Puella Magi Madoka Magica
| One of most intriguing things about PMMM series is Kyubey and moral dilemmas he presents. Do you think that, needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one? Do you think that ends justify the means? Do you think that alien should be hold to this same moral standards as humans? How can you say that something is evil or not? And since, Kyubey get a lot of - IMO underserved - hate, I decide to put him on trial. I will play a role of advocatus diaboli, and I will debete with anyone who thinks that Kyubey's actions were highly immoral and that he deserve to punished. I'm waiting for good arguments - for or against notion that Kyubey is evil. |
Heredity said: I thought the whole point of his character was that he was rational, he doesn't operate on morals. OK, but do you think that being rational give you absolution? Is that mean that any kind of morality is essentially pointless, if you think that doing most logical thing is always right? |
| I just finished watching the series for the first time -- after several attempts. To the person who created the poll, great idea. But you can easily edit your poll to add more options, and you can also edit the questions. So I wonder if there is much point to just posing your "Yes/No" question. I have created lots of polls myself, and I have often added options. It does not mess up the existing poll numbers if you add extra options. I can certainly foresee a lot of very interesting discussion in this thread, if people can hear about it. As for myself, I had planned simply to leave a comment on the Episode 12 thread. I was not expecting any active discussions. |
okanagan said: I just finished watching the series for the first time -- after several attempts. To the person who created the poll, great idea. But you can easily edit your poll to add more options, and you can also edit the questions. So I wonder if there is much point to just posing your "Yes/No" question. I have created lots of polls myself, and I have often added options. It does not mess up the existing poll numbers if you add extra options. I can certainly foresee a lot of very interesting discussion in this thread, if people can hear about it. As for myself, I had planned simply to leave a comment on the Episode 12 thread. I was not expecting any active discussions. Thank you for attention! You see those questions about morality are one of the best things about this show, and I simply want to know what people are thinking about them. And Ispecifically made only two option available - to stir up discussion. :) But what kind of options you would like to see in the poll? |
| Very interesting question. Morality is something which may even conflict with some other things within our 'world'. 'Insubordination'. Willingly disobeying an order of a superior (i.e. military). Is it good or bad? Does it even matter? Rules state, you can be punished if you don't do what you're expected to. However, what to do, if your job is something where morality says: it's wrong! More on the ethics: There is research done on various ends. Some of them just have to face questions like: is this actually benefitting for our society? What are the implications? When I watched the Madoka series, at the end of ep9 I disliked QB. I won't say 'hate', because I did understand his arguments. And actually I think hes quite correct (Second law of thermodynamics). I didn't give it any more thoughts back then - I was enjoying the show. However, when I watched the movies, I believe they added some things to his explanation (can't exactly remember all the differences). I was like: god damn, we do the same thing. Therefore. I just cannot say his actions are wrong. I think it's because we have emotions that we think it's wrong. And thats exactly the reason why I will vote 'no'. My emotions and what I've been taught during my life tell me: it's wrong. In any case, the race of QB has their own morality. It differs from ours. |
| Okay, here is an example of a nice poll which has five options rather than just two: http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=312375 The question is: Omnipotent characters: Haruhi vs Madoka: So, who's more powerful? They then gave five options: (1) Haruhi (2) Madoka (3) Both (4) Neither (5) A challenger appears (Someone else) So, I would suggest adding a few more options to this poll along these lines. |
| And the point of adding more choices is? The fact remains that the question only have 2 answers: yes or no. If you go with "both" then you aren't giving it enough thought to the question, if I were to answer "both" I would rather answer "yes" his actions are justificable. If I go with "none" then his actions are "wrong". The point is the whole debate with 2 possible answers is to make people actually think about the question, or at least that's what I think of the reason behind the thread. That said, back to the actual topic. Morals are based on each sociaty and are a construct, nothing else. You can't bound another sociaty by your own morals and ethics, you can oppose that sociaty but that doesn't mean you are right and they are wrong. I as a human who loves life think that the incubators are basically scumbags (based on my own morals and ethics) and at the same time I think humans are scumbags and that can easily be justified with Kyubei lifestock explaination. I as an observer can't say that anything that Kyubei did was wrong (with the exception of omiting information) and I justify this by saying that as a "higher being" he did comply to behave as humans did, based on how we tread livestock, he improved our method and did the same based on our standards. This question has many shades to it -.