Psycho-Pass and Shin Sekai Yori comparison (spoilers ahead)

[Kanon]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

What I find really amusing about these comparisons of their ending is that they essentially were the same ending in both shows. The society in both PP and SSY did not get toppled. Both Akane and Saki chose to operate within the system instead of staging a revolt. The bad guy in both series dies, albeit for understand philosophical reasons.

So why the massive difference in assessment between the two endings? I find it incredibly befuddling to say the least .

They are similar, but they are not the same. There are differences.

For one, the two main characters' fate are radically different. Saki got a very good ending: she married her childhood friend, became the leader of the village, and can safely try to improve the system from within. For viewers like me who liked her, this is very satisfying. Akane, on the other hand failed to "save" Kogami, remains powerless, and came up with absolutely no answer to change the system other than wait and hope (it worked for Edmond Dantes but I'm not sure it will work for her...). She is back to square one. Nothing has changed for her. In fact, I'd argue she might be worse off than before now. Ignorance is bliss.

And let's not forget toppling the SSY society was never the point and it became quickly obvious it would never occur, so there's no reason to be disappointed it didn't happen. The SSY society had been presented as horrific and yet completely necessary. Something PP failed to do. I completely agree with Dawnstorm's posts.

I also think Squealer got a better send-off than Makishima. He delivered a passionate speech that did not completely fall on deaf ears - Saki and later Satoru understood his point of view. On the other hand, Makishima and Kogami never got to interact in a meaningful way in the finale. Kogami had absolutely no interest in what Makishima wanted to say, and put him down like he would a mad dog. Makishima will leave nothing behind. I thought they kept him alive for so long because he still had an important role to play, but nope. He just attempted to overthrow the system once more and failed again. This felt pretty anticlimactic.

It's for all these reasons I liked SSY's ending better. It felt very appropriate.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Kanon

They are similar, but they are not the same. There are differences.

For one, the two main characters' fate are radically different. Saki got a very good ending: she married her childhood friend, became the leader of the village, and can safely try to improve the system from within. For viewers like me who liked her, this is very satisfying. Akane, on the other hand failed to "save" Kogami, remains powerless, and came up with absolutely no answer to change the system other than wait and hope (it worked for Edmond Dantes but I'm not sure it will work for her...). She is back to square one. Nothing has changed for her. In fact, I'd argue she might be worse off than before now. Ignorance is bliss.

First of all, that was merely a huge time skip in which we were shown basically nothing. We can imagine that the system changed, but we weren't really shown anything. Saki might be the village leader, but we don't know why and how (Their fellow villagers did not seem to really believe in their philosophy so I'm not sure how this happened). Essentially the story fast forwarded to some happily ever after ending where we did not get to see how in any way they reached that position. We were only left to imagine that after a long time, Saki worked within her society to instigate some sort of change. But the show basically provided no solution to their problems . SSY in fact gave no answer to how to change their society, it merely told us that it did change.

Anyhow, Akane did not get a huge time skip to work within her system, and it is completely dishonest to assert that nothing changed. Akane is now in more of a leadership position than before at work. She has direct contact with Sibyl and knows their secret, so she is in the best position to try in enact some change in that society. Furthermore, she has come a long way in the show. She has experience, and understands the world around her better. Her attitude towards the new recruit at the end is also noticeably different from when Gino welcomed her. There is a sense that Akane is going to struggle to find a change, and I think there is a lot of hinting of more story to come. Especially with Kogami still alive and on the run.

Originally Posted by Kanon

And let's not forget toppling the SSY society was never the point and it became quickly obvious it would never occur, so there's no reason to be disappointed it didn't happen. The SSY society had been presented as horrific and yet completely necessary. Something PP failed to do. I completely agree with Dawnstorm's posts.

What more justification do you need than the fact that PP's society is generally more peaceful and prosperous than what they had before?

Originally Posted by Kanon

I also think Squealer got a better send-off than Makishima. He delivered a passionate speech that did not completely fall on deaf ears - Saki and later Satoru understood his point of view. On the other hand, Makishima and Kogami never got to interact in a meaningful way in the finale. Kogami had absolutely no interest in what Makishima wanted to say, and put him down like he would a mad dog. Makishima will leave nothing behind. I thought they kept him alive for so long because he still had an important role to play, but nope. He just attempted to overthrow the system once more and failed again. This felt pretty anticlimactic.

It's for all these reasons I liked SSY's ending better. It felt very appropriate.

That's the thing I did in fact like about the PP finale. Normally after being wounded, you would see the villain get in a 20 minute epic brawl or something, but Makishima's send off was not that sort of cliche ending. He lost a lot of blood, and he tried in vain to escape. He knew he was screwed and he knew Kogami would be the one to kill him. Kogami did understand Makishima, and so did Akane (Are you forgetting that damn sequence a couple episodes ago where Akane was imagining all the things people were telling her and she talked about understanding Makishima's point of view?), but Makishima is a murderer. Kogami took justice into his own hands.

And so Makishima might be dead, but his legacy is definitely not over. He definitely affected our two main characters, Kogami and Akane. Akane now has a completely different way of looking at her society thanks to what Makishima showed her. Kogami was baited further into complete darkness, and in some ways is closest to the path that Makishima was on. Their lives will never be the same, especially Kogami who after enacting his revenge has nothing left and just became a wanted man.

----

I think both series went for their logical endings, and were very strong. It's too easy for series to want to go out in some sort of blaze of glory, but they didn't and I think both feel more meaningful as a result.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

SY in fact gave no answer to how to change their society, it merely told us that it did change.

No it did not. The series did not say the society has changed or everything is "happily ever after" as you imply but Saki and Satoru were working towards a change and believed in that change.

And SSY did show us how they were working towards that change.

* First Saki made sure many monster rat societies were spared. I understand that might look like she is in control of their lives and nothing has changed, but nothing will change if they are all killed off. Despite the obvious hate the humans might have for the monster rats, Saki was able to intervene on their behalf. Perhaps it won't be their generation but another generation of PK users and Monster rats that will solve things in ways this generation could not.

* In the farther future we see that Saki and/or Satoru are researching Akki and Gouma. They might not have the answer about stopping this from occurring but they also haven't resolved to do nothing.

* Saki and Satoru are contacting the other villages and not dealing with this issue just within their own small world.

* Anyways the most telling sign is Saki and Satoru are hopeful not fearful of their new child. The message at the end even says "an object of fear turns into hope". They talk about their child's future not if it will have a future.

* Saki is also writing to the people 1000 years in future again showing us she believes that humanity will have this future.

All these things were small not life changing events. They were small steps and many more will have to be taken but the message is clear that they have started to take those steps.

Anyways we can say Saki and Satoru had more opportunities than Akane and co. and that is actually true but in the end it was the writers who created these situations for the characters.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

* First Saki made sure many monster rat societies were spared. I understand that might look like she is in control of their lives and nothing has changed, but nothing will change if they are all killed off. Despite the obvious hate the humans might have for the monster rats, Saki was able to intervene on their behalf. Perhaps it won't be their generation but another generation of PK users and Monster rats that will solve things in ways this generation could not.

