Chrono Cross is a 1999 sequel to chrono trigger. While chrono trigger focused more on the concept of time travel, chrono cross focuses on the idea of multiple universes. Although time travel is still featured in its plot to a smaller extent. Thematically, it has a large focus on environmentalism and oppression, as well as the concept of alienation told through the lens of the sci fi concept of alternate realities.

The main theme of the game is the idea of relationships. This idea of relationships is not limited in scope to a specific kind of relationship, but rather is about the concept of relationships in general in all the forms it takes. This scope ranging from your relationship to yourself, your relationship (or lack thereof) with other people, the relationships between different groups, your relationship to the planet, and even ultimately your relationship to the transcendental reality. The music likewise is used to convey and strengthen these ideas, with the themes it was trying to convey being stated to be "burning soul, lonely world, and unforgettable memories." And to drive the points of the game home, in the end of the game, to convey the idea of the story pervading real life it switches to using real actors for part of the credits. Using the concept of parallel worlds to highlight how your world and it could be connected.

The story is told through the lens of a series of increasing existential quandries, ending by veering into borderline existential horror. It begins with a darker take on the ideas of things like its a wonderful life, showing what would be different in a world without you, and the reality of it marching on all the same. But the other side of the coin is that it is more specifically a world that has no place for you. You wake up one day only to find that in this world you died long ago, and your village doesn't accept your existence. Even your house is lived in by someone else.

The second arc raises the stakes. Asking what it would be like to be in an antagonistic relationship with everyone you come in contact with. You wake up in the body of an enemy, only to have their crimes and identity placed on and blamed on you. What's more, they are a race that is treated with suspicion by the residents. Now even the residents of your own home in your own universe consider you an outsider, treating you with hostility. So it veers into a first person exploration of both warranties antagonism and racism, and how the latter is often tied to the former.

The final arc gets into a much darker take on the combination of the aforementioned themes. Asking you finally what if it wasn't simply better if you didn't exist. This is asked in three different ways. First, addressed to you as an individual, who is now blamed for leading the future to destruction. Though you don't understand what your role was in such events. The second is aimed at humanity in general. Asking whether saving humanity and saving the world are really compatible goals, or whether humanity is not simply too environmentally destructive. And the final, though less explored version is a big picture sense. Whether life in general is worth living, or whether it wouldn't be better for reality to end as a whole. And each of these is challenged in turn, highlighting a claim to having value in life, and a right to exist.

Contents show]

Alienation

Alienation is the state or experience of being isolated from a group or an activity to which one should belong or in which one should be involved. This has various possible manifestations, each of which are generally seen in a negative light. Sociologically it has to do with a low degree of integration into your community environment, or being disjointed from being able to approach parts of it in a natural way. It is often associated with feelings of powerlessness, or even a sense of meaninglessness of normlessness in terms of feeling like one has no purpose or place to exist.

Alienation can manifest in various ways. One potential way stems from racism. People who are native to a community, but treated as a perpetual outsider can find themselves feeling like they lack a place in it. It can often lead to a struggle to find themselves as feeling like they really have a home there. Another concept of alienation comes from marxist class analysis, in which it talks about how the mode of production can lead to a worker feeling alienated when they lack control over their work or its outcome, and rather than producing things they can identify, are merely a small part of a system in which they lack power.

Alienation does not necessarily always have moral connotations however. Sometimes people can feel alienated by situations that aren't necessarily the cause of any individual, merely the result of some form of disjointed outcome. Children sometimes feel alienated from a parent if their spouse dies and they remarry, giving the children a feeling of that parent now being involved with relationships the child is not involved in. Or returning soldiers from difficult warlike situations can feel it if their identity is too heavily shaped by a situation that they now no longer find themselves in, and so they have difficulty adapting to normal life. In all these situations, the threat of feeling lost in life is present, and work is done to discover how to best approach and resolve these issues.

Chrono cross begins by expressing this metaphor literally. At the beginning of the game you wake up one day to find that you suddenly have no place in what you thought was your home. This alienation and the feelings tied to it often relate to the idea of finding that you are not really integrated properly into the community, either through something like ostracization or simply some type of inherent difference from it. But the game chooses to express it literally. You wake up to find out that you have been dead for ten years. No one in your home recognizes you or is willing to accept you, and even your family is gone, with someone else living in what you thought was your house. And so with nothing else to do, you simply set off away from your home due to the lack of anything that binds you there. In a new world you are forced to have new relationships and a new identity.

This sense of self exploration is both presented as literal, and as a metaphor for self discovery in terms of finding what your place in this world is. In game there is a literal element to it in that you sense that there are people who know who you are who can solve the mystery for you. But it also ties to how those who feel alienated often go on a journey of self discovery. One that ties to finding their place in the world. This place may either be a metaphorical or literal one. Sometimes it involves finding an entirely new community where you will be more integrated. And sometimes it involves self searching so as to find a sense of identity that will allow one to more naturally exist in their home. Sometimes it may even involve a tangible struggle, such as with the case of racism fighting to be seen as a more naturalized member of a community.

Later in the game, this sense of alienation is explored from a different angle, in that even once you find your original universe again, now you are in the body of another person, and so are both rejected by people who don't see you as yourself, as well as experiencing the racism that stems from being a race that your community did not approve of. This also highlights the reality of different perspectives of the same community, showing the different ways one can be treated based on how you are seen.

Switching bodies has other connotations of alienation. Dark serge tells you when he sees you that as your roles are reversed, so are your problems. A common feeling of alienation stems from situations where it feels like when people react to you, they are reacting to a version of you that doesn't actually exist. Because their expectations differ from your actual self. Here expressed literally through the medium of you ending up in another body, and having to fight to be treated in accord with your mental content. Which has relevance for various other thematic applications. The themes of both not being seen as yourself, and of racism are related in that both are an external projection of an identity onto you that does not accurately reflect you.

In the end you return home as if both the literal and symbolic journey were completed, and some of this sense of alienation was overcome. But it leaves it open ended what is going to follow in terms of how the player is meant to project on the character. The game strongly highlights how there isn't one single straightforward narrative, so a situation is never necessarily fully resolved. You return home and are told that now you can live your own life with it once again feeling like home. But it calls you to look forward to the future to see where a following journey might lead you. So while you may resolve it to some degree, there will always be more going on.

A large way that the game explains this is through the lens of loneliness. Loneliness was also stated explicitly to be a major theme of the game. And loneliness ties heavily to alienation, especially in its ties to your community. and being alone in the world. It highlights a sense of how you have trouble relating even to yourself, much less others. And so there is a sense in which the journey of life is an isolated path where your steams may converge and diverge with others. Sege wakes up in a world where he now knows no one, but even at the end of the game, time shifts and so his adventure and in a large sense his memories of it are once again erased. But this does not end on a totally pessimistic note, since the final scenes of the game are an indication that despite this, kid is going to once again seek him out. And so while loneliness and the lonely world are a pervading reality, and there is a constant struggle against it, it is not a fruitless one.

