Darkness and Light

[Zhavi]

There was a Brian Sanderson book (forget the name, his newest one) where the bad guys hid in plain sight.

 

 

One of the protagonists, a princess, went to the enemy city, got into contact with one of her spies, and found him dying. There were two men there who said they were the dying man's mercenaries, and that they would let the contract slide onto the princess. The whole way the talkative one would make quips like 'You know what I hate about being a mercenary? Everyone thinks you're a murderer/liar/unscrupulous etcetc' and joke about it and get on very well with the princess. And at the end, when the princess finds out that yes, they are indeed murderers, liars, and unscrupulous (and one of them was a sociopath) as well as having manipulated her quite neatly -- it was a huge surprise to me. It was very nicely done.

 

 

A bad guy can do his own dirty work if he wants to (just not the typical way of subtle antagonists), but he'd have to be careful it never is shown to light, and if it is that it is construed as noble or necessary.

[Kashemia]

My favorite villain of all time comes from the fantasy musical of Atlantis, and it's mainly because he's so evil. He does several times mention to be evil, but all in all, it's a mix of powerhunger, revering an evil god and for the glory of the nation.

 

In short, he manage to, in war, kill his best friend who is the commander, blame it on the enemy and take over the army. He then returns to Atlantis as a war hero, plotting to overthrow the king. He manages to get the hero imprisoned for kissing the princess, talking him into killing the kind and then, when the hero have second thoughts, kills the kind himself and blames the hero. He then seduces the princess (and makes her pregnant), imprisons, tortures, rapes and kills the heroes mother, turns the entire nation from their god, Poseidon (the greek god of the sea) to his evil god, make them believe that they have to go to war to ensure their land untill eventually the gods get so angry that they make the entire island sink into the ocean.

 

Why he is such an amazing villain is because he's extremely evil, but also extremely charismatic, so he get an entire people to follow him.

 

It sounds like the same deal with Zane's villain character, who sounds really interesting.

[Eva]

"There is no good and evil. There is only truth and perspective." ~Constable

[DAISHI]

All respects to Constable, I disagree.

[ArmachiA]

It's pretty true unless your a sociopath... even then you don't know your doing right or wrong because you don't know the difference.

 

Hitler didn't think what he was doing was bad, he though what he was doing was necessary.

 

Who was the villian in the Revolutionary war? Was it the Brits and there taxes and rules? Or was is the Americans and there rebellious and disrespectful nature toward the crown?

 

We fight wars on perspective. The winner declares the side that was bad. Everything is based off perspective.

[DAISHI]

@ArmachiA That's a post-modernist version of ambiguous morality I don't subscribe to.

[Aveline]

Yep, kind of how there's always postcards and paintings of the great American west that just show empty fields and forests stretching across a continent haha...

[ArmachiA]

^ I dunno man, Wyoming is pretty empty.

 

It's not ambiguous mortality, we all know what Hitler did was wrong... except for Hitler and his followers, they thought he was doing right. No one is evil for the sake of being evil, there's always a reason.

 

Hell let's talk video games. Sephiroth did was he did because he thought it was the natural conclusion of things, he didn't go "I'm gonna be evil and destroy the world now kthx."

 

In FFX Seymour decided he was better for Spira than his father, and intended on marrying Yuna in an effort to unite it. He really thought he was doing what he felt was necessary. He did not think he was evil.

 

Now in the movie Serenity, the main bad guy knows he's evil, but he says he's doing it for a more perfect world. Not one he will live in, as he is evil, but for future generations. He believes he's doing evil for the right reasons.

 

There is a lot of different ways people justify their behavior and therefore it's perspective.

[Ellion Goto]

Gotta agree with Armi. I don't really know of anyone that just hurts things, places, or people without some justification. Whether you subscribe to it or not is irrelevant. It just means you disagree, therego justifying your side, case in point. Honestly if we stick to the movie genre where a villain is "truly evil" it doesn't really make a lot of sense. For example, in Fifth Element, where the Zork (I guess that's his name) fired 1 million workers instead of 500,000 within his company as a blatant display of his alignment... it didn't make a lot of sense... Unless you take into consideration he's saving money which is his justification.

 

 

Other than that... I only know true evil characters in the form of like supernatural beings that are not tied to consequences in this world.

[DAISHI]

What one believes to be righ does not necessary make it right in a ethical code that rests on objective morality. When one subscribes to a subjective code then all things can be right.

[ArmachiA]

Hence the argument. What they believe is right is not societies belief of right, therefore is wrong. However they STILL believe they're doing right. That's the whole point.

[Shamadconde]

What one believes to be righ does not necessary make it right in a ethical code that rests on objective morality. When one subscribes to a subjective code then all things can be right.

 

OW! OWWWWWW!!! MY BRAIN! MY BRAIN!!!

[ArmachiA]

He's talking about the general ethical code of all people and society. There's a general ethical code of all man that may differ and then there a general society code of what is wrong and what is right. Even then, that varies from culture to culture.

