Why is this so difficult for him?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Why is this so difficult for him?
Why is this so difficult for him?
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Batman would derail the trolley so no one gets killed.
not if we go by published books where batman discusses the trolley problem
page 1
page 2
>Reduction of harm? What the frick is that, I just want to spite the imaginary villain I've invented in my head, even if an innocent person has to die for it.
I think this Batman guy might be a little crazy!
>reduction of harm
He's reduced the harm by avoiding the deaths of five people. You know this. He means not JUST to save lives, but ALSO to spite the villain in order ti discourage him doing it again.
Read between the lines.
Also I'd just push the switch half way so the trolley comes off the tracks and nobody gets killed.
This is Batman, but it is a version of an alternate reality.
This looks like shit
that's Allred for you
I never much liked Allred's art either.
Allred used to be good.
>shitty art and shitty writing
Impressive.
>shitty art and shitty writing
>This looks like shit
>we reach a point in time in which some people complain about Allred's art
I want this plantet to explode NOW
>Just do the opposite of what they want you to do lol
>Just try to do everything even if you can't lol
So what's your answer to the trolley problem?
Phrase it exactly like the sarcastic greentexts you just wrote.
Each trolley is a separate problem, no one answer applies to every instance
How is that an answer?
>it depends lol
is as much a platitude as any other result, really. All you're saying is that you refuse to act on incomplete information, but you're never going to have complete information. Are there five murderers on the track? Would saving their lives cause them to reform? Would the one guy turn into Victor Zsasz?
When the time comes, you're either going to pull the lever or not, and explain your answer to whoever lives.
In the standard 5:1 situation, I'm pulling. The trolley is already in motion, and that's damage minimization. If I can take the hit instead, I do.
The hiker organ variation is a no: Utility whoring is easily abused (and has been, to catastrophic result).
Even if my answer or your answer is the wrong one, shit is said and done. All you can do is try to be the kind of person who makes the best decisions with what you have.
>>Just try to do everything even if you can't lol
That's the definition of the spirit of a superhero. They try, whether they can succeed or not, and in doing so become symbols encouraging others to try as well. One person can't solve the trolley problem on his own, but with even one person inspired to stand alongside him he can.
"You should always do it because the bad guy doesn't get what he wants"
moronic. Presumably the same guy that tied the five people to the track tied the single guy to the branching track. How is he losing if you play into his deathtrap?
Anon, read it again
The innocent person is not tied to the tracks
But they are in the actual version of the trolley problem, not the stupid version that the writer made to sound smart.
the result of the problem still the same, either 1 or 5 people die
As stated, the worker not tied to the tracks would be able to leave the tracks as the trolly is coming.
Batman is insane.
This is allred? Who the frick is writing?
Mark Russal
Russell
Than the joker would be free and kill the five tied up people by shoving toy trolleys down there throats.
Except the people on the trolley
the problem is you can't always stop the trolley
Batman can
He wish to
fpbp
and /thread
Its sometimes stated that Batman is afraid to justify killing because he thinks he'll spiral out of control. Today, you're killing the joker, and we'd all say that's fine, but why stop there? Why not just murder every thug in Gotham?
The "I'll be just like you" cliche is fricking stupid, but with Batman it works. Your parents was killed by some thug who thought he was stronger and deserved more than them, and s you're going to spend money to become like that thug? Why?
Fair. Entirely defeats the point of being a "change" if you're just another crazy or crooked cop
people call it bullshit because there have been plenty of times where Batman is fine with leaving somebody to die, usually by their own doing. Stuff like slitting Jason's throat to save the Joker just makes him look unreasonably bad
Why can't he just set up a checklist on when to kill a guy? Sure second chances are real but often people when given inches takes miles.
