Morality in Death Note? Do the ends justify the means?

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Sinfully Naomi

I believe that both Light and.... Light are correct about the world rotting. Yes, people lying, cheating and such to pursue their own happiness is a key factor in this. It seems the world has become a place of mass selfishness. People are only going to be looking out for themselves, because most of the time we are told not to trust anyone. Everyone will be subject to a life of solitude and fear that others will hurt them, betray them, do them wrong in any sense. I know this as a fact for myself, because I feel this way strongly, that only the happiness of one's self matters to them. Your, or my happiness doesn't matter to the vast majority of the world.

In the real world, the word "rotting" means that it is in a degenerative state. Hence for the world to be rotting, it must be getting perceptibly worse all the time. This doesn't seem to be happening as most overall trends are positive in the long run, so one would have to question Light's power of observation (if not his whacked moral sense). What you're describing is the fact that people don't don't interact with perfect generosity with one another; and that's true enough, but it's also sort of a non-statement.

[ac195]

"I close my eyes, only for a moment, and the moment's gone
All my dreams, pass before my eyes, a curiosity
Dust in the wind, all they are is dust in the wind.
Same old song, just a drop of water in an endless sea
All we do, crumbles to the ground, though we refuse to see

Dust in the wind, all we are is dust in the wind

Don't hang on, nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky
It slips away, all your money won't another minute buy

Dust in the wind, All we are is dust in the wind"

[roriconfan]

The world is not rotting. It's all in the eyes of the beholder. I am pretty sure the Chinese see the world getting better from their point of view. And gosh, they are more than a billion.

[ac195]

[Nevflinn]

Originally Posted by velvet nightmare

Except that 8 year old becomes a criminal and then gets added to kira's list

light doesn't want the world to vigilante itself to death or there would be no point of him taking up the mantle of L. he could just sit at home and use the internet to find criminals.

kira's principal is not to take the law into your own hands but to obey the current ones. if using your example happening by the time word of kira had gone main stream, the crime rates would not have gone down by the end of the show as 1 act of violence would be replied with another therefore increasing crime

First, you just said that it's perfectly fine to kill an eight year old child if it's thought that he's done wrong.

Second, yes, Light didn't want to inspire vigilantes - that was just an obvious repercussion of his actions which he was too deluded to notice. But seriously, people look up to their idols and follow their examples. Kira wasn't just a hero to these people, he was worshipped like a god - and he himself wanted to be seen as such.
And didn't he take the mantle of L so that he could both eliminate the chance of the police catching onto him, and so that he could have access to higher-ranked criminals that he couldn't get access to beforehand?

Third, that's a freakin' pathetic way of showing your principle, as taking the law into his own hands is exactly what Light does. If he really cared about law and order, he'd have stuck to working hard within the system to improve it and make things better. All you did was point out why Light's plan couldn't have worked in any world other than a disgustingly cynical one.

Originally Posted by Sinfully Naomi

I believe that both Light and.... Light are correct about the world rotting. Yes, people lying, cheating and such to pursue their own happiness is a key factor in this. It seems the world has become a place of mass selfishness. People are only going to be looking out for themselves, because most of the time we are told not to trust anyone. Everyone will be subject to a life of solitude and fear that others will hurt them, betray them, do them wrong in any sense. I know this as a fact for myself, because I feel this way strongly, that only the happiness of one's self matters to them. Your, or my happiness doesn't matter to the vast majority of the world.

People being like this, not caring to help one another, not caring of another's happiness is the key aspect of a "rotting" world. They only way is for there to be more people who think of others and care to help one another, but as the generations go on, that fleeting number will become smaller, and smaller, until there's nothing but hate an distrust in the world. So what if people have a longer lifespan, who would want to live in a world where at most only one other person might even think of you being a signifigant thing in thier life?

Only one world is ever corrupted in modern day life; the world of innocence. That world begins when you, the individual, are born, and ends when you finally comprehend the world's potential for harm and tragedy as well as peace and prosperity. Look back at history. Look back at the Egyptians, the Romans and Medieval kingdoms, the Aztecs and Persians, even the Renaissance and Victorian times, and see how life was back then. Hell, look back at the period classified as modern history, and you'll see just how much life has improved. Anyone who wasn't in the upper class had it lousy, standards of morals and standards of living were atrocious, etc.

