Like I said, simply because he lost doesn't make his philosophy flawed. Anyone can lose regardless of philosophy, and the issue of making too many enemies can be evaded if you are sneaky enough and know how to manipulate enemies against each other or shift blame. Even a champion of justice can fall as a result of making too many enemies, so it's not even relevant. The idea that the universe has a moral arc is frankly just silly. Morality is the invention of social animals to facilitate order within their societies. Different societies have had all sorts of different rules about what is considered moral; even the Greeks who are known as the champions of freedom have completely condoned atrocities like slavery, yet the nations surrounding them didn't rise up in a moral outrage to stop it. Europeans came to the Americas and wiped out millions of the indigenous peoples, but no outraged international community rose up. You can cherry-pick examples from history all you like to fit that supposed moral-arc theory, but atrocities have happened all the time without any sort of "moral-arc" kicking in to correct it. The philosophy was not a justification for Oryx to act on some inherent violent desire. The philosophy predates Oryx, and in fact he did not want to do the things that it required of him (hence the first time Xivu Arath killed him for being soft). To claim it's some justification after the fact is clearly false. You didn't seem to acknowledge this part of my last comment (as well as some other parts that I can only assume that you just have no rebuttal for) so I'll reiterate: if the Sword Logic and the quest to save the universe was merely an excuse, he would not have risked himself losing power and his own life by allowing his court to openly challenge him to combat at any time. The evidence is not on your side. (this is probably my last comment on this, anyway, are you arguing in character? because I'm not sure, but I assume you are given how you have a problem with me breaking the 4th wall)