Это автоматически сохраненная страница от 04.10.2013. Оригинал был здесь: http://2ch.hk/b/res/55795892.html
Сайт a2ch.ru не связан с авторами и содержимым страницы
жалоба / abuse: email@example.com
Антон на радио
Признавайся, антоша, это ты звонил сейчас в прямой эфир? Еду тут, и вдруг такой социофоб-изгой-не-выхожу-из-дома.
This is an interesting point because you are talking about the concept of good and evil being a moral concept that is widely accepted as true, while its foundation (religion) is ignored and regarded as irrelevant, because altough society has adopted the philosophy of good and evil because thousands of years of judaism/christian values has deepy planted the these ideas as social, phsychogical and philosophical traditon regarding right and wrong and morals in general, even though the religious concepts or definitions had been abandoned (So you claim, but its far from true).
You are using a certain philosophical viewpoint (do you even know wich one? wich includes the idea good and evil being defined by the current social norms and morals, defined by the ruling social body based on social traditions established by previous ruling classes or masses, dating back to when the church held power, and this is where this idea sort of falls apart.
This is ironic in so many ways. first of all it doesnt apply to the current post-modernistic society we live in. The idea of good and evil or right and wrong was abandoned after WW1. Existensialism became the most prominent social philosophy, wich most of all questioned the concept of the established religious ideas of goof and evil, and questioned society and the ruling class for sending out young men of wich thousands upon thousands were expected to die against a land they considered "Wrong" or "Evil". Philosophers gained ground in the debate surrounding the existence of right or wrong.
After WW2 these concepts were dropped totally. After watching the hideous crimes like the Hiroshima Nuke and The Holocaust, acts that killed millions of innocent people for no viable reasons, All commited by humans, people lost faith in the idea of human nature being good and the idea of absolute values or truths. Politicians on the "good side" allowing a bomb to whipe out an entire city of hundreds of thousands innocent individuals, where a large percent probably activley demonstratind against a war against the allied. That is malicious too. People questioned the idea of a society wich caused such hideos crimes, yet considered themselves the "Good Guys" and the Germans as evil scum due to the holocaust. The Conclusion reached by Philosophers was that this proved that no Absolute truths or values existed within the human race.
the Modernist movement tried to move forward and make things better, with a clear defined idea about a "good society" but ironicly turned into what we live in now, post-modernism wich adopted the ideas about no true values or morals, and does not debate good and evil because the current philosophical consensus is that good and evil only appears in superman or batman, it is a fictional concept that works great in children stories but can not can not be applied to real life...
and now even superheroes must show a dark side or past that turned them into what they are so we can identify with them. Society has generally abandoned the idea of someone being "lawfull good" with no dark side, immoral tendencies or acts.
Like you said, even fleet admiral akainu is "evil", the Tenryuubito is cruel and blackbeard is "Evil Luffy". This is were your point of view falls apart, as you are trying to apply morals to a world and a series that according to your description is defined by Nihilism since it lacks a faction that fits the the traditional definition of "Good". Your description condradicts itself.
Do you see the irony?
Oda does not use the concept of "pure evil" in the series, altought it exists in shonen manga in general, Oda has never shown anyone who is evil for the sake of being evil, there are no "Demons" in one piece, everyone who kills or commits something that upsets Luffy and the reader has a motivation, wich means they are doing it for a cause, not because they like to do bad stuff. There are a few exceptions, Doflamingo is a sadist who likes to toy with people just for his own amusement and laughts at other peoples pain. So far we have not learned any motivation for this behavior but it might be revealed in the current arc, But Blackbeard is not one of those exceptions, neither is Akainu or Blackbeard. Their motivations are clear; Blackbeard wants to become the pirate king just like luffy, and akainu wants absolute justice.
Just because Blackbeard is bizarro-luffy doesnt mean he is EVIL. he just has a different approach and uses different methods. Luffy&#39;s strenght, as pointed out by mihawk, is his charisma wich attracts people to follow him and turns enemies into allies, because he is so innocent and likeable.
Blackbeard is the opposite, he basicly "buys" a strong crew by freeing impel down prisoners in exchange for joining his crew and promise of DF powers, and the few bits we have seen of him and his crew post-timeskip, his crew seems to be dissapointed with him and complains about various things, while luffy has a crew that would die for him (literary, we have seen this time and time again)
Lets take a closer look at those you call evil:
*He puts achieving his own set goals above everything else. The idea of a goal or desire justifying itself once you reach it, and in his case the "goal" is becoming pirate king and gains more power. This is refered to as Hedonism, the concept of justifying the act of taking whatever you want from those who can not defend it, as your right to claim it is equal to their desire to keep it for themselves, With both claims being legit, the one who comes out on top should not be charged with regret since his victory proves him worthy of the prize. This ideal can have a total disregard for the law.
its best summed up as a full on pursuit of fulfilling desires, or complete self-realization disregarding the consequences or impact it may have on other people if they get in your way, because everyone is responsible for their own destiny and you have no obligation to back down because someone gets in your way: to try to prevent you from reaching self-fulfillment is not morally superior to your quest to reach your goal regardless if it involves taking out those who will try stand in your way. The outcome is what ultimately determines fate when two sides collide. To the victor belongs the spoils.