If Death Note means anything, it means a criticism of our affluent society, and how isolated and excessively introverted we have become. To that end, naturally, you are correct in that the improvements in the world have come with a negative. But it's quite easy to fix; just stick your head outdoors and say hello to people. Be friendly, get involved in communities and the like. Heck, even chatting on a forum or blog is opening up. And those who actually completely isolate themselves are, thankfully, in a small minority.

[Tenken's Smile]

Let's look at one of the greatest ethical dilemmas ever proposed - the trolley problem: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_dilemma)
If a trolley is hurtling down a track towards 5 people. You are on a bridge under which it will pass, and you can stop it by dropping a heavy weight in front of it. As it happens, there is a very fat man next to you - your only way to stop the trolley is to push him over the bridge and onto the track, killing him to save five. The further development of this example involves the case, where the fat man is, in fact, the villain who put these 5 people in peril. Should you proceed?

In this instance, pushing the villain to his death, especially to save 5 innocent people seems not just moral but to some, imperative and just. A utilitarian view asserts that it would be not only permissible, but, morally speaking, the better option (the other option being no action at all). It might also be justifiable to consider that simply being present in this situation and being able to influence its outcome constitutes an obligation to participate. If this were the case, then deciding to do nothing would be considered an immoral act.

[roriconfan]

^ The above question assumes that it is all about numbers. Kill a few to save many. Yet, there are people more usefull to society than others. A thousand beggers offer less to the world than a single small factory manager.

Also, it assumes that it is evil to kill and the killer must be punished or it will repeat itself.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by roriconfan

^ The above question assumes that it is all about numbers. Kill a few to save many. Yet, there are people more usefull to society than others. A thousand beggers offer less to the world than a single small factory manager.

I think its better to make it simpler. In truth, nothing can be done without sacrifice. Even the smallest actions(for example, breathing) requires sacrifice. It only ranges from the simplest factors such as time, energy, effort to the most complicated ones----life, natural balance, beliefs. The guide in decision-making really should just be based on limiting sacrifices. Death Note just complicates things by showing the "extremes". What matters is control---a way of weighing the negatives and positives. To answer the thread question, depending on the situation, the end will and will not justify the means. (using majority definition of justice.)

Also, it assumes that it is evil to kill and the killer must be punished or it will repeat itself.

Another extreme statement. It goes without saying, soldiers are honored for killing. In a way, we can directly relate killing to saving...so using partial universal ideology...killing CAN be "good". In very serious and complex cases, deaths and killings are inevitable---ones who disagree with this statement has only their naivety to support. What really matters is "control"---a trait Light seems to lack.

[LXwillXlive]

i see light's intentions, absolutely i do, but what he fails to realize is that people can change.

he killed them off before they could pay for their crimes and become better people.

and maybe the jail system we have now doesn't change people like that. what we need to do is find a way to do that. there is a reason why someone commits a crime. sometimes it's not even their fault. sure they made the choice to do it, but most times it was a greater influence than what it seems.

:/

society needs to change, but not in kira's way. light was smart, but failed to realize everyone is human.

[Sinfully Naomi]

Most importantly, he failed to realize that he was human himself.

[Doodles214]

i'm sorry, but i disagree with LXwillXlive. i believe that people DON'T change. kira (light) might have been too extreme about the world's situation, but people don't change...

[Knightrunner]

Originally Posted by LXwillXlive

i see light's intentions, absolutely i do, but what he fails to realize is that people can change.

he killed them off before they could pay for their crimes and become better people.

and maybe the jail system we have now doesn't change people like that. what we need to do is find a way to do that. there is a reason why someone commits a crime. sometimes it's not even their fault. sure they made the choice to do it, but most times it was a greater influence than what it seems.

:/

society needs to change, but not in kira's way. light was smart, but failed to realize everyone is human.

People with crimes that high don't change. It is extremely rare (next to imposible)to find a murderer that became a saint. Plus Kira in the manga wiped out 70 percent crime rate around the world which is a huge improvement to mankind.