-. I'll skip to the point. The incubators actions: Can't be said to me inmoral based on our standards as they treat a "lower being" as we treat those that we consider just a tool. Can't be judged by our morals. Are as wrong as our own way to behave towards others. Hiding information is wrong, even when not asked. My own thoughts: I would still oppose them as the girls did because that's my nature I guess. Are wrong, logical and all but wrong by my own way of thinking. Conclusions: As we can't bind them by our own morals their actions are not morally wrong (and even if we could, we do the same). I would try to change their way of thinking (as much as humans need to change). Their logic is pretty good but as we saw, it's not all about logic. Kyubei actions are evil and yet they aren't, he is the enemy and yet the one that gives the weapons to fight his monsters, there is no neutrality as he is achieving something. So my answer to the poll would be: Yes they are morally justifiable as there are no moral code to judge his actions. But no, I as a person that looks out while walking to avoid stepping on ants I can't possibly live with myself if I don't try to change the world if I have the powet to do so, as Madoka and Homura did. (And I'll consider a vegan life from now on.) P.D: As always I apologize for my grammar because I barely know english. |
slomo said: Very interesting question. Morality is something which may even conflict with some other things within our 'world'. 'Insubordination'. Willingly disobeying an order of a superior (i.e. military). Is it good or bad? Does it even matter? Rules state, you can be punished if you don't do what you're expected to. However, what to do, if your job is something where morality says: it's wrong! As for military - you should aks yourself if organization designed with sole purpose of killing other human beings can be morally good to begin with? I think that you can say that military, at best can be perceived as necessary evil - we need protection from invasion etc. - but to think of military as a force for good? I don't think so. As for "following orders" - Nuremberg trial pretty much put an end this debate: you can't simply justify an immoral act - like genocide - with statement: "I was only following orders", you are still morally responsible for your actions. slomo said: More on the ethics: There is research done on various ends. Some of them just have to face questions like: is this actually benefitting for our society? What are the implications? As for results of Kyubey's actions - we pretty much knows what they are: he helped to save universe from heat death, and by doing so he saved countless civilisations, and he also helped humankind to develop. It's quite possible that without him and his species, humankind would never evolved beyond Stone Age level, he make this possible: http://ghostlightning.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gg_puella_magi_madoka_magica_-_11_44209da8-mkv_snapshot_06-33_2011-04-23_07-37-06.jpg Here is an interesting fanfic about this: http://markusramikin.deviantart.com/art/The-First-Wish-324628298 slomo said: When I watched the Madoka series, at the end of ep9 I disliked QB. I won't say 'hate', because I did understand his arguments. And actually I think hes quite correct (Second law of thermodynamics). I didn't give it any more thoughts back then - I was enjoying the show. However, when I watched the movies, I believe they added some things to his explanation (can't exactly remember all the differences). I was like: god damn, we do the same thing. As for Kyubey's actions regarding prolonging existence of the universe - some time ago I read SF series called "A time odyssey" by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter, wher both authors told a story of advanced civilization who want to prolong life of a universe by... destroying all other civilisations in the universe - that way they be sure, that no one else "waste" energy. In comparison Kyubey's actions are not that bad, don't you think? In fact humanity, and every other civilisation in cosmos will benefit from his actions. slomo said: Therefore. I just cannot say his actions are wrong. I think it's because we have emotions that we think it's wrong. And thats exactly the reason why I will vote 'no'. My emotions and what I've been taught during my life tell me: it's wrong. In any case, the race of QB has their own morality. It differs from ours. So, emotions are your moral compass? So, what happen when you are extremely angry at someone, is it OK to hurt this person? I don't think so. Also emotions are highly subjective so they can't be basis of universal morality- society can't be build on emotions, like Kyubey pointed out. And you think that aliens can have they own set of moral values? Then you don't believe in objective morality? And even if you don't, then do you think that Kyubey should be held to human moral standards, since he is operating on Earth, and his actions effect not only human children but also whole human society? |