Yes, we are shown this, but we were not shown in any way how she convinced her village to spare the rats. That scene with Squealer was a practical lynch mob, so it sure was going to take a hell of a job to come up with a convincing argument for sparing them. Again, this is just them merely fast forwarding to some sort of "result" instead of showing how they went about to change it.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

* In the farther future we see that Saki and/or Satoru are researching Akki and Gouma. They might not have the answer about stopping this from occurring but they also haven't resolved to do nothing.

So in fact, the problem has not been solved.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

* Saki and Satoru are contacting the other villages and not dealing with this issue just within their own small world.

Was it ever indicated that their village was out of contact with other villages?

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

* Anyways the most telling sign is Saki and Satoru are hopeful not fearful of their new child. The message at the end even says "an object of fear turns into hope". They talk about their child's future not if it will have a future.

Well sure, but the underlying issue still exists. We have not been shown how they plan to resolve karma demons and fiends, so this does not mean much (Did any method in fact get changed?).

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

* Saki is also writing to the people 1000 years in future again showing us she believes that humanity will have this future.

Words are words. Akane said Sibyl doesn't have a future in PP and chose to believe in humanity too.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

All these things were small not life changing events. They were small steps and many more will have to be taken but the message is clear that they have started to take those steps.

Anyways we can say Saki and Satoru had more opportunities than Akane and co. and that is actually true but in the end it was the writers who created these situations for the characters.

You mean, they time skipped to a situation where the results of changes were shown, but we did not see how they in fact actually did go about changing anything.

I'm not really criticizing SSY here btw, I just don't see how it really did anything too different from PP in its ending. I loved how both ended.

[Kanon]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

First of all, that was merely a huge time skip in which we were shown basically nothing. We can imagine that the system changed, but we weren't really shown anything. Saki might be the village leader, but we don't know why and how (Their fellow villagers did not seem to really believe in their philosophy so I'm not sure how this happened). Essentially the story fast forwarded to some happily ever after ending where we did not get to see how in any way they reached that position. We were only left to imagine that after a long time, Saki worked within her society to instigate some sort of change. But the show basically provided no solution to their problems . SSY in fact gave no answer to how to change their society, it merely told us that it did change.

We were shown at least one thing: Saki managed to save several queerats colonies. That in itself is quite an accomplishment, given how dead-set the others were on exterminating them all. It's enough to make me think Saki will be successful in the long run.

What more justification do you need than the fact that PP's society is generally more peaceful and prosperous than what they had before?

This was put into perspective tons of time during the show, starting with the very first episode. Their society is not as peaceful and prosperous as Sibyl wants them to think. And I'd take a less peaceful society any day so long as it's not totally isolated from the outside world and run by a totalitarian regime (made up of psychopaths to boot!). I don't buy for one second that Sibyl's benefits outweighs all the bad. Sibyl is not necessary for modern society to survive.

Kogami did understand Makishima, and so did Akane (Are you forgetting that damn sequence a couple episodes ago where Akane was imagining all the things people were telling her and she talked about understanding Makishima's point of view?), but Makishima is a murderer. Kogami took justice into his own hands.

They understood him, but Kogami was too obsessed by revenge to give a damn, and Akane ultimately decided he was wrong and essentially sided with Sibyl. The sequence you're talking about actually made me very hopeful Akane was attempting to trick them and was only pretending to go along... I was mistaken. She actually had no plan in mind.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Kanon

We were shown at least one thing: Saki managed to save several queerats colonies. That in itself is quite an accomplishment, given how dead-set the others were on exterminating them all. It's enough to make me think Saki will be successful in the long run.

So they spared some of them, although I think it's rather dubious that she'd be able to convince them considering the lynch mob we saw at the end with Squealer. However, the rats are still their slaves and nothing changed on that front from what I can see. Return to status quo?

Originally Posted by Kanon

This was put into perspective tons of time during the show, starting with the very first episode. Their society is not as peaceful and prosperous as Sibyl wants them to think. And I'd take a less peaceful society any day so long as it's not totally isolated from the outside world and run by a totalitarian regime (made up of psychopaths to boot!). I don't buy for one second that Sibyl's benefits outweighs all the bad. Sibyl is not necessary for modern society to survive.

A few criminally asymptomatic individuals doesn't make their society exactly that unsafe, and we have a police force to clean up the few bugs in the system. The damage caused by those few individuals is nothing compared to the crime in our world today.

And I am not saying the benefits outweigh the bad, but the bad isn't explicitly clear in this society. It's easy to see how people could be complacent in such a society and allow these changes to take place in their lives. When crimes rates drop to astronomically low numbers, and people now struggle far less to find what they are good at in this society, it's easy to see why feel comfortable. Something abstract like "but now we don't have free will" is not enough. It's easy to see why people lost sight of what's important in their lives.

Originally Posted by Kanon

They understood him, but Kogami was too obsessed by revenge to give a damn, and Akane ultimately decided he was wrong and essentially sided with Sibyl. The sequence you're talking about actually made me very hopeful Akane was attempting to trick them and was only pretending to go along... I was mistaken. She actually had no plan in mind.

Why should Kogami give a damn? Makishima caused a lot of death and destruction. He's evil, and the society he was in didn't allow him to judge him properly. He went around the law to fulfill his goals and went rogue. Effectively he left Makishima get to him.

And no, Akane didn't say that Makishima's philosophy is wrong. In fact she seems to agree with his point of view, but she views Makishima's actions as wrong. He was too radical, he wanted to destroy their entire society. That's just unacceptable and foolish. Akane made the right choice IMO.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Words are words. Akane said Sibyl doesn't have a future in PP and chose to believe in humanity too.

Words are not just words in fiction but present the themes of what the writer is telling us.

After Akane made her grand speech about believing in the people and the law, sybil system laughed at her. This bring into question whether Akane is right and the Psychopass doesn't understand it will eventually fall. Or Akane is being horribly naive and just like 1984 the system is too powerful. It is left open for interpretation to the viewer but because of this is creates a weak statement.

In the end while some things might have changed via personnel we see the system itself is running the same way as always. You have your instructors and enforcers.

Whether Saki and Satoru made actual change or not is besides the point. They are actively trying to make that change through what they learned. They not only believe in a future but they are actively trying to make that future better by researching other possibilities. They aren't just saying I believe it will be better but working towards it. Being happy about their child is just a symbolic message of all this.

Also I agree with Kanon that the set up and reasons of Saki and Satoru's world makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Psychopass world. We were told exactly why the different things were set in place. I understand it so thematically it makes sense that Saki and Satoru learned things about their world and through all their experiences they understand why things have to change and that they are trying to change it. They are not waiting for the future to change it. I don't think the exactly how is important. Although showing them researching things is technically the how.