[Sun_petal]

Here's my theory the only reason why humanity isn't perfect because it would be boring with everyone acting the same!!!! God gave us choices whether good or bad. If you pick a bad choice, you eventually learn from your lesson. Plus, Kira said he could be god??? Newsflash!!!!! Kira can destroy lifes while God can destroy AND create lives OR give second chances. While Kira it's just one chance and you're a gonner. Again it would be boring if everyone were perfect acting like little robots. God gave us FEELINGS and CHOICES. If Kira did succeed, everyone will start to act like mindless robots. NOTHING is 100%

[roriconfan]

Originally Posted by Sun_petal

If Kira did succeed, everyone will start to act like mindless robots. NOTHING is 100%

If Kira had succeed we would all be dead. Nobody can be flawless for a lifetime, no matter how much we try and he wouldn't be forgiving not even once.
Thus, Kira was wrong. He was no god, he was no divine punisher. He was a cocky arsehole who wanted to feel superior by having power over life and death... on the expense of everyone else.

[Slave0fLife]

I think this difference of opinion is basically because people have different premises. For example, I do not think that god certainly exists. I have an open mind to the possibility, but I don't see any reason as to believe blindly that he does. I believe we are all just physics, chemical reactions, etc - our thoughts and reactions to situations included.
So, from my point of view, there is no right or wrong, some people are just more capable of either convincing people to be in a certain way or forcing people to obey their rules ('cause he can).
I would be one of the people who would like Kira, since his ideas of who should live or die are similar to mine (rapists, war-lords, assassins), although I would have to have a bit more proof of what they did rather than just a "the police caught him and they say he's a murderer". What I would not like about him would be the fact that, if he got too scared that someone was too curious, he would kill the person, which would be a problem if he got neurotic and started thinking everyone was on him. But, I hardly would be able to do anything, as I am not near as smart as him, and I would never get close to who he was.

Then, there are the people who don't like what he does. From his point of view, the ones who object to him (at least from what I remember) peacefully wouldn't make a difference, and wouldn't die or anything, they would just ramble. The ones who defied his rules (rapists, pedophiles, etc) would die. And then there would be the ones who are smart enough to get close to him - these would be rare, and probably die along the way, but it's a risk when taking down someone so powerful.

In the end, I believe there is no absolute right or wrong, there is no ultimate justice, people just do what they think is right and some are better at changing people's minds or forcing people to obey them than others.

[roriconfan]

Originally Posted by Slave0fLife

there is no absolute right or wrong, there is no ultimate justice, people just do what they think is right and some are better at changing people's minds or forcing people to obey them than others.

That doesn't excuse what Kira did. He didn't prove or enforce anything. He just killed.

[hierophant]

I think in real life Kira wouldn't be so sucessfull. A single human's perception is too small to be able to track all criminals.

Criminals + cops also would do something so Kira wouldn't be able to track criminals, like hiding their identities or prohibing media covering. Kira would have hard time tracking common criminals, not to say the elusive ones.

And people would have fear of being notorious, and not of commiting crimes.

Even if Kira would have found a way to keep well informed, the result would be nothing more nothing else than living in a government where cops would execute people without trials. People would live in fear of police and media, and crimes wouldn't end.

[Slave0fLife]

But that's just it: he did what HE thought was right, and fought till the end to do it. He betrayed, cheated, did everything that most of us consider horrible, but in his mind (and maybe the minds of others) it was the right thing to do.
L did what people who feel opressed do (or think of doing) - try to find a way to reinstate the right order of things, in his point of view, even at the risk of his own life. Light might have felt opressed by society, and found the means to put the world "on the right path".

If there were a world-dictator, who had the power to do whatever he wanted, and 95% of the world agreed with his ways. Suppose you were in the 5%. What would you do? Your options would be either accept that "that's the way things are" or try to do something about it, in which case your best bet would be try to unite with some people that also don't like the reality they are in. These must also be very trustworthy, so as not to tell on you because of fear. Then, you would try to overpower the dictator, be it convincing the world that you are right or by force.
Great, let's suppose that you managed to beat the guy and your idea of a perfect world is now reality.
The thing is, the situation above is the same for any "right" and "wrong". The 95% of the world could be agreeing with either Light or with L. You could be a "Jesus-like" guy, and be fighting against "what is wrong", or you could be a dictator, fighting against "what is wrong".

