Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R
Actually, Saki was the one that was showing doubt over how horrific such an action ("children killing their mother") was given the circumstances. I suspect this is because Saki realizes that human society has little right to judge here since humanity has taken at least equally morally questionable actions. So your description of Saki's response to what happened to the Queerat's Queen is simply off. It was Satoru, not Saki, that was the one completely horrified by it.
|
Sorry, my bad.
Quote:
|
If this society was truly that concerned with morality, we wouldn't see people so ready and willing to kill mere children, which most advanced societies consider an extremely immoral act. No, this world is pragmatic to the extreme, arguably amoral in nature.
|
Again, what does that society consider moral? Is killing one to save millions a moral act? Basically, if you had the opportunity to kill baby Hitler, would you?
This society obviously would, since that's what they do, and they don't seem to have many qualms about doing so. They test for baby Hitlers, and kill all of them, before they go around killing many more. Sure, their test might not be 100% accurate, hell, they probably kill more innocent people than they do baby Hitlers, but statistically, they are saving more lives by doing so than by not. Considering how the Education Board acts, they obviously think this is the right thing (because, it minimizes suffering). Saki thinks not (because, innocent people are being murdered).
Depends all on how you define morality.
So taking it back to Saki and the Queerats, now that I have been corrected. Also bringing the novel info in:
-Saki justifies the actions of the queerats "they aren't human, that is perfectly reasonable for them to do."
-Saki connects the moral scheme of humanity, "oh yeah we're the same." It's not just killing risky children, a lot of the "good" acts in their society like casual sex/etc are specifically engineered for "optimal outcome," i.e. utilitarianism.