Well, I’m not sure which of your posts you’re talking about, but I thought I’d respond to this one.
So, vampires are just animals and putting a chip in one’s head makes them harmless. Isn’t that the Initiative’s take on things? I was under the impression that they didn’t know what they were doing.
Besides, erislover has already said this:
I agree. As long as Spike walks like a sentient being and talks like a sentient being, then I shall treat him like a sentient being. Spike himself has expressed the desire to be treated like a man and not a monster, so treat him like a man I shall.
I was responding to Tim’s specific statement that nobody’s claiming Spike to be non-evil. In my post, I merely pointed out that bobkitty clearly believes Spike to be morally neutral … and thus, non-evil. Obviously, you’re in agreement with bobkitty.
No offense, but it’s really frustrating when people keep conflating issues. As I said, I was responding to The Tim’s specific claim. The question of whether Spike is morally neutral is a separate one altogether.
Besides, Trion has already explained why it’s foolish to think of Spike as being no more sentient than a dog. In addition to Trion’s explanation, I’d like to point that Spike does more than just feed his vampiric tendencies. He also designs schemes of mass destruction, and he manipulates Buffy and the Scoobies emotionally. This is more than just ordinary blood-sucking evil that we’re talking about. So to paraphrase Trion, if Spike walks, talks, thinks and acts like a sentient being, it’s only fair to treat him as such.
Besides which, as you yourself hinted, if Spike ISN’T a sentient being, then it’s ridiculous to claim that he’s capable of genuinely loving Buffy… and it’s even more ridiculous to assert that Buffy should open his eyes and return his affection.
Stoid- Your argument falls apart because Vampires equal Demons. Demons can be either good or evil or even neutral. Spike knows he’s evil. He’s admitted it several times. He has NEVER admitted that he wanted to be redeemed. I think this is a major point.
I understand why women are attracted to him (my Fiance’ is one of them). What I don’t understand is the thought that he is trying to be good for goodness sake.
To me it’s like a man desperate to get laid. The man will say anything, do anything, in an attempt to get some action. I know men who have switched religions in order to marry their perspective mate. Does this make them religious? No, not in my opinion. The same goes for spike; he’s trying to impress buffy and do whatever he can in order to land her. He can’t kill her, as he did the other two slayers, so he has to destroy who she is. Render her useless. He’s still trying to get rid of the slayer.
I probably made several logical fallacies, but hey, I ain’t no expert.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by JThunder * **
Besides, Trion has already explained why it’s foolish to think of Spike as being no more sentient than a dog. In addition to Trion’s explanation, I’d like to point that Spike does more than just feed his vampiric tendencies. He also designs schemes of mass destruction, and he manipulates Buffy and the Scoobies emotionally. This is more than just ordinary blood-sucking evil that we’re talking about. So to paraphrase Trion, if Spike walks, talks, thinks and acts like a sentient being, it’s only fair to treat him as such.
Now who’s conflating issues? Since when does sentient = human? It has been shown that chimpanzees and dolphins are probably sentient, that doesn’t make them human.
He is a species separate from us, just as they are, and therefore his moral code is not ours. Don’t forget that our morality is grounded in self-interest, and the belief that we are the highest and most important form of life, and as such we often permit ourselves to do things to other beings that the other beings almost certainly find objectionable, and we do so without a shred of guilt. How are vampires different?
Also, he hasn’t been scheming about mass destruction lately, and never did much of it to begin with, and I know a whole lot of people capable and willing of using emotional manipulation to get what they want, and I’d hardly call them evil.
Since when did I claim that sentient = human? I made no such claim, nor did anyone else here.
Well first of all, I’d disagree that chimps and dolphins are probably sentient, but that’s a subject for another day. At any rate, Spike’s humanity isn’t the issue. Rather, it’s his sentience that is.
Which proves nothing, unless one believes that his moral code is equally valid. Everyone has a moral code of some sort, but some people are still less moral than others.
Speak for yourself. I, for one, believe that certain moral principles transcend mere self-interest. In other words, doing the right thing may not always be convenient, and it may not always be to my advantage, but it’s still the right thing to do.
Besides, if Spike’s morality is truly so different from that of human beings, that strikes me as a darned good reason for Buffy to reject him as a romantic interest.
All I have to say is you Spike-Bashers are going to have a bloody field day after tonight’s episode.
Poor Spike. Yes, I know, he’s evil, blah blah blah. But he’s Spike. :: rowr! ::
Since when does sentience have anything to do with a moral code, unless you are equating it with humans? All sentient means is self-sware.
My original position: different species/different moral code. Example: Lions kill lambs. Are they evil? No, it is their nature to do so. So… vampires kill humans, are they evil? No, it is their nature to do so.