[Ellion Goto]

So wait... let me get this straight. You're basically stating that if society believes it to be right, then if you think differently you're wrong? So when the Mayans considered a sacrifice as an ethical need to get things done that was the absolute right? When slavery was the most popular method of cheap labor that was the correct way? These concepts either don't exist anymore or are no longer tolerated for a reason. I'm sorry but Society is not always right, thus the reason for change.... Hell the United States was founded based on that exact concept... that society is not always right.

 

However, just to be fair, each and everyone of the scenarios listed above had a justifiable reason for their existence... it just doesn't make it right by my viewpoint... and now society's viewpoint. Now you seem to basically be arguing in favor of what Armi's point is... that everything is subjective but you don't realize it.

[ArmachiA]

In other news, may be the first time in history me and Ellion are arguing for the same side

[Shamadconde]

The world, as we know it, is about to end.

[DAISHI]

Actually somewhere along the way we've gotten entirely confused because I would never purposely make that argument. We will do this over when I get back from seaworld.

[Shamadconde]

Goody!

[ArmachiA]

It's not really an issue, we're supposed to be helping a dood out with his villainy and I'm not sure we're helping by arguing

 

so grr argh villainy!

[Trizzip]

Meh....a human being is a subjective creature by nature. Whether we like it or not, we all see the world through different eyes. Hence, it is impossible (in my opinion) to have an objective view on morality. Morality itself is in the eyes of the beholder. If it wasn't, all philosophers would be on the same page instead of having constant discussions since the beginning of time on what is right and what is wrong. There are no facts when it comes to ethics (like 2+2=4), it all just feelings and usually a lot more complicated then you think. The only good thing from arguing ethical behavior is that you can learn something new from the perspective of another. However, if you argue for the sake that "you're wrong and I'm right" sort of attitude, then it's kind of a waste of time.

 

Good and evil is an interpretation, not by a society, but by an individual. At least, in a society such as ours which is not interdependent. We have strayed from the 'community' type role and (in my opinion) most americans seem to prefer an independent state of mind with his/her own view points on the world. Where in other countries, interdependence sort of dictates an overall (this is how you should act) type society.

 

I don't think someone is evil, good, selfish, selfless, vain, pitiful, great, etc. based on what society dictates. I do so based on my own interpretation. A lot of folks get angry at me cause they can't stand that I disagree with them when they have that (2+2=4) mindset. I just tell 'em that they probably shouldn't waste their emotional energy in trying to change me, because I am who I am and if I want to interpret something in my own way, there is nothing anyone can do to stop. For the record, I never considered Sephiroth to be evil. There world isn't black and white.

[Shamadconde]

What did you consider him? I lean towards mentally hilarious.

[ArmachiA]

A Mama's boy.

[Trizzip]

What did you consider him? I lean towards mentally hilarious.

 

 

lol, I'm gonna have to use that for future referance, that is outstanding! I'd say a combination of both of ya'll's post. Mentally broken with mommy issues. I actually felt bad for what he went through and would have liked to have seen some peace of mind go his way to calm his soul. The true antangonist IMO was Jenovoa....but even 'it' wasn't what I would consider evil. The alien was just doing what it was created to do I'm sure.

 

When I eat cows, birds, pigs, and other various animals, I don't consider what I'm doing evil. I'm just doing what I was created to do. Eat meat!

[Shamadconde]

Now that I think about it, was there any FF villains who weren't mentally hilarious?

[DAISHI]

Meh....a human being is a subjective creature by nature. Whether we like it or not, we all see the world through different eyes. Hence, it is impossible (in my opinion) to have an objective view on morality. Morality itself is in the eyes of the beholder. If it wasn't, all philosophers would be on the same page instead of having constant discussions since the beginning of time on what is right and what is wrong. There are no facts when it comes to ethics (like 2+2=4), it all just feelings and usually a lot more complicated then you think. The only good thing from arguing ethical behavior is that you can learn something new from the perspective of another. However, if you argue for the sake that "you're wrong and I'm right" sort of attitude, then it's kind of a waste of time.

 

Good and evil is an interpretation, not by a society, but by an individual. At least, in a society such as ours which is not interdependent. We have strayed from the 'community' type role and (in my opinion) most americans seem to prefer an independent state of mind with his/her own view points on the world. Where in other countries, interdependence sort of dictates an overall (this is how you should act) type society.

 

I don't think someone is evil, good, selfish, selfless, vain, pitiful, great, etc. based on what society dictates. I do so based on my own interpretation. A lot of folks get angry at me cause they can't stand that I disagree with them when they have that (2+2=4) mindset. I just tell 'em that they probably shouldn't waste their emotional energy in trying to change me, because I am who I am and if I want to interpret something in my own way, there is nothing anyone can do to stop. For the record, I never considered Sephiroth to be evil. There world isn't black and white.

 

 

My contention was that if one believes in a divine component of morality to set an objective standard, that while there are fluctuations in what is tolerated between individuals or societies, that there are also hard limits on what can be considered right or wrong.