@AgeofHurricane:
Sigh you are so SILLY. I edited because I thought you probably wouldn't GET my reference because you wouldn't listen to it. If you had you would UNDERSTAND that I am not calling a chimp or anything silly. Your inner chimp means that you are using the basic gut instincts that come from our evolution in the past when we lived in small groups. These instincts are basically the gut feelings like do not kill your buddy or child ect. When I thought about it some more I realized that actually that kind of moral logic didn't fit your rational that I had miss labelled the error in your moral logic. Actually what you are doing is better described by cognitive psychology and human development perspective. Basically you are using a less advanced type of moral logic typical of children. You are stuck on rules as being the only aspect/method of determining whether some one is a villian or not. Basically you keep coming back to this justification:
Cyclops has done a few BAD things so he must be a VILLIAN!!! Everybody TOTALLY has the RIGHT to JUDGE HIM!! Ect. over and over again you keep saying.
I first of all am not emotional, even though you jumped into a conversation I was having with another poster about our annoyance at the characterization of storm as having a less developed ability for moral logic than she deserves. Despite the fact that you clearly are unable to see the big picture, I have been patient and have labored to explain. I hoped I might be able to remedy what have been some gross errors in moral logic that keep being used by a few people again and again in x-men forums. It has boggled my mind and been kind of worrying that so many people, including some marvel writers, fail to understand what being part of an endangered species or people means or that by using this new context their already thinly spread moral framework set up in the 1960s is obsolete just as the comic code is.
Still I am not emotional as you having again jumped to conclusions have assumed I am. If I am anything it is mildly annoyed at your: repeated failure to comprehend, your refusal to listen, your strange and simply incorrect ideas of what bias means and how comparisons work in a debate (probably created by the performing astonishing leaps association fueled by bias and yet having no supporting basis in reading comprehension or in the methods of constructing an argument.
I took time to try to understand you, to answer your questions and misunderstandings. I put in the effort to try to deconstruct what should be obvious if you knew what you were talking about, into simpler bite sized blocks that had you been able to see them you could used them see outside your box. Having climbed over that hurdle maybe you'd been able to reach the bridge I made and maybe (OMG my stars and garters!!) then we could have a worth while discussion!!!
Instead you turn you turn to the same excuse common to the defensive opinionated types frequently hurl when they find themselves out gunned. Quote "please do keep in mind that we're talking about fictional characters here so you can stop getting all emotional ad personal." If you are going to start a fight with someone, then bother them with poorly constructed arguments based on errors. Then you should not be surprised to critiqued for doing so.
I am not surprised that you clearly can not take it, but I hoped for the better; my mistake. Personally I find the fact that devalue the importance of survival for a species and your misconceptions of what constitutes a hero or a villain as very worrisome.
************************************************************************
I will simply things yet again in even more basic terms!!:
1.) Intention matters, in fact it is KEY!! ( Yes people sling around the saying about best intentions and failure paving streets but they besides the point. A person's ability, their success and failures do not determine their alignment. Hero who fails with the best intentions or is led astray is not a villain. (As long as their intentions are still selfless.) Thats a tragedy or a hero that is more grey than black and white morally (also a more realistic hero in being so.) Others may call said person a villain but that says more about them than the character they refer to. You can question their choices but not their alignment.
It is when a character's motive changes to a selfish one that they become a villain. True villain serve only themselves they do not make hard choices (which may have consequences harmful to themselves) sake of others. Calling Cyclops, who has worked tirelessly to help his people survive threat after threat while ALSO trying his best not to harm humans and to help human kind as well, unless they are faced with no other option but to do so, by fellow X-man and mutant makes storm look ignorant. It is an incorrect use of the term. As seen in worlds apart, Storm should be equipped with much a more mature moral logic.
But I think the great OMA DESALA from stargate describes it better:
Log in to comment