Psychopass never really showed us why they have the Sybil System. Trust me I understand if they just topple the system it might bring chaos. But it was never made clear why they went on this system in the first place. The system itself makes no sense. The system brings peace and security, but why? And really even that is brought into question when from the very first episode we have pretty violent crime. So pretty much we are left with an ending where Akane can't do anything against this corrupt system because if it ends the world will go into chaos. But instead the people will eventually change it somehow through the law. The problem is the only law shown in the story is the sybil system itself.

In the end SSY was not actually about dealing with its system. If anything the audience is presented with different sides and I think we learn that neither side is entirely good or evil. I don't find it to be a happily ever after ending. I think the situation is still pretty bitter for both sides. However, I can still see how Saki and Satoru learned and internalized things to work towards a better future.

The entirety of Psychopass was about the system but in the end the story doesn't really deal with it at all at least not in any meaningful way in my opinion.

[ahelo]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

In the end SSY was not actually about dealing with its system. If anything the audience is presented with different sides and I think we learn that neither side is entirely good or evil. I don't find it to be a happily ever after ending. I think the situation is still pretty bitter for both sides. However, I can still see how Saki and Satoru learned and internalized things to work towards a better future.

The entirety of Psychopass was about the system but in the end the story doesn't really deal with it at all at least not in any meaningful way in my opinion.

THIS. This is the reason, for me, why the ending of SSY worked so much better than the ending of Psycho Pass even though they're the same in essence.

[TinyRedLeaf]

I don't have much time, so I'll try to cover as much as I can, as I don't expect to return to this debate any time soon.

(1)
Firstly, I never said I was satisfied with ending of Psycho-Pass. To be sure, I didn't really care about the final outcome of the story, as the plot had more or less fallen apart for me the moment the truth of the Sibyl System was revealed. I was, however, responding to the original post about choosing between Akane or Saki. And given that I identify much more strongly with Akane's struggles than Saki's, I naturally chose Akane.

(2)
Secondly, I find the widespread support for Shin Sekai Yori's ending interesting. For reasons that I've already outlined, I just don't feel this groundswell of goodwill towards Saki and Satoru. I wish I could feel something stronger, I really do. But, the truth is, all I feel is indifference.

The scope of imagination that went into creating the New World is breathtaking. But I just can't shake the nagging feeling that the story overall pulled in too many different directions, without gelling together into a cohesive, thematic whole until the end. I don't know why the revelation that the queer-rats are "human" should be as amazing as it seems to be for many viewers, because it felt obvious to me a very long time ago. I recall that many anime-only viewers had already speculated along the same lines several weeks ago, so I can't be the only one who isn't particularly surprised by the outcome.

That ties in with my feeling about the narrative coherence, or relative lack of it, of Shin Sekai Yori. The story just didn't do enough for me to feel much sympathy towards the queer-rats, to make me feel outraged about their unfair fate.

(3)
Thirdly, I am genuinely puzzled about the criticisms of Akane's apparent unwillingness to "fight the system", and I wonder if it stems from fundamentally different worldviews. There seems to be this overwhelming desire for Akane to topple the system like Makishima attempted to, but an apparent lack of awareness of how hypocritical it would be for Akane to do so.

To me, Makishima, Kougami and Akane represented three distinct choices. Makishima was the nihilist who would destroy the system. Kougami believed that the ends justified the means. Akane was the only one who sincerely believed that the means must be just in order to achieve a just end.

However vile the Sibyl System was, she understood that plotting to destroy it would make her no different from Makishima. It wouldn't be the justice she desired.

This pursuit of justice was also demonstrated in her stubborn insistence on bringing in Kougami alive and in preventing him from committing a crime while pursuing his private vendetta with Makishima.

In my opinion, Akane had been thoroughly consistent throughout the series. She represented an idea and was also compelling as a character at the same time. In contrast, Saki went all over the place, in narrative direction, in emotional composure and in intellectual conviction. That's why I strongly feel that Akane makes the stronger heroine overall.

(4)
As for my statement that Sibyl was born out of the collective wishes of Akane's countrymen, I don't see why that's difficult to understand. It doesn't matter that the Sibyl System originally envisioned by the people was a pure machine intelligence that eventually became a perversion of nature. It matters only that the people's wishes were the First Cause that led to the System's creation. How it subsequently evolved does not change the fact that it exists only because the people of Akane's world willed it into existence.

To argue that it's justifiable to tear down Sibyl System as it now exists because it has become a corruption of the people's original wishes is almost the same as arguing that it's justifiable to tear down America's Second Amendment because it is no longer relevant to the context of modern society. Both artefacts of law and Constitution were created in different times and for different purposes, but had evolved over time to take present forms that have little resemblance to their original intents. But that doesn't change the fact that both were created as a function of the people's will.

In both cases, a lot of people may be right, that the situation has changed and an artefact of a bygone socio-political system has to be revised or abolished. Yet, in both instances, the just way to bring about that change is through the law, and not by breaking the law.

The law is what Akane stands for. Which is why, in the end, she chose to remain an inspector, because that is how she chooses to build the society she wants. In this regard, she's no different from Saki.

Saki chose change through quiet rebellion. Akane, on the other hand, chose change by working within the system. Both recognised the evil in their worlds, but they each took a different philosophical approach towards the solutions they believed in.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Words are not just words in fiction but present the themes of what the writer is telling us.

After Akane made her grand speech about believing in the people and the law, sybil system laughed at her. This bring into question whether Akane is right and the Psychopass doesn't understand it will eventually fall. Or Akane is being horribly naive and just like 1984 the system is too powerful. It is left open for interpretation to the viewer but because of this is creates a weak statement.

In the end while some things might have changed via personnel we see the system itself is running the same way as always. You have your instructors and enforcers.

Weak statement? The show clearly presented an argument for why it thinks the Sibyl system should not exist. Urobuchi Gen drove that point home quite well with his musings over free will and what not. Akane though is also considering the safety and protection of people in their society. Free will is great, but being safe and prosperous is also important too. Without a way to transition in as peaceful of a manner as possible to something actually better, Sibyl is necessary for keeping that society together. Her level headed nature on this matter is also why she constantly has a low PP rating.

And yes, the system wasn't brought down. Akane was never a revolutionary. That was Makishima. However, Akane is clearly a different person than when we first met her in episode 1. Plus she is in a far better position now than ever to enact change in a gradual and more constructive manner than Makishima. She's also shown the aptitude to successfully negotiate with Sibyl, so there's got to be something there.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Whether Saki and Satoru made actual change or not is besides the point. They are actively trying to make that change through what they learned. They not only believe in a future but they are actively trying to make that future better by researching other possibilities. They aren't just saying I believe it will be better but working towards it. Being happy about their child is just a symbolic message of all this.

So you wanted to see at the end of Psycho-Pass that Akane was actively working towards some goal with all the experiences she had? This seems to be what it all boils down to. The show left us on the note that Akane is going to have to struggle to find an answer (And I believe this hinted heavily at a possible sequel as well), and SSY basically time jumped Saki's struggle.

