SGA: The creation of Michael

[David cgc]

Why do you want to be a human? All beings are going to want to be what they are. That seems like a given.

That's exactly my point, though. Michael was being all butthurt about getting prettied up and wanting to be true to his gothy self before the treatment started to wear off. It'd be as if I walked up to you and told you right now that you were a Wraith. I doubt that you'd suddenly be all, "Die, human scum!" I could see why he'd be such a bitch about it if he could've remembered a damn thing about being a Wraith, but that didn't come until later, after he started whining.

To make my second such comparison in as many posts, I think he should've been more like the Final Five, at least at first; total, utter denial of his bloodline.

 

[Jimmy_C]

It really doesn't matter if it was or wasn't. They are a species that exists now, who values their existence, and that gives them a "right" to live just as much as humans.

No it doesn't. Just because they are a species doesn't mean they can't be exterminated. We exterminate species all the time (or attempt to) that are harmful to us. Smallpox, polio, and malaria are among the diseases we have eradicated or are attempting to exterminate.

And why would you want to be a wraith? You have to kill a sentient being in order to survive. Any individual who wishes to be a wraith condones murder of another individual. It is not moral to wish to remain one. Just because you have a condition that requires you to indiscriminately kill doesn't mean you are morally right to wish to remain with that condition.

Would you feel that a person with diabetes type 1 is morally right to remain a diabetic even if there was a readily available cure? After all, that's also a genetic condition. They would save themselves, and everyone else, a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

That Michael was angry that he was changed does not make sense, unless he is not a moral person. He was changed so he would not have to kill another intelligent person. That is not a bad thing!!!

 

[Temis the Vorta]

To make my second such comparison in as many posts, I think he should've been more like the Final Five, at least at first; total, utter denial of his bloodline.

But he never had a chance to become bonded to his human self and think of it as his real self. He was just an amnesiac being told by humans that he's human. The Final Five had whole lifetimes in which they believed they were human so naturally the truth was far more of a shock.

And add to that the fact that the Wraith were portrayed as far more inhuman than the Cylons ever were - I'd expect a Wraith to be fundamentally disgusted by the idea of being human. The Cylons were hardly anything but humans, really. They had no real "robot" personality traits. Even Cavil didn't act like a robot, just like an angry human.

I like the way they did it not for internal logic - what Michael "should" have done - but because it would have annoyed me if the writers took the viewpoint that Michael should automatically prefer to be human. If he had some innate instinct that he was truly not human, that makes sense and respects the integrity of the character more.

Considering how botched the Michael plotline was, I wouldn't want them to remove the sole element I actually respected - that the writers respected Michael's integrity enough not to make him yet another alien who just wants to be human. So sick of that.

Just because they are a species doesn't mean they can't be exterminated. We exterminate species all the time (or attempt to) that are harmful to us. Smallpox, polio, and malaria are among the diseases we have eradicated or are attempting to exterminate.

If the smallpox were sentient, I'm sure they'd fight back, and they would have a right to do so, in the abstract.

But of course I'd be trying my best to exterminate them - because I'm human and I'd side with my team. That's why ethical issues don't apply to this fight. Nobody is in the wrong here. The only question is who lives and who dies and that comes down solely to power.

And why would you want to be a wraith? You have to kill a sentient being in order to survive.

Presumably they don't value sentience of other species. They've adjusted their moral compass their survival needs, just like humans do. Humans eat intelligent, emotionally sensitive animals like pigs and we don't even need to, in order to survive. That's pretty horrible, isn't it? But most people don't worry about it. They've adjusted their moral compasses to whatever suits their tastes. The Wraith could certainly do the same if their lives depended on it.

Would you feel that a person with diabetes type 1 is morally right to remain a diabetic even if there was a readily available cure?

That's not a very accurate analogy (I like my humans-eating-pigs one a lot better) but if someone who has diabetes doesn't want to be cured, who am I to say they must be? If they're spending their own money on it, I have no right to interfere.

They would save themselves, and everyone else, a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

Oooh slippery slope time! Hey, let's ban McDonald's next - all those fat-ass idiots who gorge themselves into morbid obesity are driving up our health care costs far more than diabetics.

That Michael was angry that he was changed does not make sense, unless he is not a moral person. He was changed so he would not have to kill another intelligent person. That is not a bad thing!!!

From a human moral perspective, sure. But the Wraith are highly unlikely to have a human moral perspective. They might very well think of humans as far more morally depraved than they are for eating animals, when humans have the option to be vegetarian and survive just fine. Who are we to judge the Wraith?