Philosophy of identity

Although related to the concept of identity addressed in existential concepts tied to finding your place in the world, or the resulting alienation that stems from it, philosophy of identity is a similar question, but in a more abstract metaphysical sense rather than an experiential one. While existential questions address who you are in terms of how you live your life, philosophy of identity addresses who you are in a metaphysical sense of continuity.

For instance, what fact about yourself makes you yourself, and makes you persist over time? How do you know that you are yourself rather than someone else. What fact about yourself is it that designates that you are the same person you were yesterday? If anything? While an unreflective response might say that these questions seem irrelevant day to day because there doesn't seem to be any immediate controversy over who is who, aspects of them do actually become more difficult in specific instances, both real and imaginary. And one is forced to call into question how accurate the intuitive sense of continuity even is.

There are various possible things to focus on as the relevant fact of identity continuity is grounded in. The biological approach focuses on you being the same organism. The brute physical view extends this further by focusing on being the same physical object in general. In contrast, the psychological view focuses on having the same mental content. A different variant of that line of thought is the narrative view. Which holds that you are not psychological content, but rather a narrative or story that makes sense of events into a cohesive whole. And so it is a self told story told about your existence that constructs this narrative allowing for continuity. There are also views that say that it is some further unknown fact, or some combination of the above, being the closest continuer of various properties.

Further explorations of the idea ask whether the question is even coherent, or to what degree it might be. Bundle theories say that the self in the sense we normally think of does not actually persist over time in an absolute sense. But that despite this fact there is still some degree of continuity. And so while your identity is not fully stable, one of the above facts is still enough to make sense of continuation moment to moment. Many modern theories call into question the idea of the relevance of the individual to begin with.

In everyday speech people are inclined to see themself as a discrete stable object with firm barriers. But this may not be an accurate conception of the self. Modern science calls into question the idea that people even have a single stream of consciousness rather than various parts which are added together for a primary perspective. And so some call into question the relevance of the individual, saying they are a mere bundle of properties with only a loose continuity. Some also go the opposite direction, saying that the world is continuous and it is the individual that is extrapolated from the big picture, rather than the other way around.

In everyday situations people are inclined to think that these distinctions do not matter much. But there are scenarios in which they are relevant. If two bodies have their mental content swapped fully, we would be inclined to ask which of them is which person. And if people are not discrete selves, then we can also ask to what degree they are literally a new person when you meet them later on. Or if someone has amnesia to what degree they are the same person, versus if they live a new life don't constitute someone new. We can also ask whether group minds are not a mere metaphor, but an actual separate layer of interaction that is tangibly cohesive enough to count as a separate organism to some degree.

Chrono cross first brings up these questions in an explicit way when you meet harle for the first time in the body of lynx. You and lynx swapped bodies. So of course you are inclined to still think of yourself as serge. But she calls into question how you can know you were ever really serge when you are in the body of lynx. She asks what serge is. A figure, a shape, a spirit, a soul? Where is serge? If you claim to be someone, you have to ask what relevant facts even make you that person. Are you really serge, or do you merely have the memories of him now? And she goes on to point out that even if you think you are serge that other people will not see you this way.

Another time philosophy of identity comes up is in terms of the idea of fission and fusion. Philosophy of identity tries to address concerns over whether if it was possible for someone to divide in half which if either resultant person would be the same as the original. In-game, kid is revealed to be half of schala. And concerns over her actual ties to the original person she was created from are brought up. At first she denies this identity, claiming she is her own person. Swearing off the idea that her source dictates her identity. But then later she seemingly merges back together. And the resultant schala now signs her name with the word kid in the middle. Implying a preservation of both identities. This is taking a view that identity is more complicated than direct 1:1 correspondence. Because to some degree it is preserved and to some it is changed.

Fission and fusion is likewise brought up with the dragon gods. While for the other dragons this is presented as less relevant, for harle it provides a bigger context. Since she comes from the dragon god, and was born to fulfill its goals, she develops an identity of her own, seeking to want to live a life in association with the new group she discovered. But ultimately complying with its whims. This brings up the question of whether if a being could split the fact that the different pieces might now diverse in interests. And so the collective being may have a will born from competing lines of thought.

Another time the game addresses philosophy of mind is with the concept of group minds. Group minds are minds that are embodied across several beings, but still seen as having a degree of integration. For instance, if a country could be said to loosely have collective intentionality enough to have a degree of collective integration. This is an important aspect of philosophy of mind even though to some people it might seem odd, since while even though it might seem strange how different things can integrate in this way, it is important to remember that even within a brain the mind is less integrated that people think, being composed of separate streams of calculation that are often competing for dominance.

Group minds would not necessarily be intelligent in the way people are, but may be something much more abstract. The relevant group mind addressed in the game is that of the world itself. While not necessarily depicted as an intelligent being, the planet itself has a type of abstract will of self preservation. As if the ecosystem were a body that tries to resist the things harming it. At the end of the game this is personified much more strongly, with the conversation about how people may only be the dreams of the planet before it is born. The term for treating the planet and ecosystem as a specific discrete being of its own is known as the gaia hypothesis. Note that even though it is something presented as to be protected, that does not necessarily mean its collective intentionality is always accord with morality. Since belthasar made use of it to pull the dragons to the primary universe although for a goal other than that of the planet.

This extends even further, and goes back to the idea of how individuals may be derivatives of the big picture just as much as the inverse. The idea that individuals are derivatives of the big picture is known as open individualism. And while it is a distinct view from bundle theories, there is some overlap. And how a body is simply something that formulates part of the big picture into having a discrete identity. You are told that eventually all dreams return to Zurvan, the sea of dreams. What zurvan is is left ambiguous. But its description implies being some type of abstract universal repository of thought that people emerge from and return to.

Taken literally this implies that to some degree individuals may be derivatives of he big picture, or at least that no direction is more primary than the other. It also implies that parts of the identity of individuals can theoretically be recycled. And perhaps that there is some type of a universal world soul or something equivalent. Though the word soul might sound too religious, analogues of this idea are present in philosophical forms in the views of cosmopsychism or panpsychism which posit an equivalent mental flow to the physical world. The game ends on a note detailing that to some degree even after death some aspect of your identity being preserved when it returns to zurvan.

Existentialism

Existentialism is a series of philosophies that seek to address the reality of existing as a being in the world. That is, rather than beginning philosophical focus with some abstract external absolute, and build from there to humanity, to start with a focus on your existence and life as a human, and what can be derived outwards from this. While some variants of the term are limited in scope to only certain philosophers, the idea of existential questions in general are applicable to many of them.

One of the primary posits of existentialist thinking is that there is not necessarily any inherent meaning to events. That meaning is not something external and objective, but is created through human interaction with external things and decision making. This does not necessarily mean that people can say that the meaning of events is whatever they want. But that their existence and interaction with it shapes the meaning. It does not necessarily automatically deny the connotations of natural meaning in its more abstract sense. But is a denial moreso of a kind of teleological path to existence that things inherently are oriented towards.

