Inconclusive | E.C

DIVERGENCY concept (for curious readers)

You don't have to read this if you prefer going COMPLETELY BLIND as this is just me discussing my thoughts and explaining how the changes I've made will work.
(At the time of this being published, despite my pain, I'm still posting the things I've already had written and ready.)

This is just so things make sense because I realized if I removed the DNA concept entirely without saying I did, many would be confused.

Ahem,

""

      The idea of DIVERGENT alone being a label for those who'd defect from an already corrupted system can and does make more sense than something being *genetic*.

      The idea of the DIVERGENT world is so simple yet could be complicated - it makes sense for a child who is groomed by a faction to be what they are - ((SPOILER)) - thus in a test they'd take in an instinct they've been taught. DIVERGENT are those who don't trust that instinct, those who let curiosity overcome them - the idea of being more awake than others because their minds are more complex.

      This does technically work with serums / sims if someone is more aware.

      E.g: fear sim would still technically be changed if per say someone knows they're in a sim. The easiest way to explain this is when someone is dreaming - you know you're dreaming, yet can't control it. Think of it like lucid dreaming, once you've actually physically in the dream understood you're dreaming, you're able to control and alter it.
You may understand you're in a dream, but you're not able to grab ahold of it's reign and act as the one in control.
But, with the truth serums and stuff, yeah technically one could fight it, but I prefer the idea of not being capable of fighting it - if you did, it'd be fucking horrible and painful such as seen in the films.

      Now I hear: "A/N! WTF is the difference between DIVERGENT and FACTIONLESSS?!"

      The difference literally is: one is a test result that's passed all outcomes, the other is a fail; a dud. DIVERGENT is supposed to be this idea of those who can break the system, the FACTIONLESS have already 'broken it' but are contained to exist as a thing to avoid; a set example. DIVERGENCY is bad, but FACTIONLESS is worse in this sort of world as the FACTIONLESS exist not just because they didn't fit in, but they instead exist to act as a controlled fear factor to be avoided. FACTIONLESS are used as a threat, used as an example to the FACTIONS to say, "if you don't succeed that is where you'll end up." and, in this case, it literally IS where they'll end up as they are the REJECTS of society.

      But then, what's DIVERGENT?

      Let's go a bit more into it;

      DIVERGENT are those horrible little puzzle pieces that can fit in any damn place they please for how they're shaped and sized. FACTIONLESS are those pieces you desperately try to put in but give up on them because you learn they're broken or chipped, so you throw them away with the rest they came with - never given another chance to be fixed.

      They both are threats in this world, but FACTIONLESS can be controlled, can be manipulated. They can be traced and framed/blamed for bad things with no questions asked. but DIVERGENT are much harder, or impossible, to control and manipulate, so in this they're either killed off as murderers or their deaths are (commonly) framed as suicides, not assassinations.

      SERUMS still affect those who are DIVERGENT, but their minds are still different and it's not a genetic thing at all. An example of this would be someone who has sleep paralysis or another who can willingly lucid dream. It's control, it's something you may unintentionally control or willingly control. It's a concept of knowing how to break something without realizing it, but in this case it's more like slipping in-between the teeth of a lock perfectly instead of trying to bend and break into it.

      DIVERGENT has the ability to slip through, FACTIONLESS can only scratch and break what it tries to slip through.

      The scary thing on this sort of wording of the concept is, it's easier to understand something that's already broken something.
      One is able to understand after thing A has broken thing B, because once A has been seen breaking B, the observer learns to fix it and prevent anything from being broken again, or as badly broken.
      But, if thing C doesn't break thing D but has the ability to break it, how is the observer supposed to understand and / or know how to fix it if it's not yet been broken?

      What if the observer is aware of C's own power, but C themselves is not?

      DIVERGENT are dangerous because their lack of knowledge / awareness to their own capabilities. FACTIONLESS are dangers but have broken so many things that it's easier to control and contain with how repetitive the pattern is.

      Difference:

      Dangerous - (N.) Able to or likely cause harm or injury.

      Danger - (ADJ.) The possibility of suffering harm or injury.

""