Still in the end, by preserving the queer rat colonies, the humans in SSY basically returned to the status quo. There was no change of real note to be seen, and just because Saki wasn't afraid of her child doesn't mean the villagers aren't. OK cool they believe in the future and are supposedly "working" towards a better future but I don't see any actual work of note being done.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Also I agree with Kanon that the set up and reasons of Saki and Satoru's world makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Psychopass world. We were told exactly why the different things were set in place. I understand it so thematically it makes sense that Saki and Satoru learned things about their world and through all their experiences they understand why things have to change and that they are trying to change it. They are not waiting for the future to change it. I don't think the exactly how is important. Although showing them researching things is technically the how.

Psychopass never really showed us why they have the Sybil System. Trust me I understand if they just topple the system it might bring chaos. But it was never made clear why they went on this system in the first place. The system itself makes no sense. The system brings peace and security, but why? And really even that is brought into question when from the very first episode we have pretty violent crime. So pretty much we are left with an ending where Akane can't do anything against this corrupt system because if it ends the world will go into chaos. But instead the people will eventually change it somehow through the law. The problem is the only law shown in the story is the sybil system itself.

I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Kanon then. I didn't find his answer very convincing, so maybe you can explain better.

Isn't the justification of the Sibyl System the fact that the average citizen is far safer (Besides a few incidents, crime is basically eradicated), and has a far easier time managing the important decisions around them? They live easier, more prosperous, and safer lives. Is this not a sufficient reason for the establishment of such a system? This point was put forth a few times towards the end of show.

In the end SSY was not actually about dealing with its system. If anything the audience is presented with different sides and I think we learn that neither side is entirely good or evil. I don't find it to be a happily ever after ending. I think the situation is still pretty bitter for both sides. However, I can still see how Saki and Satoru learned and internalized things to work towards a better future.

The entirety of Psychopass was about the system but in the end the story doesn't really deal with it at all at least not in any meaningful way in my opinion.

This seems ridiculously arbitrary.

Why does Psycho-Pass have to "deal" with the system, and what do you mean exactly by that?

And if Psycho-Pass is about the system, how is SSY not about its system as well?

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Urobuchi Gen drove that point home quite well with his musings over free will and what not. Akane though is also considering the safety and protection of people in their society. Free will is great, but being safe and prosperous is also important too.

Therein lies one of my issues with Psychopass. Gen is always trying to have it both ways. He presents contradictory ideas but doesn't make a decision on what is more important. In the end it creates something very wishy washy.

I admit this was also a strength of a series since it allowed the characters to explore many different ideas but when push comes to shove I feel Gen did not follow through with any of these ideas. Maybe for you it works, but for me it makes for a very boring narrative.

And again this is reflective in the end where Gen leaves it open whether Akane or the Sybil system is right about its future.

And yes, the system wasn't brought down. Akane was never a revolutionary. That was Makishima.

I never said I thought Akane should completely overthrow the system. So let me be clear I was not expecting that. I was hoping Akane would come up with her own solution and yes in some ways she did. But I feel Akane's solution is not really an answer.

I respect that Akane doesn't want to commit any crimes to bring down the system but her answer of working within a corrupt system because it is the law to bring down that corrupt system just doesn't work for me. I found this again a contradiction and a weak statement.

Still in the end, by preserving the queer rat colonies, the humans in SSY basically returned to the status quo. There was no change of real note to be seen.

This was shown right after the war when there would be obvious hostilities on both sides. The fact that Saki kept her promise to kiroumaru about preserving his tribe and some others was significant enough.

That being said it might never be fixed because of what Satoru discovered. If they think of the Monster rats as human the monster rats have an advantage over them. At the very most we can hope Saki and Satoru will try to treat them with more dignity.

and just because Saki wasn't afraid of her child doesn't mean the villagers aren't. OK cool they believe in the future and are supposedly "working" towards a better future but I don't see any actual work of note being done.

Once again they are researching Akki and Gouma to look for answers of how they come about. That is "work of note" to me.

Saki and Satoru not being afraid of their child is at most meant to be symbolic. That being said again I admit actual tangible change might take a long time to come.

I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Kanon then. I didn't find his answer very convincing, so maybe you can explain better.

Isn't the justification of the Sibyl System the fact that the average citizen is far safer (Besides a few incidents, crime is basically eradicated), and has a far easier time managing the important decisions around them? They live easier, more prosperous, and safer lives. Is this not a sufficient reason for the establishment of such a system? This point was put forth a few times towards the end of show.

Only if you have a strong psycho pass to you live more prosperous lives, for everyone else well it sucks to be you.

The series also told us the citizens were safer but it didn't really show us (besides showing us that the citizens did not know how to react to a violent crises). If anything the series went out of its way to show us how bad & tolitarian the sybil system was. Which is also why I don't buy the idea that the sybil system was originally created with the wishes of the people in mind. But there are a lot of things that make no sense about the world building of the series. And maybe that is my overall problem there is a lot of telling the audience but not showing and a lot of what is shown contradicts what is told.

This seems ridiculously arbitrary.

Why does Psycho-Pass have to "deal" with the system, and what do you mean exactly by that?

And if Psycho-Pass is about the system, how is SSY not about its system as well?

The entire plot line of Psycho Pass centers around the sybil system. It was either about Makishima trying to destroy the system or trying to stop Makishima. The sybil system was the core of Psycho Pass' focus. In fact the series is even named after it.

SSY was never about changing its system. In fact the series goes out of its way to show the audience the absolute necessity of that system. Its themes run a completely different course than Psychopass. If anything SSY is more about survival. Both the PK users and the Monster rats did what they did for survival. Neither side was more morally right or wrong. The world of SSY is pretty dark and if anything it ends on a dark note, but Saki and Satoru still have hope despite that.

I realize that this might seem similar to Akane's situation where she has hope despite not being able to destroy the sybil system today but I just felt this was presented in a more wishy washy fashion that even Gen himself can't decide if the series is ending on a hopeful note or not.

In the end I had a more meaningful experience from SSY. It is perfectly fine that you got meaning out of both or someone else got more meaning out of Psycho Pass but just because series might seem similar on the surface doesn't mean you and I are going to get the same thing out of them.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Therein lies one of my issues with Psychopass. Gen is always trying to have it both ways. He presents contradictory ideas but doesn't make a decision on what is more important. In the end it creates something very wishy washy.

I admit this was also a strength of a series since it allowed the characters to explore many different ideas but when push comes to shove I feel Gen did not follow through with any of these ideas. Maybe for you it works, but for me it makes for a very boring narrative.

And again this is reflective in the end where Gen leaves it open whether Akane or the Sybil system is right about its future.

Giving the viewer leeway in a kind of show like that is very important. It's boring to be preached to. Let the viewer think for themselves.

