Superman's morality

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't see how you came to the conclusion hat Superman stories lack that. It seems like you want Superman to be more of a morally grey character, because you see his outlook on life to be unrealistic.

Right. All might is morally grey? Naruto is morally grey? I can put out a list of villains who never got to have a point and was caricaturised .lex luthor is the only villain that got to have his point of view set forward. Look at Manchester black, heck! Even arion isn't allowed to have a point. This is why batman has more memorable modern day story lines.batman writer admits and allows the bad effects or limitations of his moral position to be confronted by batman.
Also, Kantian ethics itself is morally grey in this instance. Superman just chose 1 over 20. That is as grey as it gets. You know why it doesn't matter because it's an understandable dilemma.

[manwhohaseverything]

I think if Superman was real, people would be scared shitless of him. Hell, I would be. But... he's not. So because he's not, the fact he's not accountable to anyone doesn't really matter, because of course he's accountable to us, the audience, and unlike if he was real, we know pretty much everything about him. So... we trust him. And so, us trusting him, it makes sense for our proxies in the stories he inhabits, whether that means Jimmy and Lois or just a guy on the street, to trust him too.

Morality is complex. If Superman saves one person, knowing twenty more will die, is he responsible for their deaths? Maybe, but what if he saves one person under the understanding that it may be possible to save the twenty as well? Suddenly there's a good outcome, and Superman's good at finding those. Maybe he's overconfident. He's certainly been characterized that way before. What's the source of that confidence, though? It's because he almost always wins. He doesn't just make the hard choices, he frequently has to decide whether or not those choices are false dichotomies. Frequently, they are.

So I think when he tells Arion that he has to save one girl even if twenty other people die, he really means "I've got confidence that I can save those people too, or at least try really hard to do it. To let someone die through lack of effort would be just as irresponsible for the one as it would for the twenty." And I probably agree with that. I think Superman should be able to make the hard choices in tough circumstances where he knows all the details, but he should also always try for the optimal outcome.

His confidence is fine. But, it comes of as naivety because he comparatively is never asked tough question or confronted with the otherside.A Kantian superman who loses twenty people to save one. When he is. The story takes the easy route and caricaturises his opponent. All might or captain America's optimism or confidence feels genuine and earned. Because they go through stuff like that and confront the otherside ,truthfully.
I have no problem with a Kantian superman, utilitarian superman or even the guy that tries to create a third option btw. As long as you are a man there can and should be bad outcomes to everything as well as good.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yes, absolutely. Besides, how robbed of agency (realistic or not) would the character feel like to readers if he's losing people every other story? That's as bad, maybe worse, than Goyer's approach, honestly. And I think the audience (generally) would tune out about as fast as they did there, too.

All might doesn't lose people every other story. That's false understanding of my point what i am trying to say is?morality as a whole has limits. No matter which type it is. Limits means an other side.Especially if its as 'human' as clarks. Genuine exploration of the otherside shouldn't be viewed as bad. That isn't disrespecting character. This is'nt just limited to trolley problem or dilemmas in saving people.

[JAK]

All might doesn't lose people every other story. That's false understanding of my point what i am trying to say is?morality as a whole has limits. No matter which type it is. Limits means an other side.Especially if its as 'human' as clarks. Genuine exploration of the otherside shouldn't be viewed as bad. That isn't disrespecting character. This is'nt just limited to trolley problem or dilemmas in saving people.

Ok, so for narrative's sake, how often then? How often does All Might lose someone with enough regularity that you feel his moral character is tested sufficiently? Because this specific scenario is one you've mentioned with decisive regularity.

And since it's not just trolley problems, what means of testing his morality did you have in mind other than people dying because of it?

[manwhohaseverything]

Ok, so for narrative's sake, how often then? How often does All Might lose someone with enough regularity that you feel his moral character is tested sufficiently? Because this specific scenario is one you've mentioned with decisive regularity.

And since it's not just trolley problems, what means of testing his morality did you have in mind other than people dying because of it?