One variant of existential thinking, though it is often differentiated is absurdism or the absurd. In philosophy, "the Absurd" refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek inherent value and meaning in life and the human inability to find any in a purposeless, meaningless or chaotic and irrational universe. The universe and the human mind do not each separately cause the Absurd, but rather, the Absurd arises by the contradictory nature of the two existing simultaneously. Where it differs from classical existentialism is that the former posits that meaning is created by human action, and can be readily perceived, whereas the latter denies the tangibility of this created meaning, saying instead that one must simply act as if their actions have meaning even when no ultimate meaning can be grasped.

Existentialism is not an inherently nonreligous philosophy, and can come in both religious andnonreligious variants. Existentialism in the loose sense began with the religious proto existential philosopher soren kierkegard who talked about how even god existing wouldn't be enough to establish meaning to human existence. And that human actions still have the possibility to orient themselves in accord with or against its will. And that in a realm of ambiguity your choice to follow a religious path still derives from an internal decision. Religious existentialism often focuses on the idea that theism is in a sense relative, and based on a decision one makes in terms of values. And so people are left with a choice what to view as their ultimate value.

A common trope of existential thought is the claim of radical freedom that comes from the realization that you are accountable for all your actions. Even if an external authority pushes you to do them, the choice to comply or not is always your own. And can never be pushed entirely on external sources. Even if your cultural situation pushes you to act a certain way, your choice to do so is still a choice. The term existential angst is used to express the feelings associated with this responsibility of decisionmaking. Later philosophers associated with structuralist thinking have highlighted how the existentialists were too focused on the idea of self choice, and how external things do come off as binding in a way. But their insights are still considered useful.

Existential questions begin even in chrono trigger when lucca asks robo what he wants to do, which prompts him to ask himself what he wants to do with his life. Something he had never properly considered before. While existential thought manifests in stories relating to the idea of choice in general, and of course this features heavily in chrono cross in various ways there are a few parts where it becomes more explicit. When you meet sprigg in the temporal vortex, she highlights an absurdist concept of how a concern of life is the fact that for all the suffering there is a scary thing about it is the fact that there is not necessarily any meaning to these events. They simply happen, and you are bound by the situation. That chance and chaos are the major players in the world, and no one is watching out for you. And so you are born into a world forced to make your own path from the chaos. A large focus of the game in general are the natural evils that come from the world themselves, and the unfortunate reality that they see to merely exist as a feature of life, rather than having any meaning to them.

The paradigm of the game does add a loose religious veneer to the existential format. Since while it does depict a type of death of god moment more than once, and a kind of existentialist need for the individual to be responsible for themselves, it also depicts the fundamental ground of reality as a type of abstract divinity. This is similar to the type of religious existentialism of paul tillich. Where god is seen not as a particular sentient being, but as the ground of being that grounds all value. But which still provides a need for the individual to sort their values within reality. A type of duality exists between this depiction of a world of underlying value, and the conversations about the difficulty ascribing any meaning to events. And so a tension exists there between these perspectives. Though not one that is presented as insurmountable.

But a type of religious reverence for reality itself, and one's place in nature is visited in both games. And the depiction comes off as if part of how this tension is resolved is in one's integrated nature where the collective actions (highlighted as "dreams") of those within reality give tangibility and meaning to what has an underlying sense of emptiness. This veers a bit into radically emergent theism also, which says the divinity is something created through the actions of those within reality. Manifested here in a more literal way in that it shows bot humans and dragonites created a tangible god for themselves. But an existentialist element here highlights your need to be careful and responsible in terms of choosing your divinity, both in the sense of choosing what you value, and in terms of choosing tangible things in the world which may end up with power over you.

One more explicit reference to proto-existentialist thinking that shows up in the game is near the end, a riff of the quote from nietzsche "If you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you" appears. Where the ghost of chrono says that if you stare into the flame, perhaps the flame stares also into you. The implication of the original quote being that your interaction with something can influence you, especially if you spend much time on it. And so a derivative of it is used as a potential explanation for the shift in the mentality of fate. In the game this does not particularly convey much information, but by using the quite highlights some of the themes to be looking for for interpretation.

One focus of existentialist thought in general being the idea of choosing who you are, and the associated authentic living that stems from this. While some philosophers have called into question the existentialist concept of authenticity, in terms of concerns it has in conflict with ethics, the reality of the need to make choices that define yourself is still considered present. A path of existential choice is expressed in the game itself in that while you experience alienation and even questions of who you are as a person, ultimately the restoration of your own internal body is shown as a metaphor of having a grasp on your own identity. Note that you are not even restored your original body, but are shown being given a new one. And so it shows the reality that the chaos of the world is not necessarily something one can totally overcome. Problems of identity are ambiguous and may have no easy answer. Especially the aspects of multiple worlds are shown as disorienting. But that despite all this it comes down to a choice to decide on who you are going to be, and a path to move forward in spite of the this.

Ethics

Environmentalism

One major theme present in the game is that of environmentalism. Environmentalism is of course concern about protecting the environment. This can have either a softer form based around doing so due to the need humanity has to be sustained by it long term, or the deeper form based on doing so for its own sake out of respect for the planet and natural life. The latter being known as deep ecology.

Environmentalism as a theme was already present in chrono trigger, but in a less explicit sense. In chrono cross, miguel describes how the heroes of chrono trigger fight against the destruction of their world even though it would not happen until long after their lifetime, and they were in no immediate danger. In this sense, lavos presented as a metaphor for environmental destruction. And fighting against it as a metaphor for environmental protection. This is further exemplified in how in chrono trigger there are side missions that involve restoring a forest.

In chrono cross these themes are made much more explicit. Lavos is not only a metaphor for environmental destruction as an external thing, but becomes an existential threat. Human evolution was influenced by lavos in a 2001-like manner to help its parasitic goals of harming the planet. Humans are designed to have a parasitic element to them that makes them naturally act in ways that can be environmentally disastrous. And so it is rooted in the very core of their being. Something that calls the player to reflect on human nature itself, and it potentially detrimental aspects.

In contrast with humans, other races are shown to be less likely to disrupt the environment due to their nature of being more in tune with it. This does not mean that these races are all benevolent though. As the games show, these races can be violent and dangerous themselves. Just that their overall lifestyle tends to be less environmentally dangerous. This has a parallel in some other fiction, such as lord of the rings where elves live in tune with the forest, but are revealed in the backstory to be highly morally dubious.

An element of this parasitic corruption is the casualness with which humans can do environmentally disastrous things without considering the consequences. Early-game you can go and kill the last hydra in one of the worlds in the hope of saving someone. But you are warned that this could be environmentally damaging. If you push through on this it harms the forest, causing a minor ecological collapse that sets off a sequence of events that even has genocide due to fighting over land. Showing how environmental problems can lead to tangible harms. At various times in the game this concern is brought up over human presence harming the environment, with even the pirates saying that their presence seems to have disturbed the islands.