 

[Jimmy_C]

To make my second such comparison in as many posts, I think he should've been more like the Final Five, at least at first; total, utter denial of his bloodline.

But he never had a chance to become bonded to his human self and think of it as his real self. He was just an amnesiac being told by humans that he's human. The Final Five had whole lifetimes in which they believed they were human so naturally the truth was far more of a shock.

And add to that the fact that the Wraith were portrayed as far more inhuman than the Cylons ever were - I'd expect a Wraith to be fundamentally disgusted by the idea of being human. The Cylons were hardly anything but humans, really. They had no real "robot" personality traits. Even Cavil didn't act like a robot, just like an angry human.

I like the way they did it not for internal logic - what Michael "should" have done - but because it would have annoyed me if the writers took the viewpoint that Michael should automatically prefer to be human. If he had some innate instinct that he was truly not human, that makes sense and respects the integrity of the character more.

Considering how botched the Michael plotline was, I wouldn't want them to remove the sole element I actually respected - that the writers respected Michael's integrity enough not to make him yet another alien who just wants to be human. So sick of that.

It isn't about being human, but being well-balanced individuals. Morality is not about what genes you carry. If killing is wrong, it is wrong not because you are a human but because you are killing a fellow person. Even aliens are people.

Just because they are a species doesn't mean they can't be exterminated. We exterminate species all the time (or attempt to) that are harmful to us. Smallpox, polio, and malaria are among the diseases we have eradicated or are attempting to exterminate.

If the smallpox were sentient, I'm sure they'd fight back, and they would have a right to do so, in the abstract.

But of course I'd be trying my best to exterminate them - because I'm human and I'd side with my team. That's why ethical issues don't apply to this fight. Nobody is in the wrong here. The only question is who lives and who dies and that comes down solely to power.

What if their existence could continue as individuals, but not be killed. Wouldn't that possibility be more ethical than just exterminating the wraith? That's what the Atlantis team were trying to do.

Presumably they don't value sentience of other species. They've adjusted their moral compass their survival needs, just like humans do. Humans eat intelligent, emotionally sensitive animals like pigs and we don't even need to, in order to survive. That's pretty horrible, isn't it? But most people don't worry about it. They've adjusted their moral compasses to whatever suits their tastes. The Wraith could certainly do the same if their lives depended on it.

That's not a very accurate analogy (I like my humans-eating-pigs one a lot better) but if someone who has diabetes doesn't want to be cured, who am I to say they must be? If they're spending their own money on it, I have no right to interfere.

What about their families. It certainly affects them. In the wraith's case, their "insulin" is your own life. That gives you the right to interfere, by your own logic there.

They would save themselves, and everyone else, a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

Oooh slippery slope time! Hey, let's ban McDonald's next - all those fat-ass idiots who gorge themselves into morbid obesity are driving up our health care costs far more than diabetics.

It was a counter example to your argument. Your argument is a slippery slope. Of course I don't agree with that example. I was explaining how that point is not a correct one because it leads to absurd conclusions such as that one.

That Michael was angry that he was changed does not make sense, unless he is not a moral person. He was changed so he would not have to kill another intelligent person. That is not a bad thing!!!

From a human moral perspective, sure. But the Wraith are highly unlikely to have a human moral perspective. They might very well think of humans as far more morally depraved than they are for eating animals, when humans have the option to be vegetarian and survive just fine. Who are we to judge the Wraith?

Morality is morality. It is independent of your genes or species. I judge a self-aware person as a self-aware person. Why should their species matter?

 

[David cgc]

To make my second such comparison in as many posts, I think he should've been more like the Final Five, at least at first; total, utter denial of his bloodline.

But he never had a chance to become bonded to his human self and think of it as his real self. He was just an amnesiac being told by humans that he's human.

Well, yes, he only had two days of experience being human, but that's two more days than he remembered being a wraith. He still wanted to change back, though. For all he knew, being a wraith feels terrible. It seemed more like he was just reflexively being an asshole than that he actually had a good reason for wanting to be himself.

 

[Wicca who Wonta]

From a human moral perspective, sure. But the Wraith are highly unlikely to have a human moral perspective. They might very well think of humans as far more morally depraved than they are for eating animals, when humans have the option to be vegetarian and survive just fine. Who are we to judge the Wraith?

Agreed! There was an episode (can't remember which ep, though) where this topic came up and a wraith made a similar comparison. As humans we generally don't think twice about killing and eating life forms we feel is less sentient than us, the same could be said about the wraith.

Morality is morality. It is independent of your genes or species. I judge a self-aware person as a self-aware person. Why should their species matter?