However, our main character is Akane and her speech about serving the law is not one that should be ignored. It was the most important one in the final episode, and it is exactly what she decided to follow through on. Once the people decide that Sibyl is no longer viable, then and only then would it be OK in Akane's eyes to turn off Sibyl. I think that's a very important point.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I never said I thought Akane should completely overthrow the system. So let me be clear I was not expecting that. I was hoping Akane would come up with her own solution and yes in some ways she did. But I feel Akane's solution is not really an answer.

I respect that Akane doesn't want to commit any crimes to bring down the system but her answer of working within a corrupt system because it is the law to bring down that corrupt system just doesn't work for me. I found this again a contradiction and a weak statement.

I think Karice said it better in the PP thread than I could:

Originally Posted by karice67

I'm not trying to argue that the system isn't bad. But I interpret Akane's decision as one of having the people in the society choose the rules and system of order that they want to follow. As per her admittedly idealistic argument in the final episode, people are always striving for a righteous way of living. And they cannot truly make that choice if someone makes it for them, whether by destroying the system that holds up what they believe to be righteous, by undermining it by cultivating a backlash based primarily on emotion (as revelation that human brains were actually running it would provoke), or by making a unilateral decision to remove what everyone believes is upholding the law without explaining it (which they would have to do if they just stopped using the Dominators). Akane's ideal world would consist of people just like her, people able to distinguish between right and wrong not based on what a system tells them, but based on their own values, and she strongly believes that it is still possible to achieve that peacefully within the system as it now is. I would even argue that to deny that implies denying her own existence. And though they left us with "Sibyl still continues", I choose to hope, and trust that Akane and others in their society are still working towards that hope. As at least one of the credit scenes suggests.

I'm not going to say that Akane's logic has to work for you, but that's why this show has different perspectives. Maybe you thought Makishima had the real solution. Maybe you agree with Kogami instead, that if the law is not worth protecting, it's time to take justice into your own hands. You say that this creates a weak statement of some sort, but Gen's main point about Sibyl stands. No matter which perspective you choose, aside from Sibyl's, Makishima, Kogami, and Akane all do not like Sibyl for the same reasons. They just have different ideas on how to manage and deal with the Sibyl system, which is an important philosophical discussion to have. I believe Akane chose the hardest path, but she also chose the most righteous.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

This was shown right after the war when there would be obvious hostilities on both sides. The fact that Saki kept her promise to kiroumaru about preserving his tribe and some others was significant enough.

That being said it might never be fixed because of what Satoru discovered. If they think of the Monster rats as human the monster rats have an advantage over them. At the very most we can hope Saki and Satoru will try to treat them with more dignity.

They didn't actually show us how they treat the rats. All we're shown is that they preserved some villages and the master-slave relationship presumably continues to exist. We can hope that they will treat them with more dignity, but in the same we can hope that Akane in PP will also do something positive for the society around her.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Once again they are researching Akki and Gouma to look for answers of how they come about. That is "work of note" to me.

Saki and Satoru not being afraid of their child is at most meant to be symbolic. That being said again I admit actual tangible change might take a long time to come.

Saki and Satoru aren't afraid of their child because they have hope. This hope though is not based upon anything tangible. It's great to have hope. PP ending also leaves off on a hopeful note with Akane.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

Only if you have a strong psycho pass to you live more prosperous lives, for everyone else well it sucks to be you.

The series also told us the citizens were safer but it didn't really show us (besides showing us that the citizens did not know how to react to a violent crises). If anything the series went out of its way to show us how bad & tolitarian the sybil system was. Which is also why I don't buy the idea that the sybil system was originally created with the wishes of the people in mind. But there are a lot of things that make no sense about the world building of the series. And maybe that is my overall problem there is a lot of telling the audience but not showing and a lot of what is shown contradicts what is told.

When we have had regimes like Nazi Germany in our world, I'm not so sure why it would be hard to believe that people would put in place a system like Psycho-Pass. Having that ability to predict people's criminality with near complete accuracy is a powerful tool, and I believe humans would use it as well.

But regardless, I think the key scene about Sibyl society was Gen's "bystander" effect seen. People have become so used to not seeing any crime whatsoever that they could not realize at all what was happening in front of them. This shows perfectly the complacency of its citizens in that they no longer are able to recognize danger. They even tell us that people leave their doors unlocked these days because there's no concern. Does that not show us sufficiently well as one example?

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

The entire plot line of Psycho Pass centers around the sybil system. It was either about Makishima trying to destroy the system or trying to stop Makishima. The sybil system was the core of Psycho Pass' focus. In fact the series is even named after it.

SSY was never about changing its system. In fact the series goes out of its way to show the audience the absolute necessity of that system. Its themes run a completely different course than Psychopass. If anything SSY is more about survival. Both the PK users and the Monster rats did what they did for survival. Neither side was more morally right or wrong. The world of SSY is pretty dark and if anything it ends on a dark note, but Saki and Satoru still have hope despite that.

I realize that this might seem similar to Akane's situation where she has hope despite not being able to destroy the sybil system today but I just felt this was presented in a more wishy washy fashion that even Gen himself can't decide if the series is ending on a hopeful note or not.

In the end I had a more meaningful experience from SSY. It is perfectly fine that you got meaning out of both or someone else got more meaning out of Psycho Pass but just because series might seem similar on the surface doesn't mean you and I are going to get the same thing out of them.

The society in both stories were established for different reasons. PP was just to preserve order and peace by eliminating crime. SSY was a matter of survival like you said. However, this doesn't make the focus on their systems less or more important.

Psycho-Pass is in the end, a crime detective story. Makishima was the sociopathic villain and the police force were the ones to hunt him down. The twist in the story is of course the Sibyl System and the Psycho-Pass ratings. Thus, a lot of the story is spent musing around law and order and Sibyl itself. But the police force were never the people here seeking to change the system. So in reality, this story really wasn't about changing the system. Our main characters were never seeking to do that, and at no time was there a reason to believe that they truly wanted to undo their society. That was only Makishima, and Kogami did not care for his goals. He simply saw him as a criminal that needed to be judged.

SSY's story is just about growing up in a dystopia setting in which the truth of it is slowly unraveled to our main characters. The driving force of the plot is learning more about the society around them and the horrifying experiences they undergo as this happens. In some ways, you could argue that the focus on their society is even more prominent than in Psycho-Pass's case. We were given sufficient understanding and justification about the "necessity" of this system for their survival, but it does not make it any less horrible. But then in the end, we see that this system breaks down anyway. They were arrogant and their practices were extreme. While the adult's actions were understandable, I don't think it had to be that way. And judging from Saki's actions in the end, she hasn't found a solution either. She didn't manage to change that horrible system.

