comments in others' journals

[scarfman]

At su_herald there's a link to a poll by ms_scarletibis about how evil each BVS character is in Season 6. Introducing the poll ms_scarletibis asks,

Of the two, which was more morally reprehensible?

*Drusilla killing Kendra, or Professor Walsh's attempt to off Buffy?
*Spike killing the Magic Box shop keeper, or any other hapless victim for a meal, or Warren attempting to shoot Buffy dead?
*Angelus killing Jenny Calendar to make sure his soul didn't come back, or The Mayor selling his soul for immortality so that he could one day become a big ass snake demon to eat people?
*Spike attacking Buffy in the bathroom, or Warren using the cerebral dampener to control Katrina in order to be his sex slave?

or, on that same token--

*Warren using the cerebral dampener to make Katrina his sex slave, or Willow using her spells to erase Tara's memories of a fight, and later has sex with her?
*Giles smothering Ben to stop a hell god, or Buffy shanking Faith, to save her boyfriend?
*Angelus, clearly insane, wanting to suck the world into a hell dimension, or Willow, clearly insane, wanting to obliterate life?

Were any of the above fair comparisons? And that's not rhetorical, by the way. Some would say yes, while I am sure there are some who would say no.

I replied:

I think the questions you asked before the actual poll are more interesting.

In the first set of four, each question is comparing an act by a demon or soulless creature with a human being. So does the last question in the second set of three. My answer for each would be, the action by the human is more morally reprehensible because, while the act by the demon may be just as evil by some quantifiable standard, the demon by nature has no morals to exercise but the human does.

For the other two questions in the second set of three: Willow's reprehensibility may be mitigated somewhat relative to Warren's because Willow's intention was not to thwart her subject's will and personality entirely but Warren's was. Giles' action, whose intent was to rescue humanity from a world-dangering evil, may be slightly better than Buffy's, depending on whether Buffy was motivated by saving her boyfriend or by rescuing a souled being (who happens to be her boyfriend) in danger of his life from the actions of a demon (the mayor); that is, a party falling into the category of those the Slayer is charged with protecting.

Comments

[athelind.livejournal.com]

Your arguments largely agree with my own.

For the last one -- well, that "clearly insane" part, for me, removes the entire issue from the moral sphere. It's like asking about the moral culpability of a truck driver who has a stroke during rush hour, jackknifes, and causes a multi-car pile-up that kills dozens. "Clearly insane", by definition, means that one's actions are outside the scope of one's volition. The moral and ethical quandaries involved in those situations rest entirely in the determination of the appropriate response to the actions of the impaired individuals.

While Willow's capacity for rational moral agency was temporarily disabled by her grief and despair, Angelus himself is defined as "Angel with his Capacity for Moral Agency removed entirely".

... which suggests that I'm conflating "capacity for moral agency" and "soul" in the BuffyVerse. I don't think that's too far off by Whedonverse rules, though the interaction of Demonic Possession and the Revenant Cognitive Patterns of who the individual was before their vampiric conversion complicates matters.

[truthmaker]

First let me say, I agree with you on the top four. Comparing the actions of a buffy!vampire to a human on moral grounds is silly. Vampires in that universe have as much moral compass as a toaster. From here on out things get more ambiguous.

Warren's cerebral dampener vs Willow's spell
I have to pic Willow on this one, not that either is very moral. I'm siding with the witch for one and only one reason. Had the two implements not been used I could see Tara (eventually) forgiving Willow and getting back together but I could not see Katrina being Warren's sex slave. Willow wins on points based on the amount of corruption to their respective victims.

Giles killing Ben vs Buffy stabbing Faith
There is an old saying, "You pays your nickel and you takes your chances." Faith made her choice when she sided with the Mayor. This was obviously going to eventually lead to a confrontation with Buffy, the result of which was one of them getting stabbed. While it could be argued that it was unslayer-like to stab a non-demon it was really not a morality question. Giles actions on the other hand have little ambiguity. He murdered a defenseless human whose only crime was being the vessel of a demon/god. He did this without first trying to free the human and without the human requesting to be "released." He committed cold blooded, premeditated murder. There is little that could be morally worse than that.