baileyjn8 OP t1_j3v2nd1 wrote
Reply to comment by durntaur in The Effect of Philosophical Libertarianism on Popular Media as Portrayed by Comic Book Villains by baileyjn8
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.
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.
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.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments