Flaw In Logic? Or Just Greediness?

[SnowyCheetah]

So as we all know, Scar got ticked off because Simba was born and was next in line for the throne. If I'm not mistaken, here is how royalty works:

The Prince/Princess is descendant of the King and Queen, and is next in line for the throne.

Since when did the King's brother ever come into the picture? In my mind, what Scar apparently expected was something that wouldn't be very likely to happen (unless of course, he caused it). So don't you think it was quite a logical fail (or just greediness) on his part to expect to be King when his brother was already King and had a mate? (btw i think it was also inevitable that Mufasa would find a mate)?

[Mike]

I'm sure that that resentment was a long time in building, and by the time Simba arrived, Scar couldn't change. The darkness that he couldn't escape.

[KiarasMate]

Yeah, I'll have to agree with Mike here and say that by the point in time that the movie starts, Scar's resentment towards Muffy would already be too strongly rooted to change, and as in regards to Scar's thoughts on being king before Simba was born, I'm sure he was already planning on doing something to seize the throne from his brother (most likely involving killing him as he would be next in line without his brother having any male kin to take his place), and so with the birth of Simba, that was just yet another hurdle for Scar to have to overcome in order to gain power.

[YFWE]

Pure greediness and resentment. It wasn't really a flaw in logic; he knew full well what had to be done in order for him to ascend to the throne and was fully willing to do it. Simba was just one more obstacle that stood in the way.

[iluvnala]

Can you simple out your question cause i dont really get your question

[IMightBeHere]

What SC is saying:
Why does Scar think he might get the throne. He is not the first born one in line.
He asks himself: Is it a fail-logic from Disney, or does Scar this because he is greedy?

[SuperBabySimba]

I don't think it's a logic-fail at all.

In human kingdoms, as far as I've understood, the ruler needs to have royal blood in him/her whenever possible, or else the whole point of the concept would fall apart with just anyone getting to be the king/queen. If the ruler died before having off-spring--I think then the ruler's blood sibling would become the ruler. ("I was first in line until that little hairball was born." As in the existence and non-existence of the off-spring of a current ruler is essential to the line order.) I think the key word is the 'line'. In this case naturally meaning the royal bloodline. The royal bloodline would end if the ruler died without off-spring and just anyone could take the place. That's why the bloodline takes a sideleap to the ruler's sibling if needed.

[Jiirani]

Is it not that since he is the Kings brother, he is next in line if something happens to Mufasa? He probably wanted rid of Mufasa before Simba was born x3

[FlipMode]

[quote="Jiirani"]Is it not that since he is the Kings brother, he is next in line if something happens to Mufasa? He probably wanted rid of Mufasa before Simba was born x3[/quote]

That is what I thought too, if Muffy never had any children then Scar would have been next to be King (I think?). He even says " I was first in line... Until the little hair ball was born."

[atouchofgrace]

If Mufasa never had any children and died, Scar would be the next king. Simba took his place as the first in line. After Simba, Scar became second in line. He wanted to get rid of Mufasa before Simba was born but now he has to find a way to get rid of both Mufasa AND Simba. Simba is one more obstacle in his way to the throne. Without Simba or any other child, Scar would always be the first in line.