*Hedonism is connected to the existentialist philosophy of Nihilism wich invokes a form of social-darwinism.
This is often applied to justify any means or actions by using Darwins idea of the survival of the fittest. The difference compared to Hedonism is the flat out Denial and disregard of the concept Right or wrong or a good or evil side, regardomg everything is chaotic neutral.
This is the basis for Blackbeards view on marines and pirates. He believes that his power grants him the right to determine what is right, because power is justice. he used this argument when he fought whitebeard, pointing out that he has lost much of his strenght and its Teachs time to prove his worth now, despite their history, he regards his acts as righteous as he sees himself as stronger and someone from a younger generation inheriting the throne through any means necessary, proclaiming that this is now his Era. After recruiting inmates from impel down and gained the gura gura no mi from and whitebeard, he got proclaimed that got what he wanted before leaving, and all that mattets to him.
*Blackbeard is a Pragmatist who will do anything to reach his goal, including betrayal, schemes (ID and Marineford) and plans (hunt down DF users to steal their powers) to reach his goal and gain power. Pragmatism is an idea that was quickly turned into a philosophy by contemporary thinkers and is based around the idea that the function of thought is as an instrument or tool for prediction, action, problem solving, to reach a certain goal through the use the required means, if you can figure out how to pull it off.
Thus, pragmatism sees no fundamental difference between practical and theoretical reason, thus using thought and observations to set up planning and preparing to optimize the chances of reaching the main goal is the basic principle.
Contrary to popular beief, Blackbeard is an intelligent character proven to be capable of pulling of convoluted schemes and posses great patience, proven by the fact that he read up on devil fruits and settling on the yami yami and figuring joining WB would the easiest way to aquire it, thus soley joining the whitebeard pirates for pragmatic and selfish reasons.
Blackbeard applies his nihilistic and hedonistic ideals to his pragmatical methods, wich is possible due to the fact that pragmatism in itself is not based around any particular religious, idealistic, moral or philosophical ideals or values.
on the contrary, pragmatism was invented soley as a method of problem solving problems, not intended to be anything else and having no political, ideological or philosophical backbone, and was developed into a philosophy by others who to this day has staued true to the idea of pragmatism as a method of solving problems related to physical, political, diplomatic, philosophical and even mathetmatical and complicated scientific problems such as quantum physics and literary rocket science issues, as they argue that it is a method of solving problems, and should not be affected or assimilated into any school of thought, remaining a neutral method for anyone to use. Altough its core idea is to solve problems, or reach a set goal, as shown by blackbeard.
Blackbeard applies this way of thinking to everything, starting with the dispatch of thatch wich he deemed praticaly nessecary and used his hedonistic and nihilistic ideas to justify the murder for the sake of reaching his first main goal.
Just l ike he pragmaticly concieves and executed a plan when getting a shichibukai title only to get into impel down to find recruits, and knowing whitebeard is at marineford he went there, no longer an ally of the government, for the sake of obtaining the Gura Gura no Mi from Whitebard through an unknown method.
Only a true pragmatist could plan out and execute such a malicous plan wich includes turning in a his former commander Ace to get his position only to betray the WG, setting up a battle royale in a prison and ultimately killing his old captain and "father".
these horrible actions are not justified simply through classic pragmatism, instead he applies his hedonistic and nihilistic views wich frees him from the idea of feeling guilt or shame since such ideas are for simple conformatist who obey the laws, and as as a pirate he has already broken the law thus justifing his way to snatch the shichibukai post to roam the grand line without consequences, and gaining acess and entry to the port outside impel, thus entering the prison to find recruits, instead of attending the marineford battle wich he was expected and appointed to do.
Once again, allowing Theoretical goals to set up a practical plan.
He only came to marineford with his new recruits the plan to obtain the gura gura no mi through killing whitebeard and using unknown methods to absorb it himself (absorbing i with the yami yami no mi is a popular theory) and to sink the marine HQ Marineford with the gura gura no mi&#39;s unmatched destructive power, sending out a symbolic message regarding his power, increasing his bounty my hundreds of hundreds of millions and move on to the new world to be able to easily find more powerful devil fruit users to absorb (if it works as i think, he can give his crewmate the power of dead DF users).
Had it not been for the intervention of sengoku and unexpected arrival of Shanks, it is possible that he would have sank marineford and in the process also killing and absorbing the DFs of the admirals.
regardless, his plan served a practical reasons for him and his crew and was not for the sake of commiting bad deeds for no reason.
Sakazuki/Akainu: Believes in Absolute Justice and has a Utalitarian mindset, shown when he kills his own men when they attempt to escape a dangerous situation, Or when he tried to kill Coby for speaking out against the unnecessary violence, with the motivation that the marines have no use for someone who does no believe in justice and complete purging of Pirates, whom he considers to be evil for being criminals who roam the sea.
Again, he is not "evil" since he simply follows an idea of absolute justice that he believes to be the right path for the marines to follow. This colours his point of view, and gives him a clear motivation for his action, wich springs from an idea of Justice, not Evil.
He is just sort of a facist.