>the question of when to take a life should be determined by a piece of paper
unless that tickbox is secretly a portal to a miniature court with a judge in it, then no
I feel like any explanation is just an over justification for adults trying to psycho analyze a comic book super hero based on classic morality scales. Batman doesn't kill because he's the good guy and the only people asking why he doesn't or saying he should are cynical twats.
why is it always batmans fault for not killing his villains, instead of arkhams fault for not securing their cells?
batman does it for free, anything he does is just a bonus for society
arkham is the one at fault for being handed their patients on a silver platter and then losing them anyways
it wouldn't be a problem if every hack writer didn't constantly throw that shit in your face. It gets old when Joker goes on killing spree after killing spree with the narrative throwing it in your face that it's Batman's fault. They don't blame the law, the courts, etc. they paint it as some kind of moral failing for Batman and the people reading sometimes run with that
in a hypothetical world where batman decides his detractors are right and retires, then no one would catch the joker at all and he would not keep breaking out and starting new rampages
it would just be one long, neverending killing spree
not so fast!
>it wouldn't be a problem if every hack writer didn't constantly throw that shit in your face
Then the problem is the hack writer not the character's morality.
This sounds reasonable, however
clearly solves the issue. If you have a -predefined- set of criteria, and you stick to them (something he can obviously do if he already sticks to a rigid set of personal guidelines), then you shouldn't need to worry about the potential moral slippery slope.
The whole "It's impossible to know exactly where to draw the line, so I'll refuse to draw any line and allow greater harm to occur to save my own conscious" is so tiresome.
>predefined- set of criteria
that's the no killing, if he changes it then who's to say he won't change anything else in 10 years? 5 years? tomorrow?
just look at religious schisms to see how small changes have a ripple effect
>who's to say he won't change anything else in 10 years?
Batman. The same person who says he won't kill anyone today.
This is the problem with this sort of argument - it all comes down to him, he's already the only one setting and sticking to his own set of personal rules. The slope is only as slippery as he allows, and we already know that he has no problem sticking to some predefined set of criteria. If we trust Batman to keep to his criteria, we can allow him to reasonably expand them. If we can't, we have to argue for the wholesale abolition of Batman in general, because there's no way we can trust him to keep his current criteria either. He's either a walking time-bomb, or he isn't. With this in mind, it's easy to choose the option with the better outcomes for Gotham.
Why hasn't the state or federal government given Joker the death penalty yet? You'd think at some point when a supervillain's murdered and maimed enough people, not even to mention all the insane supercrime shit he's done, and escaped from prison enough times, some legislation might be introduced to fast-track executing them as soon as they're in custody.
I don't honestly blame Batman when it comes to this argument.
How and why is the prison security of Gotham City so bad when they have multiple supervillains with unlimited resources doing bad things all the time? How is the city not investing millions into stopping them from breaking out? Literally all of them should be in for life as soon as Batman apprehends them.
I mean you can certainly say marvel also has a problem where their villains escape too often but they at least pretend like they're trying to contain them with all it's high tech prisons like the Vault or the Raft
Marvel supervillains are typically superhuman too and the heroes decide "all right that's enough time to die you fricker" relatively often.
Goblin stayed dead for over two decades, even.
The Superman trolly problem answer
So with the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald averted, does anyone even know who Gordon Lightfoot is in the DCU?
He became just as popular for writing a song about how Superman saved the Edmund Fitzgerald.
I don't get how Batman and Superman can have no kill rules but Diana doesn't and she's not a mass murdering vigilante like they predict a lack of a no kill rule would turn them into. They should just follow her lead.
it's just too practical and would quickly erode their list of villains. There is no reason at all people like Joker or Zsasz should still be alive
If I was Superman, I would have said "that is explicitly why WE can't go around killing villains". Not that I disagree with her, but I'd be a guy with a pistol, and Superman would be a guy blowing through and taking human lives like we're insignificant.
There's a literal real difference there; I'd even argue that's why Batman shouldn't go around killing people.
so it's fine if they let Captain Atom or Huntress do it?
No, and I'd typically default to "no" for any super adjacent person as well. Its not about the power, but the connections.
How do people still read mainstream cape comics?
Stardust:
>You tried to run over the world population with your atomic death train, so now you shall be turned into train tracks and eternally run over by trains
What now?