| Okay, so given the choices I voted "no". In most parts of the world, it is illegal to enter into a contract with a minor, i.e. a person who has not yet legally become an adult. So it is not possible for the girls to give their consent. Therefore, all of the things that QB is doing to the girls are without consent. So if one of the girls suffers or dies as a result, then QB is legally liable. QB can reasonably anticipate that the result of "its" actions are likely to result in suffering or death. So QB would be guilty of a criminal offense, not merely civil damages. Yes, it's great that QB is working to protect the entire universe from the "heat death" implied by the second law of thermodynamics. But QB is doing it in an illegal way. If QB simply got Madoka's parents to sign a consent form then it would all be fine. Hopefully, Madoka's mom and dad would check with a good lawyer who was an expert on incubators. |
Tachikoma1701 said: As for military - you should aks yourself if organization designed with sole purpose of killing other human beings can be morally good to begin with? I think that you can say that military, at best can be perceived as necessary evil - we need protection from invasion etc. - but to think of military as a force for good? I don't think so. As for "following orders" - Nuremberg trial pretty much put an end this debate: you can't simply justify an immoral act - like genocide - with statement: "I was only following orders", you are still morally responsible for your actions. I agree. Your last sentence is pretty much what I wanted to show. It wasn't so much about the military, I wanted to state that logically 'correct' may differ from morally 'correct'. Maybe it was a bad example. Tachikoma1701 said: As for Kyubey's actions regarding prolonging existence of the universe - some time ago I read SF series called "A time odyssey" by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter, wher both authors told a story of advanced civilization who want to prolong life of a universe by... destroying all other civilisations in the universe - that way they be sure, that no one else "waste" energy. In comparison Kyubey's actions are not that bad, don't you think? In fact humanity, and every other civilisation in cosmos will benefit from his actions. Thats why I say he's quite correct. So again, I agree with you here. Tachikoma1701 said: So, emotions are your moral compass? So, what happen when you are extremely angry at someone, is it OK to hurt this person? I don't think so. Also emotions are highly subjective so they can't be basis of universal morality- society can't be build on emotions, like Kyubey pointed out. And you think that aliens can have they own set of moral values? Then you don't believe in objective morality? And even if you don't, then do you think that Kyubey should be held to human moral standards, since he is operating on Earth, and his actions effect not only human children but also whole human society? Many questions to answer. I'll try to explain myself a little bit better: Yes, I voted 'no' because of my emotions. In fact I don't know how to answer the question, because - yes - I think QBs race has their own set of moral values. And I don't know if I should judge him by my or his moral. No, emotions are not my moral compass. Of course I would never do what you asked there. But I do believe that our morality is/was affected by our emotions. If it were built on only objective and logical aspects, then wouldn't it be completely fine how we threat our lifestocks? Maximize efficiency, minimize cost, minimize side effects (etc.). |
A_Raizan said: And the point of adding more choices is? The fact remains that the question only have 2 answers: yes or no. If you go with "both" then you aren't giving it enough thought to the question, if I were to answer "both" I would rather answer "yes" his actions are justificable. If I go with "none" then his actions are "wrong". The point is the whole debate with 2 possible answers is to make people actually think about the question, or at least that's what I think of the reason behind the thread. That said, back to the actual topic. Morals are based on each sociaty and are a construct, nothing else. You can't bound another sociaty by your own morals and ethics, you can oppose that sociaty but that doesn't mean you are right and they are wrong. I as a human who loves life think that the incubators are basically scumbags (based on my own morals and ethics) and at the same time I think humans are scumbags and that can easily be justified with Kyubei lifestock explaination. I as an observer can't say that anything that Kyubei did was wrong (with the exception of omiting information) and I justify this by saying that as a "higher being" he did comply to behave as humans did, based on how we tread livestock, he improved our method and did the same based on our standards. This question has many shades to it -.