[Dawnstorm]

At this point, people who enter this thread probably have seen both shows, or don't mind spoilers. At any rate, there's a spoiler warning in the title, and there hasn't been a spoiler tag in the last couple of posts, so I'm not going to use spoiler code in this post either. You have been warned.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Spoiler:

The show actually provided a very valid reasoning behind incorporating human brains into the super computer of Sibyl. It's because machines could not hope to understand the complexity of human nature. Machines are in fact, really stupid. Any computer engineer could tell you how stupid a computer is, and we're not getting any closer to them being even 1/100 capable as a human being in thought processes. So the idea that humans would have to be a part of the system is a fairly logical one. I personally think if this process was completely algorithmic base though, it would not have mattered much. Someone or something, AI or otherwise, would have to be coming to these decisions whether they are part of the system or operating the system. The exact mechanism behind the PP ratings was pretty irrelevant in the end because the PP ratings (aside from criminally asymptomatic individuals) were more or less quite accurate.

Even though I used words like "downright stupid" (which I shouldn't have), my point isn't one of plausibility: it's how much it contributes to the story.

In other words: what does involving human brains in the Sybil system change, and how does the story reflect that? Here, I find that the system has been mostly played for effect. "If we show that footage, the system is history." It also serves as the plot set-up: In terms of free-will: We control you, and if we can't controll you, we absorb you so we can better control others.

Enter free will. If you yourself are not in control, someone or something else is. If it were a simple AI (one based on algorhythms like, say, the thing that plays games for you), what controls you is a machine. An autonomous AI would be more person like. But if you're using the brains of psychopaths, then - in some manner - you're ruled by psychopaths. Not really, since the collective has effects you can't quite predict. But PP doesn't exploit that difference. By focussing on Makishima, what we get is a suggestion of: "people like this rule you". It's not quite that simple, because Makishima refuses to be part of it, etc. But antagonist-wise that's what it's played for. A machine would be bad, but psychopaths are worse.

It's possible that's not the intention, but it's such an obvious and expected reaction that I expect a writer who doesn't want this would counter it. All the characters we see have a viewer-friendly, averse reaction to the brain-in-a-char. We have no idea how the system came into practise, either. Yet the system is fairly young. Who is its architect? Still alive? (It's possibly been mentioned, I don't know, but it's not really a feature of the show.)

Imagine for example, a test run (say, as a profiling tool). Imagine a young, idealistic scientist who can solve crimes with this machine, but can't actually do anything, since the experiements are illegal. Imagine an underdog fight to get this accepted. We'd have to get his/her side of the story. Better if he's likable and the antagonists are beaurocrats who just protect the status-quo. Because narratively directed sympathies clash with cliché morality, that sort of set-up would force anyone to think through issues.

I'm not saying that PP should go this route; but they're not mining the potential of the set-up for anything but (a) shock value, and (b) a fairly simplistic philosophical premise, namely that an outside perspective is better at solving inside problems (because they're more objective).

It's true that it "works" in the show (with minor hickups), but the way the show presents the evidence is also not very convincing: uniform crowd behaviour (which comes in extremes of naivity, frustration, range and fear). There's so little nuance, that I have trouble buying the evidence. I find it hard to believe in the "reality" of the life I'm seeing, but the philosophy is not compelling enough to suspend my disbelief for it.

My favourite episode of the final arc was the one with the bad art and animation, where all they do is talk. The show is at its strongest when they pit characters against each other, and unlike many others I actually liked how they ended Akane's character arc. It's just that in the end it doesn't amount to much, because the world feels shallow.

SSY is not without flaws, but it does provide a much more interesting setting. I agree with what you said in your last post:

SSY's story is just about growing up in a dystopia setting in which the truth of it is slowly unraveled to our main characters. The driving force of the plot is learning more about the society around them and the horrifying experiences they undergo as this happens. In some ways, you could argue that the focus on their society is even more prominent than in Psycho-Pass's case.

Precisely. Importantly, we know, roughly, how it came to be. That helps us understand what happened, and it also provide goggles with which to view the show. For example, that the bakenezumi tried to eliminate the humans can be seen in the light of the shows history: if non-cantus users wouldn't have threatened cantus users back then, they might not have been turned into bakenezumi in the first place.

With PP, we don't know how it came to be, which is especially hard to swallow since the system is so extremely young. We also don't know why. Better efficiency in crime-fighting, which is hard to quantify in the first place, seems to be the only thing it has going for it. Also, I'm pretty certain that the sort of experiments needed to develop this sort of system is currently illegal in Japan. So how did this happen? PP does a terrible job making me see how such a system could come into place.

In SSY, the system in place is terrible. But it's not, on the whole, run by terrible people. In addition, we understand why it's there in the first place. The effect of all of this is that it's hard to find villains, or even scapegoats.

In PP, we have no idea how the system comes to be. Thus we know little about its justifications (beyond being more efficient at the sort of stuff we're already doing). And the system is an easy target, because it's got a quasi-personality. If it talks to you in the form of that woman, it's literally a psychopath. Scrutiny at SSY-level would kill PP. (Or not, if you do a good job with it; but there's little of it in the show, as far as I can see.)

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

For reasons that I've already outlined, I just don't feel this groundswell of goodwill towards Saki and Satoru. I wish I could feel something stronger, I really do. But, the truth is, all I feel is indifference.

The scope of imagination that went into creating the New World is breathtaking. But I just can't shake the nagging feeling that the story overall pulled in too many different directions, without gelling together into a cohesive, thematic whole until the end. I don't know why the revelation that the queer-rats are "human" should be as amazing as it seems to be for many viewers, because it felt obvious to me a very long time ago. I recall that many anime-only viewers had already speculated along the same lines several weeks ago, so I can't be the only one who isn't particularly surprised by the outcome.

Well, to me, Saki was - from the beginning - more of a point-of-view character than a true protagonist. She could tell the story, because she was there all the way to the end. I thought the characterisation was servicable, and the pacing was at times to rapid, but that didn't bother me. I always had the bigger picture in mind when viewing the show and what happened to Saki & Co was actually secondary.

Since Saki is also our narrator, the limits of her perspective also make the story. Saki is a good vehicle to tell the story, because she was there for all the key scenes. But her point of view is unreliable, becuase she's a tad naive. (For example, I absolutely loved the final picture of the scroll that says "the power of imagination changes the world", or something to that effect. It shows both Saki's hopefulness, but if you've watched the show from the point-of-view of a present day human, then you can see that "the power of imagination" has, quite literally, changed the face of the earth to what we have here. There's an irony in that image, I just enjoy.

There's an us-vs.-them line plotted into the story that's delicious. Take the ending for example; Saki destroyed the "psychobuster" to save Satoru, and then she asked Krioumaru to sacrifice himself (and held his corpse - now, isn't that touching?). Later, she asks Squealer for an apology, which - I think - she wouldn't do if she actually got the situation the bakenezumi are in. Has Saki learned from all this? Maybe, maybe not.

