But if I’m getting this correctly, your definition of Hope encompasses both Faith and Reason as means of explaining the world around you.
Basically, yes. Most people find it incredibly difficult to believe in something unless they have a reason that they think is logical: the disconnect between (for example) atheists and Christians is how much sense the Bible makes to them.
In contrast, animals rely almost exclusively on instincts; they don’t seek to explain or question or find reasons for the rules. They just follow them, or else they’ll die a painful death.
Rage (instead of my assumed “negative emotion”) is emotion and impulse in as much as it doesn’t try to explain. Or rather that Hope indicates conviction while Rage in a roundabout way includes all doubt? Ah, I’m still unsure if I’m on the same page as you…
In my view, the conviction that Rage players experience is basically the same as the animal instinct thing I mentioned above. Where Hope players study the outside world and invent their own “religion”, Rage players search within themselves and discover the “religion” hinted at by their impulses and emotions.
I think both paths have certain obstacles that can mislead players who aren’t well-versed in Doubt. Hope players, like everyone else on Earth, have imperfect senses, leading to flaws in the explanations that they base on these senses; and Rage players are prevented from reaching the truth within every part of reality by the illusion that is their ego (used in the Freudian sense). Hope players doubt their body, Rage players doubt their mind.
But I still think Mind bleeds heavily into the field of choice; Terezi’s entire ordeal with Vriska displayed her ability to see the diverging results of her decision on whether to kill. Or Dave’s decision to call Heads or Tails. The coin-flip is always arbitrary, and all she ever really cares about is the associated choice.
I don’t disagree! If we believe (for whatever reason) that the objective Truth is unknowable, or perhaps nonexistent, then the truth that matters is that which we choose to use. Instead of judging people’s actions based on how close they are to the Truth in their souls, we have to examine their decisions and all their reasoning, and decide whether or not they’re justified based on
a) What they wanted to accomplish
and to a lesser extent
b) What they knew about the situation at the time
c) What they did to expand this knowledge
Heart, as an aspect, leaves very little room, or necessity, for personal choice. Any given situation can be dealt with in (effectively) two ways: the one that matches your soul, and the one that doesn’t. You can “be yourself”, or you can… not. In this respect, morality for Heart players is relatively simple, if inflexible, although there is the question of discovering your true self in the first place.
So maybe the difference is that while Heart and Rage both (in some ways) can include impulse as a feeling or an instinct, Hope shares Heart’s association with truth while both Mind and Rage are false?
I wouldn’t say that Mind and Rage are “false”— rather, they view truth as something that is made or enforced rather than simply the Unchanging Objective Truth. Meanwhile, Heart and Rage see morality as a set of rules that are dictated to us (the concept that underlies following your impulses/instincts, or your “heart”), where Mind and Hope believe very firmly that we make the rules.