These scenes also highlight the intersection between environmental and classist issues. Because it is often lower classes, or more oppressed peoples who suffer more under the disasters of environmentally disastrous actions. Because often the harmful actions will be pushed more towards their living spaces, or they will be unable to as easily offset it. In-game this is shown with the presence of humans and how it is at times the other races who are suffering under some human action.

This culminates in an even larger question being asked. that of whether saving humanity is the same as saving the world, or whether these two concepts are inherently opposed. The dragons basically insist that humanity is too inherently dangerous to be allowed to continue. And so for the sake of the planet humans need to be wiped out. This is something addressed in actual ethics too, in extinctionism or certain variants of antinatalism. Whether human action is not so damaging that it would be morally preferable to lead to the end of humanity so as that the world can exist without it.

The game presents this as a hard hitting serious question, showing heavy damage caused by human existence. And that even if humans have difficulty overcoming this due to being born this way that there is still the question of how to address this harm, and whether drastic measures are needed. This ties to the scientific concept of the great filter. Which is the concern that we may not see any extraterrestrial civilizations because advanced civilizations may tend to destroy themselves.

While these dark reflections on humanity are presented as a grave issue, In the end of the narrative, humanity is shown to have moved slightly in the right direction. It was from humans that a means to combat lavos was derived. And in a symbolic transcendence of their own nature, it was humans that destroyed it using some type of mystical ecological device that harmonizes the environment in some way. This can only be done by learning the tune from terra tower. Showing that the complaints and perspectives of the dragons were actually taken seriously. It is actually somewhat difficult to find out what to do in the game. Showing that the solution won't come easy. And the solution comes at great expense, since belthasar's sequence of events he allows to transpire causes great suffering in the path towards finding a solution. Even in the end you are told that now that fate no longer exists humanity has to accept responsibility for its own actions. So while it overcame the immediate threat, this does not deny the reality of future dangers.

Oppression and class systems

A large theme of the chrono games is the idea of oppression and class systems of various kinds. In chrono trigger in the past people were oppressed by dinosaurs. Then later, non magic users by magic users. And in the future humans by robots. And of course the world at large was presented as something lavos had power over in a way analogous to a form of opression. With the battle theme against its second form being titled world revolution in reference to the human response.

In chrono cross however the tone shifts and the shoe is on the other foot. Now rather than humanity being the victims, humanity is presented as the aggressors to some of the other races. The other races in the game are presented in a lower situation relative to humans, and while humans are not always directly oppressing them, human actions and apathy towards them leads to many problems they are forced to deal with. In another world they talk about how the hydras have been entirely wiped out. And in home world you can accidentally wipe out the last one, leading the hydra marshes to become damaged, destabilizing the community of those who lived there.

The game highlights a darker form of this. When humans kill the last hydra the dwarves decide from this to adapt a social darwinist view, stating that survival is built off of the death of others. And so in response to their long term oppression they turn to oppressing others. This highlights cycles of suffering that can be caused due to interrelated situations. Postcolonialism highlights many topics like this, and the long term effects that can come from these actions. Notably also, the game highlights how death is a facet of nature and darwinism in general, but that a leap is made from the natural world to a social darwinist take on society itself. With reflections on the nature of this natural suffering, and whether oppression is a natural extension of it.

This shift of humans from the oppressed to the oppressors makes the tone of the events feel more personal. Not only are humans involved, but by your actions you can have a hand in it also. With the game piling on guilt as you are personally blamed for the deaths. This along with the message of the game to see these stories as continuous with real life calls into question your place in the real world, and what situations you might have a hand in that you need to take a step back and consider how to improve on.

Note that this focus on oppression isn't merely blaming you individually. You did not personally give rise to the entire process of oppression, instead only having a tiny part in the events. This ties to how real life oppression isn't always directly spearheaded by individuals, but they simply exist in situations where they are inadvertently contributing to it. Because they do what seems natural to them, not thinking over the long term consequences of their actions. But even if they are not the ones spearheading it they are still faced with a moral responsibility to try to do better.

Racism is a large theme of the game in general. When you return home in the body of lynx your own ton turns against you. So it shows how even the same place can give you different experiences based on who you are when you go to it. This is something that it shows that serge when first starting out would not ave considered. But it makes it personal when you become a victim of racism from people you already knew and did not think negatively of before then. Highlighting the fact that oftentimes the people who are the privileged classes do not have an easy time understanding what life is like for others, since they are limited to their own perspectives.

In chrono trigger a notable focus is the fact that in zeal it shows how oftentimes the higher classes will even be smarter and more educated. This may be either since they have more access to education, or that those more educated are more capable of using it for the case of exploitation. This can likewise apply in real situations where you have to address that the oppressed often are kept from even being educated enough to understand their own situation. And that the ones who come off seemingly more refined or proper are only that way because the system is designed to make it easier for them. And so you can't use this metric of coming off this way to determine who is in the right in these situations.

Moral luck

Moral luck describes circumstances whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or praise for an action or its consequences even if it is clear that said agent did not have full control over either the action or its consequences. One example being the distinction of where people are born. Someone born in nazi Germany is unavoidably more likely to become a nazi than someone from elsewhere. So it becomes difficult to address whether it is even coherent to be able to morally compare individuals that come from different situations.

Chrono cross highlights an element of this in the fact that humans by their very nature were influenced evolutionarily to become environmentally disastrous by lavos. they are shown harming the environment. But the question is raised in a way how to view this. Because it is not entirely about free agency, but a fact of their nature that is difficult to fight against. As such, you have to address the fact that agency is not a kind of individual thing, but an unfolding of forces that are larger than any one individual. The game does not explore this in much depth beyond the fact of highlighting this reality. But it shows the need to understand people's place in a more particular slant of where they come from.

Moral luck also comes up in the game in the situation of killing the last hydra. You were not the one who did most of the hydra hunting. And it is likely that someone else would have killed it after it not you. After all, in another world where you were already dead they were dead already. But moral luck factors in where you set off a genocide, even though you were only a tiny part of the happenings. The concept exists to highlight situations like this, and address the degree to which one can really hold the individual accountable for their agency versus the structural unfolding that detailed their actions.

While many people have different goals in the games, the kind of depersonalized way it often shows the characters highlights the fact that all these events are an unfolding of larger forces they find themselves entrenched in. As if it were a tide that was carrying them. But this does not alleviate all moral responsibility. Because they are still shown being able to affect the unfolding of the tide. Making morality a more particularist thing that stems from your particular location than something comparable as if in a neutral setting. For some, based on the situation, they simply can't do the same goods that are able to be done by others.