I mentioned it before both reporting aspects combined with journalism. It's depends on the story. For example, All might has to deal with his mentor/mother figure Nana Shimura's son being his opponent's(all for one) successor. the same man that killed nana. The reason shigaraki became all for one's successor is because he saved the kid and raised him as his own. Allmight didn't. He went to America to complete his training and escape all for one until he was ready. Another example is red hood for batman. Redhood exists because batman has limitations.The elric brothers failed to save a little girl at the start of their journey.therefore, it made them realise despite their powers they haven't become gods. Reed Richards and the thing in classic tales. I am not asking for trolley problem to be reiterated over and over again.

This and no kill rules limitations should brought forward in story as much frequency as the batman's does or atleast their should great memorable stories that deal with it without any undercut . Also, i would like for things like mon el being stuck, the bottle city of kandor.. Etc to be used in a more effective manner. instead of caricaturising opponent's with a point. dealing with them would be much more appreciated. for instance the elite, in this case arion.as i said, what if this story was genuine study of two moral positions a utilitarian arion and a kantian superman. Let the opponent's make their points. It is essential. Otherwise, story undercuts itself.A good opposition fleshes out the hero and compliments him

[Adekis]

Now that sparks an interesting concept, and very dark. Imagine being able to hear everything, but sound works as it does in the real world. He'd hear trouble, but know that he could never get there in time because the sound is from too long ago and the person is already dead.

THAT is a perfect "dark multiverse" concept: a Superman who is driven crazy because he can hear and see everything, but never get there in time even with his powers. Yikes.

Welp, I hate everything about that, haha!

Other than for that, it just shows why a limit to "realism" is a very good thing for super-heroes.

Yeah. Dave Mazzuchelli has a great line about how the more "realistic" you make super-heroes, the more likely they are to just immediately fall apart. I agree with that wholeheartedly, and think the solution is to avoid realism to a certain, and probably large, extent.

[JAK]

I mentioned it before both reporting aspects combined with journalism. It's depends on the story. For example, All might has to deal with his mentor/mother figure Nana Shimura's son being his opponent's(all for one) successor. the same man that killed nana. The reason shigaraki became all for one's successor is because he saved the kid and raised him as his own. Allmight didn't. He went to America to complete his training and escape all for one until he was ready. Another example is red hood for batman. Redhood exists because batman has limitations.The elric brothers failed to save a little girl at the start of their journey.therefore, it made them realise despite their powers they haven't become gods. Reed Richards and the thing in classic tales. I am not asking for trolley problem to be reiterated over and over again.

This and no kill rules limitations should brought forward in story as much frequency as the batman's does or atleast their should great memorable stories that deal with it without any undercut . Also, i would like for things like mon el being stuck, the bottle city of kandor.. Etc to be used in a more effective manner. instead of caricaturising opponent's with a point. dealing with them would be much more appreciated. for instance the elite, in this case arion.as i said, what if this story was genuine study of two moral positions a utilitarian arion and a kantian superman. Let the opponent's make their points. It is essential. Otherwise, story undercuts itself.A good opposition fleshes out the hero and compliments him

Ok, then - the topic just kept coming back to people dying, so it seemed like that was the idea. But I'm all for his morals being tested, as long as the strength of his convictions (and mental strength as well as his powers) wins 99% of the time in the end.

Like you, I'd like him to be quick on his feet and often very able to surprise his opponents (Bendis did some of this, but even if you "know" he won't kill you, the idea of not knowing what he'll do should scare the hell outta them. I love that idea)

I'd have to go back and read the story with Arion... I remember reading it at the time and just not caring for it at all because it wasn't even a choice to me.

Welp, I hate everything about that, haha!

Oh, me too! It just popped into my head and I thought "ah. Dark Multiverse, at best" lol

Yeah. Dave Mazzuchelli has a great line about how the more "realistic" you make super-heroes, the more likely they are to just immediately fall apart. I agree with that wholeheartedly, and think the solution is to avoid realism to a certain, and probably large, extent.

Same. And I think that's especially true for a character like Superman. Not that he can't "exist" in that space, just that he shouldn't often. These started as kids' books for a reason, after all.