You seem to have decided that self-awareness changes the rules, when I don’t see how that follows. Different creatures occupy different places in the food chain, and vampires would be at the top. Just because we are their food doesn’t mean they are evil. It does mean we have a right to fight back, but it doesn’t mean they are evil. Dogs are killers, but as long as they don’t kill us, we love them. Why not Spike?
I’m not talking about our individual decisions, I’m talking about what is generally accepted as the universal human moral code, which starts from a very basic premise: we, the human species, are the most important species on earth and can therefore do things to other species to serve our own needs. That is the code I’m referring to. And it is definitely springing from self-interest. And vampires have the identical code, only replace “human” with “vampire”.
Except for the very reason we are discussing this: he is coming to adopt the human code, just as our dogs do when we teach them not to chase the cat and not to eat the baby.
stoid
I’m not going to try to argue the point (at least not right now), but I wanted to say that I feel that finding Drusilla sexy is exactly equivalent with finding Spike sexy. So I think expressing desire for Dru weakens the position of anyone who’s saying that Spike is an abuser. [By the way, I agree that Spike is evil. I just wanted to point out that Dru is as well. People let sex appeal get in the way of the facts.]
I’d also like to point out that the big difference between Buffy and Spike, abuse-wise, is that Buffy saw it for what it was, didn’t like it, and put a stop to it. It doesn’t excuse what she was doing, but it puts her on another level from Spike. Of course, he wanted the relationship out in the open, which one could argue was a healthier attitude than she had. Discuss.
Since this must be directed at me, then I must answer.
Spike is evil. I’ve never claimed otherwise. How would finding him sexy (if I did, which I don’t) undermine that? Drusilla is certainly evil, too. I still think she’s hot. I’d date her, and I wouldn’t even have to apologize for her. You could take your problems with her to her yourself
I wish to take issue with this specific point. Vampires are not separate from us. They are, in fact, made up of us. Also it’s my understanding that the demon merges with the human, that’s why they retain the human memory and act like the human (sort of).
Because Spike clearly behaves in a way that transcends mere animal behavior. He exhibits human cunning and otherwise human behavior. He claims to be capable of romantic love. He’s obviously a lot more human-like than he is animal-like. So I think Trion is correct to treat him as someone who is capable of making moral decisions.
In fact, Spike himself admitted to being evil. This alone suggests that he is more than just some animal who is enslaved to animalistic behavior. Since he is much more human-like than animal-like, I think the burden of extraordinary proof would rest on those who claim that we should regard him as being a slave to animalistic behavior.
Besides, while we can love our dogs, there’s something severely wrong about loving our dogs, if you get my drift. So even if we say that Spike can’t help himself, that argument is still fatal to the “Buffy-should-learn-to-return-Spike’s-romantic-affections” camp.
Nope. At best, that is only one aspect of human morality, so it is incorrect to claim that human morality is merely a matter of self-interest. In fact, “self-interest” isn’t even an accurate way to describe this aspect of morality. That aspect of morality springs from the common good, which is vastly different from mere self-interest – and certainly far different from any moral code that Spike has exhibited.
Besides, the argument that “Spike’s morality is just different from ours” fails to impress me. One could argue that Pol Pot’s morality was different from ours, and that wouldn’t impress me either.
Nope. We’ve already discussed numerous examples which show that Spike is not adopting human morality, and that he is deliberately and actively engaging in acts which are abhorrent to human sensibilities.
Tell me if this is a good analogy for Spike. He’s like a serial killer-basically can’t help himself toward the evil side, all his impulses lie in that direction. While it’s not impossible for a serial killer to stop, it can happen.
I disagree. First, finding someone “sexy” is very different from excusing their actions, which is the point of this thread.
Second, Dru is totally, completely, stark raving, elevator-only-goes-to-the-basement, bloody mad. She has the advantage (such as it is) of being much, much less culpable for her actions than Spike. The moral equivalence between the two is much less than that between, say, Spike and Darla. Or even Spike and Anya.
HELL YEAH. More Dru for erl if he’s out of the picture, even if they aren’t together anymore. Die, Spike, die! Well, ok, actually I don’t want him gone. I like Buffy+Spike better than Buffy+Angel. More tasty moral dilemmas.
But, can someone explain why he can hurt Buffy even with the chip in his head? I’m catching the past episodes on FX now and I’m right at the part where he escaped from the Initiative. They said he couldn’t even hurt people…
Of course, I completely agree with burundi. But I’m just here to make it official. WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE LATEST EPISODE “SEEING RED”. EXPECT SPOILERS. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
