If lex luthor was truly altruistic, would he be a better superman than clark?

[manwhohaseverything]

As the title suggests, would the ultimate self made man be more super than Superman himself? Your thoughts. It might not be a competition.But,we can judge it like one. Can't we?

[Jackalope89]

Being altruistic is one thing. But that wouldn't negate his narcissism, which is one of the main things holding him back. And being a high functioning psychopath.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

As the title suggests, would the ultimate self made man be more super than Superman himself? Your thoughts. It might not be a competition.But,we can judge it like one. Can't we?

a heroic Lex would basically be like Batman, who's both in and out of universe kinda the go-to for human powerless heroes. Well I guess you could argue that Lex is usually more self made than Bruce who usually inherits his cash. But besides that detail, Batman does rival (and in some ways surpass) Superman in a lot of ways. But I guess it's not just power that makes Superman shine, it's also his personality. Would altruistic Lex still be an ******* like in post forever evil phase? That kinda might stunt him in the public eye the way it does with MHA's Endevor. So it really depends on how different good guy Lex is, and what we are measuring that would make him better or worse than Superman.

[llozymandias]

a heroic Lex would basically be like Batman, who's both in and out of universe kinda the go-to for human powerless heroes. Well I guess you could argue that Lex is usually more self made than Bruce who usually inherits his cash. But besides that detail, Batman does rival (and in some ways surpass) Superman in a lot of ways. But I guess it's not just power that makes Superman shine, it's also his personality. Would altruistic Lex still be an ******* like in post forever evil phase? That kinda might stunt him in the public eye the way it does with MHA's Endevor. So it really depends on how different good guy Lex is, and what we are measuring that would make him better or worse than Superman.

Batman is nowhere near being Lex's intellectual equal.

[Yoda]

In most incarnations Lex would have to be a completely different character. Even when he does start out as a billionaire and successful businessman before Superman shows up it's usually shown or at least implied to have been acquired through bad acts or outright evil. LexCorp is routinely shown to screw over nearly everyone he comes in contact with, whether through testing or development that kills people, to stealing work from scientists. And of course there's the whole angle where he likes to screw with people just for fun, like that diner story. I don't think he's ever been shown to have the capacity to be a better person than Clark.

Plus, isn't the idea that Lex is a "better" person because he acquired all his wealth and knowledge where Superman was "handed" his powers actually a big part of Lex's whole MO (and ignores the fact that being a super genius is as much a "superpower" as being able to fly)? And it misses the point that that isn't what makes Superman Superman?. The idea generally being if you took away Clark's powers he'd still be trying to help people, while Lex would still be a petty, miserable person.

[manwhohaseverything]

In most incarnations Lex would have to be a completely different character. Even when he does start out as a billionaire and successful businessman before Superman shows up it's usually shown or at least implied to have been acquired through bad acts or outright evil. LexCorp is routinely shown to screw over nearly everyone he comes in contact with, whether through testing or development that kills people, to stealing work from scientists. And of course there's the whole angle where he likes to screw with people just for fun, like that diner story. I don't think he's ever been shown to have the capacity to be a better person than Clark.

Plus, isn't the idea that Lex is a "better" person because he acquired all his wealth and knowledge where Superman was "handed" his powers actually a big part of Lex's whole MO (and ignores the fact that being a super genius is as much a "superpower" as being able to fly)? And it misses the point that that isn't what makes Superman Superman?. The idea generally being if you took away Clark's powers he'd still be trying to help people, while Lex would still be a petty, miserable person.

Have i said lex is a paragon of truth and justice in main universe? No. He doesn't have to be. Lex has all the qualities required and potential to be a better superman. If he were altruistic. Even though, a ruthless business man he can still be that.Tony stark made weapons. His company and shield had stolen tec from scientists as well. So, the idea that lex is irredeemable is false.

He might be trying to help people. Helping people in which way?isn't it condescending to think people can't solve their own problems?Even if that were true. he doesn't solve something we can't. So which is it? He helps people or it looks like he is helping people.Be that as a may, that still leaves the the fact that a guy who gets constantly stronger without any effort is complecent, passionless and lazy. Usage of power isn't the only factor of judge of character. How its being refined also is a judge of character. Lex can change and become "better". But, can clark himself change or acknowledge his shortcomings? If its a yes,Then lex cannot be a better superman. Otherwise,lex can and there is no doubt in my mind be the better man.

[DochaDocha]

One of the broken aspects of Superman, and perhaps a reason why some writers choose to present Superman as a dumb jock, is that he has greater potential intellect than Luthor. The best thing Luthor does, Superman technically can do better. So if both men did everything the same, Superman is going to do it better. Luthor's ability to surpass Superman in one field would be the result of extra concentration in that one specific thing while Superman spreads himself thin. So if you take the representation of Superman who's god tier at everything, the answer is no. If you take a more simple-minded version of Superman, the answer becomes less clear.

[Frontier]

Clark has said in the past that if Lex wasn't so obsessed with himself and beating Superman that he could truly save the world and be "better" in all the ways he claims to be, but it never really takes (aside from the end of All-Star).

[Flash Gordon]

No, he's a rich ass dude who wants things to revolve around him.

[Kuwagaton]

He's either a really bad person with virtually zero to twenty percent humanity, or an intially helpful and maybe hopeful guy who just flips over dumb stuff to an absurd degree. So I say no, but it's not hard to imagine someone with that impression or take on him.

[llozymandias]

One of the broken aspects of Superman, and perhaps a reason why some writers choose to present Superman as a dumb jock, is that he has greater potential intellect than Luthor. The best thing Luthor does, Superman technically can do better. So if both men did everything the same, Superman is going to do it better. Luthor's ability to surpass Superman in one field would be the result of extra concentration in that one specific thing while Superman spreads himself thin. So if you take the representation of Superman who's god tier at everything, the answer is no. If you take a more simple-minded version of Superman, the answer becomes less clear.

This is one reason i prefer pre-coie, both Lex & Kal were super-geniuses. It's just that Lex was more brilliant. Lex (at 15, or slightly younger) created a working antidote for kryptonite. Something Superman, who at that time was "more intelligent than an army of einsteins". could not do after decades of research & experiments.