What I love about SSY is that the story works even if you think Saki is too naive. This is only possible because of the setting focus I talked about above. Take, for example, one of the last scenes:

We see mole rats eating. A huge one waltzes over a little one and just eats, leaving the other one pinned with it. We go inside the building and hear Saki and Satoru talk about humans, bakenezumi, and mole rats. Then they go outside and keep talking, sitting on the stairs. They don't pay too much attention to the mole rats down there, but the camera sure does. There's an element of us-vs-them, in the image, that gets turned on its head. Are the bakenezumi humans? Well, in the end, the fat rat eats. In the end, there's not so much difference between mole rats and humans. Saki doesn't reflect that, or at least not explicitly. Squealer wasn't the fat rat; he was one of smaller ones who knew when to get out of the way, and when to eat. Step up far enough, and the fattest rats are human cantus users. Restrict their ability to eat and their methods to deal with the smaller rats, and they'll starve. It's a back and forth. Who's the fat rat now?

(Incidently, the kid I liked the best among them was Mamoru. Imagine if how frustrated I would have been had I watched for the characters. )

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Dawnstorm

Even though I used words like "downright stupid" (which I shouldn't have), my point isn't one of plausibility: it's how much it contributes to the story.

In other words: what does involving human brains in the Sybil system change, and how does the story reflect that? Here, I find that the system has been mostly played for effect. "If we show that footage, the system is history." It also serves as the plot set-up: In terms of free-will: We control you, and if we can't controll you, we absorb you so we can better control others.

Well here is something interesting I found about this whole scenario. And you may not have been one of these individuals, but I remember a lot of people who were talking about Sibyl before the brain reveal were questioning the fact that no human judgement was involved in ascertaining whether someone was a criminal. They thought that the system was flawed because it lacked human judgement, but now we find out that it actually does have human judgement involved.

But anyways as to the rest of your comments.

Originally Posted by Dawnstorm

Enter free will. If you yourself are not in control, someone or something else is. If it were a simple AI (one based on algorhythms like, say, the thing that plays games for you), what controls you is a machine. An autonomous AI would be more person like. But if you're using the brains of psychopaths, then - in some manner - you're ruled by psychopaths. Not really, since the collective has effects you can't quite predict. But PP doesn't exploit that difference. By focussing on Makishima, what we get is a suggestion of: "people like this rule you". It's not quite that simple, because Makishima refuses to be part of it, etc. But antagonist-wise that's what it's played for. A machine would be bad, but psychopaths are worse.

It's possible that's not the intention, but it's such an obvious and expected reaction that I expect a writer who doesn't want this would counter it. All the characters we see have a viewer-friendly, averse reaction to the brain-in-a-char. We have no idea how the system came into practise, either. Yet the system is fairly young. Who is its architect? Still alive? (It's possibly been mentioned, I don't know, but it's not really a feature of the show.)

I personally would have preferred if the system was presented as a collective of brains, but not all of which were criminally asymptomatic "sociopaths" like the series implied. Maybe Gen is just implying that anyone who seeks to rule and control others is a sociopath, and modern day psychology research has linked the behaviors of those in power with the behavior of sociopaths so it is not far from the truth. But I digress, even though I think the presentation here lacks the nuance one would hope for, I do not think the end result is changed all that much.

I think in the end, Gen wasn't looking for a whole lot of nuance in his portrayal of Sibyl. The philosophical ideas here were simple, and not supposed to be misinterpreted. If we had a society that always abides by these Psycho-Pass ratings... Our governance would reflect a lack of empathy, an inability to see other people's points of view, and just an all around neglecting of basis human principles. That's why this society can happily lock away those who get marked by Sibyl and not blink an eye. The core idea here is that a society that chooses to use something like Sibyl, which removes free will, is sociopathic. It makes sense then that the brains are "sociopaths." Our instant, adverse reaction to Sibyl is fully intentional.

Originally Posted by Dawnstorm

Imagine for example, a test run (say, as a profiling tool). Imagine a young, idealistic scientist who can solve crimes with this machine, but can't actually do anything, since the experiements are illegal. Imagine an underdog fight to get this accepted. We'd have to get his/her side of the story. Better if he's likable and the antagonists are beaurocrats who just protect the status-quo. Because narratively directed sympathies clash with cliché morality, that sort of set-up would force anyone to think through issues.

I'm not saying that PP should go this route; but they're not mining the potential of the set-up for anything but (a) shock value, and (b) a fairly simplistic philosophical premise, namely that an outside perspective is better at solving inside problems (because they're more objective).

It's true that it "works" in the show (with minor hickups), but the way the show presents the evidence is also not very convincing: uniform crowd behaviour (which comes in extremes of naivity, frustration, range and fear). There's so little nuance, that I have trouble buying the evidence. I find it hard to believe in the "reality" of the life I'm seeing, but the philosophy is not compelling enough to suspend my disbelief for it.

My favourite episode of the final arc was the one with the bad art and animation, where all they do is talk. The show is at its strongest when they pit characters against each other, and unlike many others I actually liked how they ended Akane's character arc. It's just that in the end it doesn't amount to much, because the world feels shallow.

Well I think this is where Psycho-Pass majorly differs itself from a show like SSY because Psycho-Pass features a more conventional form of entertainment overall than SSY. That being that this is a crime detective story most of all, and all the philosophical questions about Sibyl are merely a backdrop to the ongoing events.

I do think though that you don't give enough credit to the philosophical questions presented in Psycho-Pass. While Gen certainly is not very subtle in his portrayal of Sibyl, he does present us with an interesting question about it in the end. If Sibyl really is providing more peace and security for its citizens, then is it right to get rid of it? Gen placed a premium on free will in this show, but when push comes to shove, Akane placed law and order over it. I think this is the very nuance one would wish for from this show. If it really lacked nuance, we would have seen a cliche ending in which Sibyl gets destroyed, the end.

Now as for your point about uniform crowd behavior... I'm not sure what you were expecting exactly. Could you explain?

Originally Posted by Dawnstorm

SSY is not without flaws, but it does provide a much more interesting setting. I agree with what you said in your last post:

Precisely. Importantly, we know, roughly, how it came to be. That helps us understand what happened, and it also provide goggles with which to view the show. For example, that the bakenezumi tried to eliminate the humans can be seen in the light of the shows history: if non-cantus users wouldn't have threatened cantus users back then, they might not have been turned into bakenezumi in the first place.

With PP, we don't know how it came to be, which is especially hard to swallow since the system is so extremely young. We also don't know why. Better efficiency in crime-fighting, which is hard to quantify in the first place, seems to be the only thing it has going for it. Also, I'm pretty certain that the sort of experiments needed to develop this sort of system is currently illegal in Japan. So how did this happen? PP does a terrible job making me see how such a system could come into place.

In SSY, the system in place is terrible. But it's not, on the whole, run by terrible people. In addition, we understand why it's there in the first place. The effect of all of this is that it's hard to find villains, or even scapegoats.

In PP, we have no idea how the system comes to be. Thus we know little about its justifications (beyond being more efficient at the sort of stuff we're already doing). And the system is an easy target, because it's got a quasi-personality. If it talks to you in the form of that woman, it's literally a psychopath. Scrutiny at SSY-level would kill PP. (Or not, if you do a good job with it; but there's little of it in the show, as far as I can see.)