Moral luck intersects with the ideas of moral psychology and moral motivation in general, including how it ties with weakness of the will. The study of morality does not only include what should be done, but also the understanding of the fact that it will be difficult for people to do it, including how it is more difficult for some than others. All of this ties back to the idea of moral luck.

Ethics and hypertime

Something brought up in-game is the question of the moral connotations of changing the past. This is brought up in the sense that if you change the past it will lead to some people from the present never having existed. This leads into morally ambiguous territory, since it leaves you with an ambiguous realm of how to see the future, and to what degree you morally relate to it from the past.

For instance, for a hypothetical person named jane. One perspective holds that there is a moral difference between the world in which Jane never existed, and one in which Jane is removed. Even if the time traveller makes it such that Jane never existed in the first place, that there is something morally questionable about doing so. Intuitively, the world containing Jane’s removal seems somehow different than the one without it. Setting aside time travel for a moment, suppose that one could push a button and make it so that Jane never existed. Ceteris paribus, this seems worse than not doing so, even if one is not technically doing harm to Jane.

This argument leads to an interesting and unexpected result: that there are ethical considerations that tie to whether or not there is hypertime. Hypertime, roughly speaking, is an extra temporal manifold against which the temporal manifold is measured. The idea is that the passage of time must be measured against something, and the most natural “something” is another dimension of time. This means a distinction between whether from the perspective of the present the future is tangibly erased, or simply never existed. As such, someone's existence hyper-occurs the first tie around, but does not hyper-occur the second time. With hypertime, both worlds exist in diachronic order and can be examined for metaphysical and moral difference. Without this form of measurement one cannot say they were removed from existence.

In-game lucca's letter talks about this moral dilemma. How in the end, changing the future caused many people to never be born. But they were trapped between the reality of either doing that, or allowing the world to be destroyed. Her letter acknowledges the reality of the future, seeing it as something that was tangibly destroyed. But sees this as simply an unavoidable facet of the unfolding of probability. The game highlights this as morally dubious, but does not attempt to answer it as an independent case, instead focusing on the reality of having to accept that as a consequence of doing another thing that is good. And so highlighting the morally grey connotations to all action.

Nonviolence

Nonviolence is the practice of generally avoiding violence at times it can reasonably be avoided. It comes from the belief that hurting others or the environment is unnecessary to achieve a positive outcome and refers to a general philosophy of abstention from violence. While as a practice it overlaps with the idea of pacifism, it is more a term for a specific series of actions rather than a philosophy. Like pacifism, it can exist in various degrees ranging from total refusal to engage in any violence to a more moderate form that leans towards avoidance of it when possible.

Nonviolence is a moderate theme in the game, tying to the larger themes of environmentalism and interventionism. The game focuses on reckless human action, often of a violent nature that can have negative consequences. This is driven home first at the point where you end up killing the last hydra, leaving the dwarves who watched this to take up a violent mentality in turn. This mentality of willingness to engage in violence is revealed to have been something present from the beginning, shining the events where you hunted animals for scales at the very beginning in a different more environmentally dubious light.

Similar to games like undertale, this comes off as in away a deconstruction of standard rpg tropes which trivialize the fighting you get involved with, often never really addressing the consequences of doing so, including to wildlife. Here it shows that consequences stem from these actions, and people are dying and even communities being harmed as a result of them if it destabilizes local wildlife. This can happen even when violent actions are not taken for pure selfish reasons, but for seemingly heroic intentions. Killing the last hydra was done under the assumption that it was necessary to save someone's life. But these sequences of actions stemming from being willing to run in and do violence can lead to dark outcomes.

Themes addressing violence inherent in the world come up at various times in the game. The dragon god tells you that in order to survive all living beings must fight desperately, and devour those they defeat. Talking about the history of evolution in the planet at large. And once again addresses the cycle of violence, saying that the weak torment those even weaker than them in turn. It reflects on this, and the logic of extending that line to wiping out other groups entirely. Tied to its goal of wiping out humanity to protect the planet. It also highlights the concept of judgement, saying that it is the strong who are sinners and those who are trampled under them who pronounce judgement. But it asks whether this is an unavoidable facet of nature, or whether there are times that this violence can be avoided in favor of a more nonviolent solution. But leaving it vague to the degree this can be possible.

This principle of nonviolence ultimately becomes the thematic resolution for the end boss. You get the bad ending by rushing into it and trying to simply attack it again, theoretically risking killing schala in the process. But in the end, even that fails because it has grown beyond the point of being able to be harmed by conventional means. Even though you have just recently gotten a legendary sword, the good ending comes from setting down your weapons and finding an alternate resolution. One that stems from an artifact that helps you harmonize the dimensions together using a tone of harmony with the planet. This has a symbolic purpose of showing that you grew beyond the mentality of reckless casual violence. Showing that it is not always necessary, and that rushing in at this time without finding an alternate resolution would not have been for the best.

Agent neutrality

A moral theory is agent-neutral if it ascribes every agent the same set of substantive aims. if it does not do so, it is agent relative. What this means is that there is a distinction between theories in which you are told that regardless of who you are, what is right to do is hypothetically the same, albeit adjusted for context. Versus a theory that says you should privilege for example those more close to you. This does not mean however that agent neutral ethics means that you don't have special duties to say, those close to you. Merely that those are dictated via proximity rather than fundamental nature, and do not override larger goods.

For instance, both approaches may say that you should prioritize your family over strangers in practice. But this is because your family has ties of closer proximity to you, and is something you are more integrated with / and likely have a position that integrates you into its interests. However, in a situation where all else is equal they will give different answers. For instance, if given an option whether to save a family member or three strangers, agent neutral ethics would say to save the latter, whereas some forms of agent relative might say to save the former. Note that agent relative approaches are not the same thing as moral relativism, which is a different topic.

While the game itself never explicitly sides with agent neutral ethics, it does aim a critique at the kind of agent relative approach media often has. Often in media a hero will be inclined to save someone important or close to them even at great risk to the world at large. And the media will present this as an inspirational path to take that validates their connection. Such as in final fantasy 4 where cecil hands over the crystals to save rosa. But here it inverts this. In order to save kid you risk putting others at risk. and this ultimately blows up on you in a way that establishes it as having been a wrong course of events, leading to many deaths. There are various ways to read the relevance of this scene. And different moral dynamics to view it through the lens of. But in general it can be viewed as a kind of criticism of this naive intimacy based narrative where it is seen as heroic to put others at risk for the sake of a significant other.

Moral archangels

Although this is not a well known term, and is limited to the variants of consequentialist moral theory he dealt with, r m hare made a moral distinction between the intuitive and critical levels of moral thinking. He proposed two hypothetical characters, which he called the archangel and the prole. The archangel has an incredibly high degree of knowledge, whereas the prole has very little. This was to distinguish the intersection of knowledge and moral action. What this means is that those with high knowledge can act based on high degree of knowledge of situation and outcomes. Whereas those with low knowledge must act based on more limited information, using useful heuristics and specific moral rules.