-. I'll skip to the point. The incubators actions: Can't be said to me inmoral based on our standards as they treat a "lower being" as we treat those that we consider just a tool. Can't be judged by our morals. Are as wrong as our own way to behave towards others. Hiding information is wrong, even when not asked. My own thoughts: I would still oppose them as the girls did because that's my nature I guess. Are wrong, logical and all but wrong by my own way of thinking. Conclusions: As we can't bind them by our own morals their actions are not morally wrong (and even if we could, we do the same). I would try to change their way of thinking (as much as humans need to change). Their logic is pretty good but as we saw, it's not all about logic. Kyubei actions are evil and yet they aren't, he is the enemy and yet the one that gives the weapons to fight his monsters, there is no neutrality as he is achieving something. So my answer to the poll would be: Yes they are morally justifiable as there are no moral code to judge his actions. But no, I as a person that looks out while walking to avoid stepping on ants I can't possibly live with myself if I don't try to change the world if I have the powet to do so, as Madoka and Homura did. (And I'll consider a vegan life from now on.) P.D: As always I apologize for my grammar because I barely know english. Don't wory about your english - truth be told, English is not my mother tongue either. :) What you have written is quite interesting, hoever I have to disagree on a few things... Firstly: you said that adding new options to the poll is essentially pointless, since either Kyubey is wrong or his right - he can't be wrong and right at the same time. I agree with you - it's law of noncontradiction. But, in the end you pretty much said that Kyubey can be wrong, and he can be right at this same time - it's just a matter of perspective. I object to that line of thinking; first thing that comes to mind is this law of noncontradiction: "contradictory statements cannot both be true at the same time". Secondly: I think that there is something like moral absolutism and that certain things are just right or wrong, regardless of cultural background. The question is: do you think that utilitarianism is universally good and morally just system? Can't you justify anything by seeing that: "needs of the many, are greater than the needs of the few. Or the one."? After all Kyubey made some good points... So, if he don't have this excuse of being an alien, then do you think that his actions were morally justifiable? My opinion? His actions can be viewed as: "necessary evil" - what he is doing is clearly immoral, but those actions serve the greater good. In a way that's how civilisation was built - and I think that was one of the points that TV series was trying to get across: sacrifices of countless generations, allowed us to have life we currently have, without them, progress wouldn't be possible. okanagan said: Okay, so given the choices I voted "no". In most parts of the world, it is illegal to enter into a contract with a minor, i.e. a person who has not yet legally become an adult. So it is not possible for the girls to give their consent. Therefore, all of the things that QB is doing to the girls are without consent. So if one of the girls suffers or dies as a result, then QB is legally liable. QB can reasonably anticipate that the result of "its" actions are likely to result in suffering or death. So QB would be guilty of a criminal offense, not merely civil damages. Yes, it's great that QB is working to protect the entire universe from the "heat death" implied by the second law of thermodynamics. But QB is doing it in an illegal way. If QB simply got Madoka's parents to sign a consent form then it would all be fine. Hopefully, Madoka's mom and dad would check with a good lawyer who was an expert on incubators. Sorry, but what you have written sounds like a cop-out: it is like you don't want to respond to my main question. ;) Of course what Kyubey is doing is illegal... on Earth. Ironically those laws you are talking about wouldn't even exist if Incubators didn't come to Earth - without them people probably would be still living naked in caves... But legitimacy of his actions is not the issue - morality is! Key question is: do you think that ends justify the means, and do you think that needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? slomo said: Many questions to answer. I'll try to explain myself a little bit better: Yes, I voted 'no' because of my emotions. In fact I don't know how to answer the question, because - yes - I think QBs race has their own set of moral values. And I don't know if I should judge him by my or his moral. No, emotions are not my moral compass. Of course I would never do what you asked there. But I do believe that our morality is/was affected by our emotions. If it were built on only objective and logical aspects, then wouldn't it be completely fine how we threat our lifestocks? Maximize efficiency, minimize cost, minimize side effects (etc.). But, like Kyubey said: livestock exists only because humans create it - some species don't exist in a wild. But also livestock don't have to fight for survival: they have assured food, water, protection from predators etc. Don't you think that it is a fair exchange? |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica Episode 12 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )tsubasalover - Apr 21, 2011 |
1543 |
by Biisoo
»»
Apr 23, 3:47 PM |
|
Poll: » Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica Episode 11 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )tsubasalover - Apr 21, 2011 |
229 |
by Biisoo
»»
Apr 15, 2:11 PM |
|
Poll: » Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica Episode 10 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )stevewiess01 - Mar 10, 2011 |
704 |
by Biisoo
»»
Apr 15, 1:41 PM |
|
Poll: » Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica Episode 8 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )stevewiess01 - Feb 24, 2011 |
627 |
by Biisoo
»»
Apr 15, 12:51 PM |
|
Poll: » Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica Episode 6 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )stevewiess01 - Feb 10, 2011 |
523 |
by Biisoo
»»
Apr 15, 11:18 AM |