I pull it to the left, dooming the train to play Smash Mouth's All-Star for the rest of its service life.
All-Star without question. I'd rather take the definite middle-of-the-road song than gamble on some shit-ass weeb shit, even if it's possible I get something good, even amazing.
The people's taste in music does not concern me.
I time it so it goes SOME-BODY when it hits the people.
>You cannot have a nice day.
Nuts.
Joker got the death penalty before.
His goons just smuggled him out of prison and revived him after he was executed.
You gotta deal with some problems at the source.
what about his son?
You tie him to a trolley track.
But then, YOU'VE become the villain tying people to trolley tracks!
NO
THAT'S NOT TRUE
THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE
Damn it you beat me by 11 seconds
>what about his son?
Unnecessary sequel.
>killing one person to save the lives of several more
that sounds familiar
Rail Tracer was the hero we needed all along.
How did this one come about? What's the joke here? Does GGG have philosophy in there or something? Not seen it but I need to know because I kek'd.
From what I understand Betham advices calculated risks while in GGG they act like a chance in a million to survive is a certainty.
Is this the worst trolley problem timeline?
What now?
Yes, because he's finally going downhill.
Sysyphus is very happy because the Gods allowed him to do something new with the rock. And regardless of what he chooses, he'll still be doing something new with the rock.
What if you open any door, and the find that there's more tasks and you're either free to leave or free to leave while pushing the boulder? The mere idea of that would be enough to make anyone happy.
It truly is not his choice. Capeshit is held hostage by the company that owns them. They will repeat this song and dance so long as it is profitable, and long after that .
This is the most bullshit image ever made. You're fricking gay.
The real question is why not a single cop, civilian or asylum worker has killed him when they have the chance, Batman literally hands him over to them and for a moment they can do whatever the frick they want and Batman will have nothing to do with it.
probably the same reason why people in supermax prisons havent been killed yet
prisoners at risk of shanking or being shanked are kept isolated from anyone and everyone
Yeah but why wouldn't one of the cops whose life has probably been ruined by the Joker just not shoot him in the head during the trip back to the asylum and take the prison sentence as a hero, he has probably nothing to lose or somebody similar in his position would see the greater good from killing Joker. At least rape him come on.
>Batman can't handle killing the Joker because he's just as crazy as the Joker!
Right, so kill Batman.
>Kill Batman
>The Joker takes his place because he can't live in a world without Batman
>Gotham is saved from and by the Joker
At last I see!
Well, now, esteemed members of the court, if y'all kindly lend me your ears, I aim to make a point 'bout the matter at hand. We're talkin' 'bout a solemn duty, a duty to safeguard the good folk of Gotham City from the likes of that devil incarnate, the Joker.
Now, in the eyes of the law, we hold dear the notion of duty, a sacred obligation to protect and serve. And who better to embody this duty than the Caped Crusader himself, our esteemed Batman? But alas, ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you that in his failure to put an end to the Joker, Batman has forsaken his duty and left the good folk of Gotham to suffer at the hands of that fiendish miscreant.
It is no secret, no, not by a long shot, that the Joker is a menace, a force of pure chaos and destruction. And yet, time and time again, Batman has let him slip through his fingers like grains of sand through an hourglass. He had the chance, the opportunity, the moral imperative to rid our fair city of this scourge once and for all. But instead, he chose to turn a blind eye, to let justice fall by the wayside.
Now, my esteemed colleagues, I ask you this: Is it not reasonable to expect a man of Batman's stature, a man of his resources and abilities, to take decisive action in the face of such clear and present danger? By allowing the Joker to roam free, Batman has played a hand in every crime, every act of violence perpetrated by that unholy terror.
And so, I implore you, members of the jury, to consider the evidence before you and deliver a verdict that reflects the gravity of Batman's negligence. For the good folk of Gotham deserve justice, they deserve peace, and they deserve a protector who will not shirk from his solemn duty at the first sign of trouble.
If Gotham had the death penalty this would solve this shit. Just setup Madame Guillotine. Sure it'd be like Paris during the Terror but Batman only has so many villains.