This is not meant to distinguish that everyone was either one or the other, but rather to highlight that people have variants of both, and it can change based on situation. But most people are closer to the prole side. This is to answer criticisms often aimed at consequentialist theories that consequentialists would often act erratic based on doing seemingly bad things for a better outcome. But it highlights that the theory would only allow for this if you have the requisite level of knowledge. In everyday situations people would be required to follow useful moral heuristics of a peaceable nature in order not to cause strife. The flipside is that if someone with archangel level knowledge really did exist, that they would act in ways that seem erratic to normal people, based on accounting for a bigger outcome. In fiction this is often called an omniscient morality license. Something that the truly wise can act based on, but which if heroes with normal knowledge tried doing the narrative would punish them for their arrogance.

In game situations that highlight this shift between modes of thinking show up in various instances. Most notably belthasar is put in this position. He sees the only way to save reality from ending as to allow a sequence of events that includes a lot of suffering and strife, all to create a way for you to get the required artifacts to stop the time devourer. Interestingly, the game never really forces you to agree that what he did was right. He simply says his piece, and then leaves, leaving you with the need to find out how to actually make use of what he provided for you. Though in general the game seems to take a tone that he did what he had to.

This same line of thought also applies to fate itself, which is part of why it acts like a villain. While fate during the events of the games is placed in an antagonistic relationship with the party, in its past it was actually keeping humanity safe for 12,000 years. While it casually killed people, this was seen as necessary for the big picture sense of preventing humanity from ending, either from the dragons or lavos. Something in its position is viewing things from a big picture lens, and so the life of individuals are seen as expendable in terms of its larger goals. But it shifts from a protector of humanity to an antagonistic force at some point. With it left ambiguous what causes this to occur.

This ties into questions addressing the concerns between more deontological versus consequentialist thinking in general. The former think you must always follow moral rules on principle. But the latter think you have to focus based on consequences. And there are various moral theories that are between them. Chrono cross shows that in a big picture sense it may be required to do or allow seemingly bad things for a larger good. But it doesn't really specify the degree to which this might be true, or address particular moral theories beyond this. As such, it can be a critique of total rule based moral thinking in the ordinary sense. Even while highlighting that for the most part day to day people might need to operate in this way.

Moral fallibilism

Moral fallibilism is a subset of larger concepts of epistemological fallibilism. Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that absolute certainty about knowledge is impossible, or at least that all claims to knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. This does not necessarily apply to all possible knowledge, but different variants hold it as true for different things. Unlike Skepticism (the doctrine that true knowledge is by definition uncertain), Fallibilism does not imply the need to abandon our knowledge, but rather that there is always an acknowledged difficulty with considering it absolute. It is an admission that, because knowledge can always be revised by further observation, then whatever we are taking as knowledge might possibly turn out to be false.

Falliblism is a common position in moral epistemology, the study of how it is we come across moral knowledge. Moral epistemology has the difficulty of trying to make sense of moral knowledge in general, as well as how humans can come about it, and what constitutes good evidence. While most ethicists consider that at least some moral leanings are loosely good enough to constitute real knowledge, there is the difficulty that it may be difficult in practice, if not impossible in principle to ever reach a strong consensus. Because while we can experience value, and morality is seen as tied to it, it is not particularly clear in what sense it is tied, or how to make use of this connection information-wise.

This comes up in game, although in an indirect way. A long running theme of the game is the reality that it is not merely an issue of willpower, but the fact that you may simply not know what is right. When serge kills the last hydra, he does it thinking he might need to do this for a good end. But this not only ends badly, but it turns out to have not been necessary to begin with. Ambiguity about right and wrong can apply both in cases of particular instances, or even what fundamental values to use. When you fight the zombie hydra, one of your party asks if what you did was right. And another responds by saying who even knows what is right or wrong. Showing that in their place in the events they cannot even tell. Ending by saying that nobody has the right answer. A fallibilist declaration that while some paths might be better than others, no one can say for an absolute. And you must necessarily act under uncertainty.

This ambiguity about right and wrong comes up in the game itself. When the dragons issue their challenge against humanity having a right to exist, the game leaves this grey, placing you in the role of a morally ambiguous person for fighting back against them, despite them having a decent case. Even you fighting against fate was revealed to have been based on forces beyond you manipulating your steps. And you did it without really considering that fate was a boon to humanity much of this time. To the same extent this ties even to the ambiguity of fate's actions and moral standing. It is left ambiguous to highlight the grey view the party has in their role in the events.

This uncertainty even ties back a bit to belthasar's plot in the big picture sense. Even his actions the game does not force you to accept. Because you are left in a grey realm of uncertainty. While he is presented as a light grey figure who helped lead to better ends, the question of his moral standing never is truly resolved. You are merely told that he did what he had to. And the final resolution doesn't provide clarity. Just a resolution of the events, and an optimistic mentality towards moving into the future.

Another relevant aspect of this element of moral fallibilism is the idea of learning from your mistakes. A large theme of the game is the fact that in light of this ambiguity, you will make mistakes. And people may end up harmed by them. This is not meant to say that the mistakes therefore don't count. But to acknowledge the difficulty, and show that it is possible to try to improve after. Across the sense of the story you get an idea of a growing sense of reverence for the planet and life in it, and a choice to be more cautious before recklessly engaging in violence.

Extinctionism

Excinctionism refers to a variety of positions revolving around the extinction of humanity. Including the idea that for moral reasons humanity should deliberately choose to voluntarily end itself. This is often held for environmental reasons, saying that humanity is so damaging to the planet that it should willingly remove itself, so that the planet can flourish without it. This is tied to antinatalism, which is a variant of extinctionism that does not seek the active purging of humans, but seeks for them to cease reproducing. These views can be held for a number of reasons, with environmental ones being only one of them.

In-game this obviously comes up with the goals of the dragons who view humanity in a light of a need to erase it for the sake of the planet. And so a challenge is made of humanity's right to exist in light of its damaging nature. This has a double sided approach, since it can be viewed either as the question of whether it is capable of humanity to improve, or whether even in light of not being able to humanity has a right to exist. But it takes an optimistic view towards humanity being able to overcome this nature. While leaving the other question more ambiguous.

The deeper sense of extinctionism is the idea that life in general is not worth living. The concept of a life worth living is a philosophical concept related to what makes it better to have lived a life rather than not existed. And the required level of value. While most interpretations of this consider a certain rather low degree of value sufficient to have a life worth living, some argue that the standard is so much higher than that that life tends to have that it makes life in general a fundamental net negative.

Concerns of this nature can come from various approaches. Either the theoretical idea that since plain matters more than absence of pleasure that life is a net negative, or the more contingent argument that while it is hypothetically possible for life to be valuable, that the tangible life that exists by and large would be better off not having existed. Though this line of thought is not heavily explored in the game. Being tied more to the backstory of schala fusing with lavos that is detailed in the re-released chrono trigger. In chrono cross it is only vaguely explored, with an offhand line where harle is concerned that kid might think this way. And miguel talks about how the eternity of nonexistence is a way to avoid the reality of being towards death.