The one who finds a way to convince people or force them to do what he thinks is right would be the "winner".

I am not saying that it's useless to do anything, just that I think the argument "it's the right thing to do" should be changed to "in my point of view, it's the right thing to do". I'm not excusing what he did (as I don't agree with everything he did, so I do think he was wrong in many aspects) nor am I invalidating any ideas of right or wrong, whichever they are.

@hierophant
I actually think that most of the World would agree with eliminating rapists, pedophiles, psicopathic murderers, etc. Especially if they were victims.
It is true, people would not be afraid of commiting crimes, only of the crime appearing in media - but for you to think that it's not any divine power eliminating people (divine power which would be all-knowing and omnipresent), you would have to be pretty smart. You would have to realize what L first realized in the story - what is needed to kill. This would require some access to police archives and such. The one who realizes this could not reveal his knowledge in public, because of the risk of being killed, so this would limit a lot of his actions, and so on.
Being from a country where there are lot's of bad people, I only think most people would be against Kira if they knew it was a person and not a god, and if he started killing innocent people. Otherwise, most people would think it was great that something was eliminating assassins, rapists, etc.
Personally, I'm pro-kill in regards to confirmed pedophiles, rapists, emotionally unstable assassins (at least for now, that a cure is not possible). See that there is a "confirmed" condition in what I said, as there has to be undeniable evidence of the person doing the crime, and he MUST have done the crime. A person who had pedophile-desires but doesn't act on them, and asks for help - I don't think he should die, since he was able to control himself and ask for help. In cases of "I saw him do it" or anything like that, I don't think the death penalty should be blindly dealt, as there are many false statements. As for the rest of the situations - it is a very long discussion that I think would be off-topic.

And I do agree with you about the government-censorship, the difference would be that it would be difficult to not-believe that there was a God eliminating people. Plus you would have to evade people who would be pro-Kira, as they would probably tell on you.

[roriconfan]

In Kira's world, anyone condemned by a court is the same as being sentenced to death.
Anyone openly not agreeing with him is sentenced to death.
Anyone who worships him in a way he doesn't fancy is sentenced to death.
Any girl getting close to Light is sentenced to death.
Anyone being at the wrong time at the wrong place is sentenced to death.
Anyone Kira doesn't like the way he looks is sentenced to death.
(random words) is sentenced to death.
Where is the justice in all this? Nowhere. Except if what a delusional megalomaniac with God syndrome and complete lack of sympathy for human life thinks it's right, counts as justice.
...which doesn't.

[Slave0fLife]

Originally Posted by roriconfan

Where is the justice in all this? Nowhere. Except if what a delusional megalomaniac with God syndrome and complete lack of sympathy for human life thinks it's right, counts as justice.
...which doesn't.

It doesn't count as justice in your point of view. That's my point. Justice is not the same for everyone - I think it's fair to kill a pedophile-rapist, but some friends and family think it's not, for whatever the reason. Justice would be either giving punishment or reward to someone, for what is considered "right" or "wrong" by the society in which this someone is living with. What society considers right or wrong can be any number of rules - Light has his, I have mine, you have yours, etc.
Usually, since no one has god-like powers, the only way to impose your ideas of right and wrong is to gain power by manipulating/convincing/joining people who have beliefs similar to your own - the more people there are, the more powerful the idea is, and it is then more likely to be established as a rule. I say impose because it is very rare to find someone who agrees with you on everything, and any "punishment" you give to someone because he/she thinks differently would be imposing.
The "cheat" with Light is that he found a way to impose his ideas of right and wrong (be them megalomaniac as they were) without the need for anyone else. Today, democracy is usually the system used because the number of people counts to gain power. But, essentialy, power is what really counts. If you gain power to do anything you want, and no one could touch you or do anything even though they wanted to, you could establish "the new world" as you wished - be it leaving it like it is now, making minor changes or even making major changes.

Just a reminder, I don't agree with most of what Light did. I just know that I would probably die trying to find a way to fight against him, since he had much more power and was a lot more intelligent than I am. Would my death while trying to defeat him be wrong? To me, it certainly would, but to him, it would not. But in the end, both of us would be trying to fight for what we believe in with what we have - the problem is I would have lost