View Single Post
Old January 28 2014, 01:07 PM   #148
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Into Darkness has the same problem. Spock, pushed past his breaking point, is clearly trying to murder Khan, not apprehend him. That makes sense, actually, and it's a reminder of the pre-Surakian savagery that lurks in all Vulcans, not just he half-human ones. It also underscores just how deep his brotherly love for Kirk runs and just how fragile watching his mother and his home planet die has left him, a year or so on. And then, before he can take it too far and cross a line he would have a tough time living with himself for crossing, Uhura stops him. Again, so far so good.

But her rationale? "He's our only chance to save Kirk!" (And why couldn't any of the other superpopsicles--products of the same gene manipulation and selective breeding--have done the same?) Pretty selfish, you ask me.
I think your argument would be stronger if Spock himself had not spent much of the film's second act talking about how a mission to assassinate Khan would be a clear violation of the law and basic morality. The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
I'm sorry, but you (and the movie) seem to be missing something. Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live. If Kirk's resurrection wasn't on the table, would Spock then have a motive not to kill Khan?
No, I understand what you're saying; it's not that I'm missing anything, it's that I think you are wrong. I do not think that the film is portraying Spock's loss of control as a good thing, nor do I think that acknowledging that doing the right thing (apprehending rather than murdering Khan) has both inherent moral benefits and practical benefits is a bad thing or something that undermines morality. And it makes perfect sense for Spock's character that the thing that would bring him back to sanity would be his brotherly love for Kirk.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote