There's something I've been thinking
about a lot recently. “Let it Go”, a song from Disney's animated
motion picture, “Frozen”. But I'm not here to talk about that,
nor do I intend to discuss how the viability of my OKCupid profile
has increased by a full order of magnitude since memorizing its
lyrics. The thing I've been thinking about recently is ethics, and
not just because I'm currently taking a class on the subject. Also
because I recently watched an anime called “Psycho-pass”, which
was basically a lecture in Utilitarianism. As well as brutal hammer
murder. So basically just like my ethics class. (That link should explain the noodle incident from the last post)
Truth be told, I've had some of these
ideas kicking around in my head for awhile now. I even considered
presenting them as the second installment of “Real Talk with Havoc
Mantis” for my anniversary, as a call-back to the post that
(re)started it all. But considering how strangely prophetic that
turned out to be, I think I'll avoid the risk of jinxing it and
refrain from referring to this as a Real Talk. Because if there's one
thing that my life doesn't need right now, it's more crazy
murderesses.
I suppose my theory goes something like
this: Fictional characters are held to a different moral standard
than real people. In a story, almost any crime can be forgiven, if
there exists a sufficiently tragic backstory or a sufficiently
heartwarming act of redemption. Remember all those kids Darth Vader
kind of slaughtered? Remember that planet he blew up? Yeah, kind of,
but he also threw an elderly man to his death, so we're expected to
believe that his Karmic checkbook is as balanced as Skullgirls'
roster. In fact, my ethics professor addressed this misconception on
the very first day of class (a bit too late, I might add): Hurling a
senior citizen down an elevator shaft does NOT absolve you of
culpability. Darth Vader also has the tragic backstory angle working
for him. Bearing witness to something as terrible as the prequel
trilogy changes a man. It's what caused Qui-Gon to lose his faith in
humanity, ultimately leading to his attempt to destroy Gotham City.
The despair it caused in Obi-Wan led to him taking up heroin, and its
banality caused me to continually reuse jokes.
Ewan Mcgregor once played a role in which he did heroin. That was a joke. |
I think it's safe to say that, from a
young age, most of our exposure to weighty morality comes from
fiction. On screens and in books, we see heroes make tough choices.
Is killing the villain justifiable if it means fewer people will die?
Is it permissible to lie in order to protect someone? Should you really tell Becky that she looks fat in that dress? In our everyday lives, morality is far less pronounced. When
was the last time you were in a climactic duel that ended with your
nemesis dangling over a vat of molten steel, clutching your
outstretched arm, and you had decide whether to pull him up to safety or drop him to his death? If you're anything like me, that could
have been up to a month ago. In real life, morality is much more
subdued. Being a good person is less about “Deciding that human
life is sacred, and there is no crime for which death is a fitting
punishment” and more about “Abstaining from getting your friends
involved in time-consuming projects, then forcing them to do all the
work because you lack every necessary skill to get anything done,
wasting their time with a half-finished mess”. As much as that
sounds like a cheap shot at someone else, (because it kind of is)
it's actually directed at myself. I doubt you're reading this,
Basicles, but if you are, I'm sorry about doing that thing. I'm being
so sincere right now.
So, to recap, in fiction, terrible
actions can be forgiven by virtue of external factors. And in real
life, most people's exposure to morality comes from fiction. When we
judge ourselves, (as seldomly as possible, in most cases) we know our
own backstory, and can use excuses to rationalize our seemingly
immoral behavior. Like that one time you ran that red light, but you
were really late for an important job interview, so you had no
choice. Or when your friend punched that cashier in the face for
making small talk, but he only did it because was really stressed
from a bad day at work. Or, to use a personal example, that one time
I set fire to a McDonalds Playplace, but only because some men want
to watch the world burn, and I am among their number. But the problem
is that when we start judging other people, (or they start judging
us) we don't know their reasons, nor do we give one infinitesimal
dshit. When someone else runs a red light, well, they were probably
in a hurry to the asshole convention they're chairing. If someone
else punches your friend in the face for trying to be polite, they
should be locked up. If someone else sets fire to a McDonald's
Playplace, they're clearly unhinged.
Because we only know the
backstory for ourselves and our friends, we tend to be much more
forgiving of them than strangers. This is called special reasoning,
and is the source of roughly
60% of the world's problems, and an astounding 100% of them that
don't stem from me setting fire to things.
Hey,
remember that thing I said earlier about crazy murderesses? Well,
that was because I originally intended to compare various fictional
killers, (all female of course, as well as at various levels of being
a computer) and discuss how odd it was that the ones with the higher
body count were actually the ones I found more sympathetic, despite
my softcore subscription to utilitarian ideals, which might conclude
that death is not conducive to happiness, and therefore killing is
directly correlated with bad times. Sure, I could attempt to justify
my opinions with the argument that those with the highest K/D ratio
exist in a state of affairs where punishing them would bring about no
further happiness, but then I realized that no one cares about my
perverse ethical standards, and the potential to give away spoilers
would be too great. And besides, one of them managed to convince me
to bake a real life cake, possibly risking the health of my real,
flesh and blood family, which is certainly indicative of a major
problem in my brain, chemically speaking, if not spiritually and
metaphysically. On the other hand, one of the girls was GlaDOS,
(Don't you dare get uppity about this. This is less of a spoiler than
the fact that Tale of Two Cities ends with you getting bored and
closing the book.) so I'm sure I could have made a killer
joke about how the cake being the truth is a far harsher reality that
a blissful lie. I had also intended to give a shout-out to my friend
Quincy Sharp, but not for the murderess that you might expect.
The inner machinations of my mind are an enigma. |
Anyway, speaking of crazy murderesses,
I finally found a new blog buddy! If you like things that are funny,
you should go check out Lessons in Unnecessary Enthusiasm (DoubleFactorial), a blog written by an improv associate of mine, All Ice
'n–
actually, scratch that. She gives her real name right there in the
URL, so there's no need for my to devise a cryptic pseudonym that
only I find funny. As for referring to her as a murderess, what can I
say? Funny people have a thing for killing. No one yet knows if this
is an example of correlation or CAWsation.
That was a pretty funny joke, but at what CAWst? |
Speaking of cryptic pseudonyms, I'd
like to take this opportunity to issue a resounding “screw you”
to the AHPI. But I would also like to once again thank you for that
thing with my wallet in the QuikTrip bathroom. We're cool.
Out of respect for my newfound blog
buddy, I will now end this post in the same way she ends all of hers:
with a haiku.
All haiku are dumb
This one is no exception
I am so meta