It matters because environment and what you need for survival shapes morality as much as anything else. People from different countries don't even have the same moral codes. Why would the wraith have the same moral codes as humans?

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

What about other predators in the animal kingdom? Is it immoral for a lion to eat a gazelle? Should we adopt some sort of "Tofu for Tigers" program? There is such inherent carnage in the natural world, I can't believe that it is accidental. Animals eat each other because that is what they are supposed to do. Morality gets way too complicated unless you settle on a rule, such as individuals only have significant moral obligations toward their own species.

Would you feel that a person with diabetes type 1 is morally right to remain a diabetic even if there was a readily available cure? After all, that's also a genetic condition. They would save themselves, and everyone else, a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

No one should be forced to undergo any medical treatment against their will. A diabetic should make his own decisions, whether he wants a cure or if he wants to remain as he is. The consequences of either choice are purely his.

To make my second such comparison in as many posts, I think he should've been more like the Final Five, at least at first; total, utter denial of his bloodline.

But he never had a chance to become bonded to his human self and think of it as his real self. He was just an amnesiac being told by humans that he's human.

Well, yes, he only had two days of experience being human, but that's two more days than he remembered being a wraith. He still wanted to change back, though. For all he knew, being a wraith feels terrible. It seemed more like he was just reflexively being an asshole than that he actually had a good reason for wanting to be himself.

While he may not have had any specific memories of being a Wraith, it seemed like he always knew that something was wrong. There seemed to be an underlying instinct that he didn't understand until he realized that he was really a Wraith.

One more thing, locking him up at Area 51 is also breaking the Geneva code for the treatment of prisoners, so they'd be in the wrong one way or the other. The easiest thing to do is just to kill him.

How so? If they locked him up at Area 51, it would be effectively killing him anyway because, unable to feed on humans, he would starve to death. I'm just not certain what the legal difference would be.

I wouldn't have the natural wraith arrogance that says humans deserve to be eaten for having the audacity to have evolved naturally, rather than being a freak of nature resulting from a bug getting frisky with the wrong sack of amniotic fluid.

How is that any different from "natural evolution"? Two very natural species, due to their interactions in their environment, evolved into a new species. Furthermore, if anything, the Aratus Bug half was the natural half. Humans weren't native to the Pegasus Galaxy. They were artificially put there by the Ancients.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

It's a kill-or-be-killed situation. The only reasonable strategy is to exterminate the Wraith. Any solution, even "mutilation," would be more justifiable morally - assuming it worked.

I don't think mutilation would necessarily "be more justifiable morally" than killing him. It all depends on what Michael would consent to. If he would rather die than be human, that's his choice. He deserves some modicum of self-determination, even if his only choices are:
a.) be forcibly changed into a human.
b.) we kill you right now.
c.) we lock you away until you starve to death.

 

[DWF]

One more thing, locking him up at Area 51 is also breaking the Geneva code for the treatment of prisoners, so they'd be in the wrong one way or the other. The easiest thing to do is just to kill him.

How so? If they locked him up at Area 51, it would be effectively killing him anyway because, unable to feed on humans, he would starve to death. I'm just not certain what the legal difference would be.

Are we talking about human Michael or wraith Michael? Locking him up as human Michael would only revert him back to a wraith without his shots. But in his human form you'd be starving a human not a wraith. And in any event even as a wraith Michael had his need to feed like a wraith removed.

This action merely gave them a third option other the killing the wraith or being killed by them. I'm not quite sure how this is different than setting the replicators on the wraith.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

One more thing, locking him up at Area 51 is also breaking the Geneva code for the treatment of prisoners, so they'd be in the wrong one way or the other. The easiest thing to do is just to kill him.

How so? If they locked him up at Area 51, it would be effectively killing him anyway because, unable to feed on humans, he would starve to death. I'm just not certain what the legal difference would be.

Are we talking about human Michael or wraith Michael? Locking him up as human Michael would only revert him back to a wraith without his shots. But in his human form you'd be starving a human not a wraith. And in any event even as a wraith Michael had his need to feed like a wraith removed.

Well, I'm talking about before Michael's experiments removed his Wraith need to feed. I'm referring to Michael back in "Michael." And clearly, as a prisoner in Area 51, they would still be able to administer treatments to keep Michael as a human. And if he's human, there's no need to let him starve to death if he can eat regular food. I'm just saying that it's wrong to force Michael to take the treatments. He should be allowed to revert back to his natural Wraith state if he so chooses. But he would also understand the simple biological fact that, as a Wraith prisoner in Area 51, he would eventually starve to death because no one would provide him with any people to eat. How does the Geneva Convention provide for sentient lifeforms that require a morally unacceptable food supply?