Fate and structuralism

Fate, sometimes referred to as destiny, is a predetermined course of events, It may be conceived as a predetermined future, whether in general or of an individual. Traditional usage defines fate as a power or agency that predetermines and orders the course of events. Fate defines events as ordered or "inevitable" and unavoidable. This is a concept based on the belief that there is a fixed natural order to the universe, and in some conceptions, the cosmos. Classical and European mythology feature personified "fate spinners," known as the Moirai in Greek mythology, the Parcae in Roman mythology, and the Norns in Norse mythology. They determine the events of the world through the mystic spinning of threads that represent individual human fates. Fate is often conceived as being divinely inspired.

While fate in the classical sense was seen as a tangible metaphysical force, the term is often used in a modern sense to also highlight a sense of the flow of events in general. One that highlights the questions over how free humans are. This ties into questions of agency, and the question of how much authorship people actually have over their own actions. Whether or not determinism is true in an absolute sense, there is a degree to which large scale events may follow a path that can be unavoidable. If not in the specifics, at least in generalities. This concept too can feed to feelings of alienation, and questions over how much power the individual actually has to alter the course of history.

Structuralism in general is the methodology that implies elements of human culture must be understood by way of their relationship to a broader, overarching system or structure. It works to uncover the structures that underlie all the things that humans do, think, perceive, and feel. Alternatively, as summarized by philosopher Simon Blackburn, structuralism is "the belief that phenomena of human life are not intelligible except through their interrelations. But since the structure can influence you, it becomes difficult to talk about the agency of the individual in a structural light. Which can lead to comparisons of the idea with a fatalitic outlook. This is especially in light of focault who said that rebellion is part of the system, rather than a true deviation. And that rebellion and power to enforce its own whims are part of power. With the rebellious entity being shaped by these power relations, rather than merely responding to them.

In-game fate is of course personified as an actual being. A machine that has power over the unfolding of events. Fate in-game is also associated with the moirai from greek mythology, with the entrance machines named after then on the path to chronopolis. This gives rise to the questions of an unfolding fate, and whether it is possible to fight against it. The concept of fighting fate is one that details not just the idea of fate as a metaphysical force, but concepts of an unfolding of structural events, and whether you can deviate from where they push you.

However, it calls into question a deeper sense of destiny. Even though you fight fate, the entire journey you were on was predicted by belthasar and manipulated for better ends. Miguel even calls your arrival to him as predestined. And belthasar considers that your fight with marcy might be fate as well. So even this concept of fighting fate may be tied to a deeper sense of destiny. When viewing this through a structuralist light it ties to questions of the agency an individual even has in terms of fighting a structure they find themself in. One that tries ascribing a particular "fate" to them. But even this rebellion may be a part of the unfolding of the structure, rather than a true deviation. In the end you defeat fate as a tangible entity, but the question is still left open whether there wasn't a larger sense of destiny, and your entire journey was preordained. This especially tying to the fact that the resolution seems to be something that can come from you, and only you.

This also ties into structuralist concepts of identity, and how your society, or even your place in it can be seemingly forcing a fate onto you. One that can be viewed as overpoweringly unavoidable from the perspective of individuals. If you live in a heavily racist society, your race can be seen as like a fate and identity that is forced onto you. One that no matter what you do it is inescapable. The game also ascribes fates pushed onto you by fact of your birth. Humans are born in bodies that inherently push them to disregard the environment. And the dragons see humans as something that inherently need to be wiped out. There is a sense of unavoidable identities ascribed to you. When you are in lynx's body, how you are treated is different. All of these being things that stem from things outside of your own actions. Dark serge tells you when he sees you that as your roles are reversed, so are your problems. Highlighting how external things are forcing you into situations and roles independently of your actions.

Note here that the game still highlights the sense of chaos in the unfolding of the world. So a kind of naturalized social determinism isn't necessarily pointed to anything. As such it is taking less of a modernist concept of a linear unfolding and more of a potentially postmodern structuralist or poststructuralist one where the structures simply unfold. Despite this, however, it never really takes a pessimistic stance on the idea of individual agency. Instead simply ending with a talk about how now that fate is dead people will have to take responsibility for their lives. This being both about faith, as well as a kind of death of god moment, and movement on from the acknowledgement of this.

Emptiness

Although not as prevalent in some other games, a subtle theme in chrono cross is a sense of underlying emptiness to events. This sense of emptiness can have various meanings. Existential emptiness highlights the meaninglessness behind events. Schala talks about evolution as a meaningless series of life forms killing one another. But there can also be a deeper metaphysical sense to emptiness. An idea that underneath your constructed identities for things, your own metaphysical identity itself might be in question. This comes up a bit when harle questions who you are after you swap bodies. Asking what fact about you makes you serge. And in the end this is never answered. Leaving it vague if there even is an objective fact detailing as such.

This sense of concern over the substantialness of events begins even earlier in chrono trigger. In chrono trigger, doreen brings up the quote about being a man dreaming they are a butterfly, or vice versa coming from the taoist philosopher zhuangzi. Pointing out that different people have different perspectives, and in some sense live in tangibly different worlds. And so you can never assume that what you see and feel is real. She highlights the different perspectives held by different people. This ties to a concept called the life-world. The phenomenological concept that the "world" you exist in is not the objective world of the sciences, but an objective construction of your mind. Because your brain does not directly perceive reality, but the senses are all internal codes it creates to keep you alive. As such, while there are intersubjective crossovers, each life-world is unique to the individual, leading to a degree of an underlying emptiness to the larger reality.

This is also highlighted in the large emphasis both games place on the word dreams. Calling reality a dream gives an implication both of reality being in a sense intangible, and unreal. But in a more positive sense it ties to the idea of goals. Here it is being used for both. Highlighting a sense of the world itself being empty, but given value by people's dreams. The word dreams are emphasized in many things like the city of dreams in zeal, dreamstone, radical dreamers, the dream devourer, and zurvan, the sea of dreams. At the end of the game you are told that maybe all people are just the dreams of the planet before it is being born. And so there is a double sided emphasis on this concept of dreams. The world is described as chaotic and empty, but not valueless, because people create the world through dreaming. and this constructed world is part of a golden chain.

In fiction, the concept of the void is often used to highlight a sense of underlying metaphysical emptiness to reality. The void shows that the basis of the world is not teleological, but the true ultimate is nothingness. And that it is being that is contingent. In chrono cross, the void is present under the name the darkness beyond time. A metaphysical place of emptiness and deletion that discarded timelines go to to be erased. Lavos is now present here as well. But has moved beyond the mere role as a planet eater, but a symbolic representation of this underlying emptiness and the path of human life towards death.

