@Clayten I'm on bsns trip, pardon my late reply
I think I'm the one that should give an apology, I, again, failed to cover every aspect that is needed to be said. Another thing is my example are just come up spontaneously on the spot without putting much thought into it, as I only use it as surface-value examples, now thinking about it, 20-people examples should be removed since what Araragi was facing is not a dilemma of choice but a dilemma of priority --it's still related, but not as direct as Harambe. I can still answer your last question though, I'll cover it later.
And I think using the term 'correct' and 'right' alone won't help me atriculate myself that much, I'll add the term objective 'correct' and subjective 'correct' this time.
It might touch upon utilitarianism but I don't think NisiO go that far into making it like an anti-thesis. It's just that utilitarianism is not really NisiO's specialty, or I haven't seen him dive that deep into utilitarianism, unlike Urobochi whose mostsome of his work are about anti-utilitarianism. (i.e Madoka, Psycho Pass, Fate/Zero).
I think you're already clear about this, but I'll just say it.
What we consider as correct from objective point of view(utilitarianism, maybe) and what we consider as correct from subjective point of view are different. I know, again, that objective and subjective are probably not a completely 'correct' word but I'll still stick with it for now due to lack of better vocabulary.
Araragi is a holder of the latter. Was it a correct choice to save an unknown limbless vampire in a middle of the night by giving up your life? Definitely not, from objective point of view. But from Araragi point of view, it is. I'll dive into the differences in objective 'correct' and subjective 'correct' if you want, but I assume you already know I'll end it here for now.
I don't think it touches upon a clear or specific scope of utilitarianism but more of a broader scope of it. In a shorter simplified term it's like: "Objective exists, striving for objective is what we do to improve yourself and for a better result, but before the existence of Objectivity, you're an individual with your own understanding, reason, knowledge, principle, experience, success, failure, that is what defines 'yourself' and also what you shouldn't abandon just to pursuing objectivity. But you also shouldn't ignore objectivity too, therefore it's better to align your subjectivity to match with the objectivity as much as possible". In Araragi case, he saved Shinobu, that is objectively wrong while it is subjectively correct, what he did(subconsciously, at that time) to align his objectively wrong with his subjectively right is, make sure Shinobu won't be able to hurt other human beings, which is a bigger scope of what he considers as objectively right.or he just wants a loli slave.
For all I know, if Araragi is put into a situation of saving 10 or killing 20, he might choose to kill himself and save the rest --he can't die anyway duhh. As long as it's the lives of loli, he's more than willing to do it. But inaction is something I hardly able to swallow as what Araragi would do, inaction would make him regret it more than anything. We see it in hell, though the context is a little different from our 20-people example-- even if he had taken no action, Senjohara would have been able to solve her problem (through kaiki), Hanekawa too, Nadeko too, but in the end, he still choose to act rather than take no action. Back to our exmaple, sure, it is a hard and cruel(edgy) decision, but IF it really were to happen, Araragi would definitely do something(without letting everyone die) while accepting the consequence of his result afterward. Even if it means to kill the other 10. We have no clear answer anyway so I don't think there's much merit or argue on what he would do in a hypothetical scenario. Let's move on to your question.
Isn't it really heartless to put your feels before everyone else's?.
I believe this is a question that Araragi posed to himself too. And then start to criticize himself for 'putting his feels before others''. The simplified answer and counter question would be "It might be heartless but isn't it too selfless to put other's feeling before our?"
Therefore, it poses another question, "Is it alright to put our feeling before others'?" The simple answer would be Yes, it's alright but on what condition?
If pursuing objective decision won't affect your subjectivity. Then do it in objective way. In this case, if putting others' feeling before you won't harm you, it's alright to put others' feeling before you. But if pursuing objective decision makes havoc in your subjectivity, then do it in subjective way. In this case, putting your feeling before other is alright and be ready to accept all kind of consequence, be it good or bad one. It's your choice, your result and it is what you've made. Accept it with both hands rather than run away from it.
Sometimes, being too afraid to make choice because it opposes to objectivity, is the same as letting objectivity swallow/erases your subjectivity --which is erasing your real self.
While I think the show gives a message regarding pursuing your subjective correctness, I don't think the show dive that deep into objectivity side but as it is the reason for Araragi's dilemma too, I think it is worth pulling it out and elaborate on its existence. Though it is still my personal interpretation of it, so, again, feel free to take it with a grain of salt. |