Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

durntaur t1_j3rup4h wrote

I think one of the biggest problems in this treatment are the contradicting suppositions that are not squared then subsequently used as parameters for defining "absolute evil". Forget about who's the biggest, baddest, evilest comic book villain.

First there is the definition of good and evil which is distilled down to that which WORKS and that which is BROKEN. That's fine and for the sake of discussion I can conditionally accept that definition. However, where the argument begins to collapse is the silent establishment of free will as an unassailable virtue and representation of good (or that which WORKS) and subsequently establishing philosophical libertarianism as the representation of freedom. That is, "there is no greater evil than slavery".

The problem is that free will is neither the agent of good nor the agent of evil. It falls in the realm of the kalon/kakon polarity and we're now back to moral relativism as the treatment suggests is inadequate for defining good and evil; i.e. we're no longer talking in terms of what WORKS and what is BROKEN. At this point the argument for what comic book villain is absolute evil is no longer working within the parameters established from the outset.

I will try to abbreviate this post by including my initial criticism of philosophical libertarianism as the representation of freedom by stating that it falls apart in practice because that which pleases me but does not please you ultimately results in might makes right and the subsequent denial of freedom to those with less power.

8

baileyjn8 OP t1_j3stbo7 wrote

No, philosophical libertarianism is the bad guy. It’s not my definition of free will.

0

durntaur t1_j3t33y7 wrote

I agree; I believe you conclude it to be "[c]haos". But it seems that where Dardseid is evaluated for his evil exercise of agency more weight is given to free will (i.e. freedom) as an unassailable virtue not to be violated because slavery is bad. That is, Darkseid's agency is bad because it violates good agency. Thus we're back to a relativistic critique of good and evil which countermands the established definition of WORKS vs. BROKEN.

So what are your definitions of free will and what constitutes slavery?

Because when I read the following it seems to suggest that the denial of agency (i.e. free will) is the measure of true evil. I can't think of anything more obstructive to my agency than being denied my existence a la The Snap.

>If you ask me, there is no greater evil than slavery, and there is no more perfect presentation of the evil of slavery than the corruption of the most powerful icon of good in superhero history into a destroyer of worlds.

2

baileyjn8 OP t1_j3v2nd1 wrote

So what you’re saying is that the perfect state of being is you being in a universe where you are being forced to do what you don’t want to do?

Saying the snap denies you existence assumes the non-existence of the afterlife. So making the snap an act of supreme evil is fundamentally an atheistic position. I would agree that for atheists, Thanos’ ranking as a bad guy goes up a number of notches.

Whats interesting, though, is the concept of the second death. That after we die here, some people will also at some point cease to exist from the afterlife. But the assumption is that those who suffer the second death are truly evil. So, if you suffer the second death, it’s because you freely choose to enslave and cause loss.

The destroyer must be destroyed.

So sure, Satan is going to say that his removal from reality is evil. Darkseid is going to say that his destruction is a bad thing.

1

durntaur t1_j3v9xv2 wrote

Please explain how you came to the conclusion that that is "what [I am] saying".

And shoehorning in the concept of the afterlife at this point shifts the argument of defining so-called "true evil" or "true villain[y]" as per your declaration that there is no greater evil than slavery. Again, this regresses to moral relativism, which your treatment eschewed. And it still doesn't absolve Thanos, Ego, or any genocidal figure from reality of their evil; in your treatment you seem to apologize (i.e. defend) Thanos and Ego:

>So we have three villains. One ugly bad guy who basically wants to get rid of bad guys^(1). One charismatic actor representing a beautiful world who wants to fix broken people^(2). And one horrific volcanic rock in humanioid form who turns the purest and most powerful superhero in human history into an enslaved weapon of mass destruction.

Your latest conclusion that Thanos gets ranked higher because there is no afterlife exposes the horrific philosophy that if there is an afterlife then genocide becomes more justifiable. Let God sort them out, amiright?

^(1)Thanos's Snap was indiscriminate, it affected the good and the evil alike.

^(2)Ego wasn't fixing anything. In fact, by your standard he was trying to enslave (and thereby eradicate) all beings across the entire universe via the Expansion.

1

baileyjn8 OP t1_j3vaekc wrote

No, Thanos is ranked higher than Ego because loss is worse than repair.

Slavery as evil does not regress to moral relativism. Ask anyone. Existence within a reality where one is forced to do what they don’t want to do is objectively worse than a reality where everyone can do what they want to do. Freedom is objectively prefereable for all people, and, if libertarianism is false, and reality is determined by perfection, then it is possible, and the ideal function of the system, and therefore not broken, so it is good.

Correct. Everyone dies. Everyone goes to God. So then say, the destruction of the Amalekites in the book of Samuel, while not fun, is more palatable. It’s a sad and tragic effect of this godless world, but any innocent Amalekites are okay now.

So this is why, to the theist, Thanos just ain’t that bad. Killing just isn’t as bad as enslaving.

Luke and Han killed zillions of Storm Troopers. Leonidas and the Spartans killed zillions of Persians. In the Revolutionary War, the Brits killed tons of Americans. Americans killed tons of Brits. None of this is fun. “Thou shalt not kill.”

But those Storm Troopers, Persians, Brits, and Amalekites are okay now.

1