The ephemeral, and death itself is tied to these themes of emptiness, and is a large theme of the game. With miguel talking about how nothing is as impartial as death. And schala describes death in various ways. Disappearing life forms, words that are deleted, thoughts that are buried, pools of cells that slowly evaporate, and echoes of consciousness that slowly fade. She highlights that every being from the most powerful to the weakest eventually dies. Tying to an eastern theme of the unfolding of nature as ephemeral, and nothing as permanent. And using language that describes things as a collection of building blocks that has only a tenuous existence.

Death is tied to concerns over emptiness in that your life is potentially zeroed at some point. As a threat that emerges from the void giving rise to a threat of all reality ending, the tie devourer now also represents a trend towards death, and the fact of having to come face to face with this emptiness that it implies. Rejecting it details a choice to go on living and find value in the world. And the talk of the golden chain and of zurvan gives context to the idea that death does not erase meaning or even the value or content of your life. That these dreams are recycled into the planet and reality, and continues on until the day that the planet can be born. Though what exactly this means is left ambiguous, whether it is a literal event or a symbolic declaration of purpose. But regardless, it inverts the negative connotations into a more optimistic message.

Religion

A large facet of chrono cross is its focus on religious themes and symbolism. An important setup for this is the setting. Fate is literally venerated as the goddess of fate on the islands. With lynx later saying that he is the incarnation of fate. And beneath fate there are the dragon gods. Different people hold different views to the degree they venerate these beings, but they are seen as overarching divinities. Beyond this, there are related things. Both the dragon tear and the frozen flame are seen as religious relics by the inhabitants. With the frozen flame being described as something that answered people's prayers. The planet itself is shown an almost religious degree of reverence by certain figures. And at the end of the game they describe zurvan. Which is presented as some type of abstract ultimate source of reality.

Another important note is that the game includes a large degree of christian symbolism. The one guarding the dead sea is called miguel after the archangel michael. And the entrance to the sea of eden is called the pearly gates. Giving it a tone of being a holy ground and the seat of god. In contrast, fate is in conflict with the dragon god. Who calls to mind the conflict in christianity against satan, represented as a dragon. The tower of geddon likewise is short for Armageddon, which is a christian apocalyptic reference. And sin is brought up, with the dragon god highlight that it is the powerful who are sinful because those they trample over are the ones pronouncing judgement on them. Taking chrono trigger into account there is also the fact that the sages are named after the biblical magi, and the mammon machine is named after the biblical mammon. Although those references were created for the western version of the game.

There is also some greek symbolism, in the greek fates and prometheus being associated with chronopolis. Of especially important note is the story of prometheus, who gave humans fire from the gods. In chrono cross, a character literally named prometheus is giving you the frozen flame, taking it from the goddess of fate. And of course in chrono trigger, robo, also called prometheus, is siding with humanity to help them against his own kind. This emphasis on the name prometheus also ties to the themes of standing against the gods. There is even some shinto symbolism in that harle's japanese name was tsukuyomi, aftr the japanese god of the moon in reference to her association with the moon, and deriving from the dragon god.

Something immediately recognizable about the setting of course is the fact that both divinities are ultimately revealed to not be literally born divinities, but rather some type of advanced construction from two alternate futures who are advanced enough that they have seemingly transcendent powers. Likewise, both forces ultimately end up as antagonists. So the game opens the question of challenging religious dogma that you come from. In general this ties to a larger although subtle theme of anti-traditionalism in general. At the same time however, the game never really challenges their claim to divine status. The dragon gods are in fact transcendent beings whose bodies are in a sense an emanation into the world. And so in a sense it presents it as if these advanced systems are almost the creation of quasi-divine forces.

The game seems to take a somewhat spiritual view, despite the call to challenge existing religious traditions. Back in chrono trigger, fiona's shrine was created in reverence of the restored forest, and fiona for restoring it. And robo is housed in it as a revered being who helped restore it. This shrine is even housed by nuns and is presented in a positive light. So we are already given a semi aniistic tone of nature veneration back in chrono trigger. Added to by the fact that the planet itself is treated by both games as a higher being in a sense.

Chrono cross likewise maintains that tone. Despite the challenging of these tangible divinities, their overall presentation doesn't challenge the nature of a kind of latent divinized view of reality itself, and the allowance that specific beings are seen as special in terms of their ability to channel it. This is even worked into the language used when dwarves call humans heretics of evolution. After everything, in the final segments of the game, you are talked to about zurvan, the sea of dreams. A transcendent source of reality, which all dreams (here meaning consciousness) flow from and return to. Zurvan here comes from zurvanite zoroastrianism, where it is seen as the abstract source of even the gods. But the word for zurvan is derived from the world for time.

And so this reverence and somewhat panentheistic view of the world is upheld. With elements of transtheism in it as well, by acknowledging that in a sense there may be beings that channel enough of reality to constitute claims of divinity. But that you must choose your divinities wisely, and these beings may be dangerous rather than beneficial. Although notably, fate itself protected humanity for a long time before coming in conflict with the heroes. Due to being a japanese game, the nature reference was likely also influenced by japanese shinto animism. Which will often build shrines for even natural outcroppings to show reverence to them.

As such, this leads to a kind of death of god moment. Death of god is a symbolic realization that comes from realizing you can no longer rely on the concept of god to give your life meaning. Here it is represented with the deaths of their literal divinities they saw as watching over them. But it is a kind of death of god theology in that it still maintains a spiritual view of the world despite this new realization of the lack of a teleological end. Death of god theology addresses the spiritual connotations of living in such a world after realizing that the world itself is not structured with a teleological end, or at least cannot be shown to be.

Another major influence seems to be gnostic themes. Which is likely tied to the fact that masato kato had worked on xenogears shortly earlier. Lavos in a sense is a partial creator of humanity. And as the game highlights, was often venerated indirectly through the frozen flame. Something shown earlier to some degree in chrono trigger, where zeal in essence started to treat it as a kind of divinity. Doubly in that once it becomes the time devourer it is a true transcendental being outside reality placing the entire thing in threat. But lavos turned humans into literal prisoners by binding them to its parasitic goals through influencing their evolution in a sense reminiscent of 2001. So it is a force that is behind various manifestations of human religion from the past, but which ultimately is a dangerous force that needs to be overcome. Fate, the dragon god, and lavos all being forces treated as divinities at different times. But in the end, after defeating them the tone is not to reject this spiritual view because of it, but focus on the transcendent absolute in zurvan. Which has a tone immediately reminiscent of gnostic themes.

The surrealist tone of the ending itself seems to be inspired by other works such as 2001 and evangelion. Where the mode of presentation itself is used to express a kind of looking forward and transcendence. What exactly is being expressed in the final conversation with schala seems to be being left deliberately ambiguous in a way. Because it isn't necessarily meant to be expressed as a literal plot point so much as this feeling of transcendence expressed by other similar works. And this ties in with the overall religious tone.