon at Starfell" theory still posits Lyanna at the ToJ. In short, while it's not impossible that Lyanna was elsewhere, it would be contrary to the symbolism that has been presented to us if she was, and there's nothing to suggest that she was. Occam's razor applies.

Sure, you can say it's a good reason if you want. There's really nothing to compare it to, because (as far as I recall) it's the only reason available to think that Lyanna was at the tower of joy. Regardless, I'm not suspicious of the information in the text, just the conclusion we draw from it. And in the end, that conclusion will either be right or it'll be wrong. (I'm honestly not sure what the presence of roses has to with location.)

Re: the App, I'm of the opinion that the app will be updated to reflect information as it becomes available in the text. In other words, if there had been an app prior to the release of ADWD, then it would have told us at that time that Jon Connington was dead. That information would then have been updated following the publication of ADWD. So I don't trust the app to tell us anything that is not revealed in Martin's text. And where there is a discrepancy, I favor the text itself.

With respect to Occam's razor... I hear you, and I know that the razor is acknowledged to be a valuable tool in certain areas of philosophical or scientific reasoning. I'm just not sure it is nearly so useful when it comes to the analysis and interpretation of art. And even in medicine, the use of Occam's razor is qualified by the admonition of Hickam's Dictum:

"Patients can have as many diseases as they damn well please."

Or, to quote Wikipedia: "at no stage should a particular diagnosis be excluded solely because it doesn't appear to fit the principle of Occam's razor."

In medicine, the stakes are life or death. No need to take things nearly so seriously, here. But the essential point is that while Occam's razor may be a useful guide for decision-making, it is not true that the simplest explanation is necessarily the best, or even the most likely. And Martin's story, as we all know by now, is anything but simple.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kingmonkey Council Member

Kingmonkey

Posted
Posted

With respect to Occam's razor... I hear you, and I know that the razor is acknowledged to be a valuable tool in certain areas of philosophical or scientific reasoning. I'm just not sure it is nearly so useful when it comes to the analysis and interpretation of art.

Oh I entirely agree, which is why I stated "Occam's razor applies." It very often doesn't.

Occam's exhortation not to multiply entities beyond necessity is a good guide when multiplying entities requires more from the universe. In art, it does not necessarily require more. It may require less, as multiplying entities may give the artist better tools to convey their art. However in this case, multiplying entities (or to be specific locations) would appear to complicate the plot to no obvious benefit and weaken the author's symbolic narrative. That's why I say Occam's razor applies.

It might be that multiplying entities is necessary to Martin's storytelling for reasons that are not yet apparent, just as Occam's razor may fail when we are not aware that a multiplication of entities is necessary after all, for reasons we are not yet aware. It's a tool for making reasonable deductions, and a rather sharp tool at that, but it's not a magic 8-ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

Jon will forever be a Stark in my heart! :bawl:

He's half a Stark. It's not a sin to be a Targaryen

Taking off kids, you all try and be nice to each other, Happy Holidays to all of you and your families. Please be nice to each other.

Bye Ser! I expect story time whenever you get back!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

Wanna touch on someting @KingMonkey said in last thread





Aegon seems to me to be Schrödinger's Secret Targ. We just don't know whether he is or not until someone opens the box.




I think the audience will eventually know--Varys and Illyrio perhaps actually give some sort of expostional explanation--but that Westeros will never know. And that will make it hard for Jon when he learns that he is Rhaegar's last true born son...no one will put any belief into it. But, in the end, it's okay because it will be Jon's actions, not name/blood that make "elect" him king (though it's his blood that allows him to do "the thing" puts the world back in balance)


Link to comment
Share on other sites
markg171 Council Member

markg171

Posted
Posted

There is some good information here, but there are a number of significant errors in this reference guide. For example, the language in bold is just incorrect. Ned never said to the Kingsguard that Aegon was dead. That should be fixed.

Which is one of my main problems with these threads. The same information in constantly paraded about, even when it's been countered quite thoroughly, or errors have been known to have been corrected in other threads.

It doesn't paint an unbiased picture at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sj4iy Council Member

sj4iy

Posted
Posted

Which is one of my main problems with these threads. The same information in constantly paraded about, even when it's been countered quite thoroughly, or errors have been known to have been corrected in other threads.

It doesn't paint an unbiased picture at all.

Then either:

1. Come up with convincing arguments, supported by the text, to prove them wrong;

Or

2. Don't come into these threads.

Also, I call complete bullshit on the idea that the "ideas" in this thread have been effectively countered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
markg171 Council Member

markg171

Posted
Posted

Then either:

1. Come up with convincing arguments, supported by the text, to prove them wrong;

Or

2. Don't come into these threads.

Also, I call complete bullshit on the idea that the "ideas" in this thread have been effectively countered.

There's been plenty of convincing arguments. They just don't fit with R+L=J so they're dismissed or downright ignored while the same posters argue over some joke until the counter argument is lost in the posts and forgotten while never having actually been addressed. Which is exactly what your second point addresses. You don't want counter arguments in these threads so you tell people not to come into the threads or you ignore their arguments.

And yes, many of the ideas in these threads have been effectively countered. In the last thread alone, off the top of my head, the idea that Ned never calls Jon his son was disproven, and the idea that Ned considers Whent, Hightower, and Dayne to be shining examples of knighthood was disproven. So I can only imagine what counterarguments in the #112 threads that came before I ever joined this board have been washed away or ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

There's been plenty of convincing arguments. They just don't fit with R+L=J so they're dismissed or downright ignored while the same posters argue over some joke until the counter argument is lost in the posts and forgotten while never having actually been addressed. Which is exactly what your second point addresses. You don't want counter arguments in these threads so you tell people not to come into the threads or you ignore their arguments.

And yes, many of the ideas in these threads have been effectively countered. In the last thread alone, off the top of my head, the idea that Ned never calls Jon his son was disproven, and the idea that Ned considers Whent, Hightower, and Dayne to be shining examples of knighthood was disproven. So I can only imagine what counterarguments in the #112 threads that came before I ever joined this board have been washed away or ignored.

There really aren't. Please tell me one. I've never seen one that fits all the clues like RLJ does.

And we've never ignored your arguments. In fact, most of us have responded to them plenty by now. But constantly going around in circles is unbelievably frustrating and those of us who do accept RLJ would rather like to talk about something else besides the same damn stuff over and over again.

And no, none of that stuff we disproven. No more than it was proven. You gave counter arguments. They were shot down. We gave counter arguments. They were shot down. That's how debate works. We can keep doing this, or you can accept that you'll never change our minds and we'll accept that we can never change yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...