Actually, I do think the people who run the system in SSY are mostly terrible people. They are downright sociopathic themselves. Being able to systematically kill children who might present troubles is kind of exactly the same thing we see in Psycho Pass. Eliminating potential dangers to ensure the safety of the group.

But like I said before, I think PP's society doesn't require much stretch of the imagination to see how and why it came about. The justification is clearly its results, and we have to believe that crime rates are drastically lower under it than otherwise. Less hassle, more peace and prosperity... It makes perfect sense to me. The reasons why Sibyl is bad are not quite as tangible as these things, so why human beings became complacent with it is easy to understand as well.

Maybe that doesn't work for you, but I think it feels sufficient.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

I don't have much time, so I'll try to cover as much as I can, as I don't expect to return to this debate any time soon.

(1)
Firstly, I never said I was satisfied with ending of Psycho-Pass. To be sure, I didn't really care about the final outcome of the story, as the plot had more or less fallen apart for me the moment the truth of the Sibyl System was revealed. I was, however, responding to the original post about choosing between Akane or Saki. And given that I identify much more strongly with Akane's struggles than Saki's, I naturally chose Akane.

I also identify more with Akane's struggles than Saki's, because Akane's are much closer to what people have to deal with in the modern, real world.

That being said, I identify more with how Saki deals with her struggles than with how Akane deals with her's.

(3)
Thirdly, I am genuinely puzzled about the criticisms of Akane's apparent unwillingness to "fight the system", and I wonder if it stems from fundamentally different worldviews. There seems to be this overwhelming desire for Akane to topple the system like Makishima attempted to, but an apparent lack of awareness of how hypocritical it would be for Akane to do so.

Honestly, I find Akane's current stance more hypocritical than I would her choosing to topple Sybil.

Akane clearly recognizes the unjust nature inherent in Sybil. She recognizes that many of the brains that make up Sybil are criminals that have never properly been held accountable for their crimes. This was a major issue for Akane, as her own words make clear. Sybil has placed itself above the law, and that's a complete affront to Akane's worldview that nobody is above the law.

Completely putting aside everything else, this would arguably be enough to warrant Akane taking action against Sybil.

To me, Makishima, Kougami and Akane represented three distinct choices. Makishima was the nihilist who would destroy the system. Kougami believed that the ends justified the means. Akane was the only one who sincerely believed that the means must be just in order to achieve a just end.

What's unjust about holding criminals accountable for their crimes? And this isn't a point of debate. Sybil openly said that many of the brains that comprise its collective did things far worse than what even Makishima did. The implication is clear.

However vile the Sibyl System was, she understood that plotting to destroy it would make her no different from Makishima.

I disagree. Makishima probably didn't care that Sibyl included many people as bad as he is, or even worse. Akane did care.

To argue that it's justifiable to tear down Sibyl System as it now exists because it has become a corruption of the people's original wishes is almost the same as arguing that it's justifiable to tear down America's Second Amendment because it is no longer relevant to the context of modern society. Both artefacts of law and Constitution were created in different times and for different purposes, but had evolved over time to take present forms that have little resemblance to their original intents. But that doesn't change the fact that both were created as a function of the people's will.

In both cases, a lot of people may be right, that the situation has changed and an artefact of a bygone socio-political system has to be revised or abolished. Yet, in both instances, the just way to bring about that change is through the law, and not by breaking the law.

What is law in Sibyl Japan? Why, it's whatever Sybil says it is. That's the only law that counts in Sibyl Japan.

But Akane recognizes that this runs contrary to the very concept of "Law". If adherence to the law is your highest priority, then a perversion of the law should be unacceptable to you.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I disagree. Makishima probably didn't care that Sibyl included many people as bad as he is, or even worse. Akane did care.

It's sort of hilarious that it seems like Makishima's main objection against the Sibyl System was that it made him feel lonely.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

What is law in Sibyl Japan? Why, it's whatever Sybil says it is. That's the only law that counts in Sibyl Japan.

But Akane recognizes that this runs contrary to the very concept of "Law". If adherence to the law is your highest priority, then a perversion of the law should be unacceptable to you.

It's worth noting that all of the institutions that relate to the law no longer exist. Lawyers, judges, lawmakers, and I think journalists are a thing of the past. From that, what recourse is there to peaceful change?

[Dawnstorm]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Well here is something interesting I found about this whole scenario. And you may not have been one of these individuals, but I remember a lot of people who were talking about Sibyl before the brain reveal were questioning the fact that no human judgement was involved in ascertaining whether someone was a criminal. They thought that the system was flawed because it lacked human judgement, but now we find out that it actually does have human judgement involved.

I remember the discussions. I don't think I contributed at all, though I'm not sure. By the time the brains-in-a-vat revelation came along I wasn't following the discussion any more. Maybe I should go check it out.

I do think though that you don't give enough credit to the philosophical questions presented in Psycho-Pass. While Gen certainly is not very subtle in his portrayal of Sibyl, he does present us with an interesting question about it in the end. If Sibyl really is providing more peace and security for its citizens, then is it right to get rid of it? Gen placed a premium on free will in this show, but when push comes to shove, Akane placed law and order over it. I think this is the very nuance one would wish for from this show. If it really lacked nuance, we would have seen a cliche ending in which Sibyl gets destroyed, the end.

How is any of this impacted by brains in a char, though? My position is that the element weakens that aspect, for reasons I've stated (though maybe not very well).

Now as for your point about uniform crowd behavior... I'm not sure what you were expecting exactly. Could you explain?

That one's probably more on the storyboarder than on the writer. I simply had the feeling that they conceptualised a crowd response and then animated every individual aligning with that. I'd place a few prominent exception to the main-drive of the crowd in. When everyone gets up to attack the rioters, one remains cowering in the corner. That sort of stuff.

It's not a major thing, but I found that it's an indicator on where a show places its emphasis. I like shows that build chaos from ground up. SSY is that type of show; even plot-irrelevant characters have their own motivation.

It's not quite fair to compare PP and SSY like that, though, since there are no real crowds in SSY (it being a village). To be honest, I'm also not sure how much selective memory strengthens my case; I might simply be wrong about my impression. I'd have to go back and see where my impression comes from (and I hope it's not simple prejudice).

Actually, I do think the people who run the system in SSY are mostly terrible people. They are downright sociopathic themselves. Being able to systematically kill children who might present troubles is kind of exactly the same thing we see in Psycho Pass. Eliminating potential dangers to ensure the safety of the group.

Heh.

But like I said before, I think PP's society doesn't require much stretch of the imagination to see how and why it came about. The justification is clearly its results, and we have to believe that crime rates are drastically lower under it than otherwise.

That explains how it continues, not how it came to be. You don't have results until after you implement it. Disagree?

Maybe that doesn't work for you, but I think it feels sufficient.

Well, it doesn't ruin the show. I still enjoyed most of it. It's just that it didn't leave much of an impression, in the end. On the other hand, I stand in awe before SSY, and that despite its flaws. I may be wrong about the whys and hows; it's not always easy to tell. But that reaction is unmistakably there.