Ultimecia didn't just want to kill everybody She wanted their existence denied. Which is truly evil. I agree with you about Seymour.
Are there any evil characters?
- Thread starter Donald Trump
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Ultimecia didn't just want to kill everybody She wanted their existence denied. Which is truly evil. I agree with you about Seymour.
Mr. Revolution
The One and Only
I'm going to take a Jamesian approach to defining good and evil. According to William James, a good is defined as a demand made by one person on another person or persons. This demand can be rooted in morals, ethics, beliefs, and desires. When a bad or an "evil" act is committed, it is defined as one person's good infringing upon the goodness of another, esp. in circumstances where a minority seeks to infringe upon the demands of the majority.
To put it in layman's terms, let's use an example: we as a society view stealing as wrong, so as a majority we have agreed to make and pass laws prohibiting stealing. The majority definition of "good"--i.e. the demand we place on the world and our society--is to have an environment where none steal, and the ones who do are caught and punished. In our society, however, there is a minority that desires the same commodities as everyone else but refuses to earn the means by which to acquire these commodities through channels deemed legitimate by the same laws that prohibit stealing. This minority, therefore, turns to stealing. A car thief, bank hacker, or jewelry robber all fit into this group. Even though their "good" is to acquire the same commodities as everyone else, their method infringes upon the majority's "good" by breaking the law. Therefore, this is an evil act.
Let's change the scenario now. The same laws are in place, but they were now voted on and passed by a rich minority. This rich minority defines good as a world where they are wealthy and increase their wealth through the exploitation of the masses. Anyone who steals from them is committing an evil act. On the reverse side, the impoverished minority defines good as a world in which they and their families can live without fear of starvation or dying from easily curable diseases due to their lack of income. And so, Robin Hood appears to steal from the rich and give to the poor.
Did he do something evil? Yes and no. From the perspective of the rich, Robin Hood violated the law and committed an evil act. However, according to James, because the rich minority was exploiting the impoverished majority, it is in fact the rich committing the truly evil act by infringing upon the demands of the majority. Therefore, in this scenario, Robin Hood did not commit an evil act.
Let's apply this to Seymour in FFX by first listing the demands:
Good #1 : This is the good defined by Seymour. His view of good is the total annihilation of humanity so as to liberate everyone from their suffering.
Good #2 : This is the good defined by the majority of Spirans. Their view of good is their continued existence despite the hellish reality crafted by Sin. They hope and dream of a world free of Sin and persist in their existence so that they may one day see this day.
Because the majority of people living in Spira still cling to the hope that one day Sin will be truly defeated, their demand on the world is the good of the majority. Seymour is just one man, and as referenced several times (particularly by Auron who claims that Mika and Seymour are not of one mind), Seymour's demand is the good of either only one man or a minority with so few members that we don't even know if anyone else subscribes to his vision of goodness. In any case, we can safely say that Seymour represents the demands of the minority, and therefore, any acts he has taken to infringe upon the good of the majority can be construed as acts of evil.
In sum, yes, Seymour is evil insomuch that his vision of good is the total annihilation of the Spirans. Despite wanting to spare them from pain, it does not make him any less evil because the majority of Spirans desire to live despite their pain.
To put it in layman's terms, let's use an example: we as a society view stealing as wrong, so as a majority we have agreed to make and pass laws prohibiting stealing. The majority definition of "good"--i.e. the demand we place on the world and our society--is to have an environment where none steal, and the ones who do are caught and punished. In our society, however, there is a minority that desires the same commodities as everyone else but refuses to earn the means by which to acquire these commodities through channels deemed legitimate by the same laws that prohibit stealing. This minority, therefore, turns to stealing. A car thief, bank hacker, or jewelry robber all fit into this group. Even though their "good" is to acquire the same commodities as everyone else, their method infringes upon the majority's "good" by breaking the law. Therefore, this is an evil act.
Let's change the scenario now. The same laws are in place, but they were now voted on and passed by a rich minority. This rich minority defines good as a world where they are wealthy and increase their wealth through the exploitation of the masses. Anyone who steals from them is committing an evil act. On the reverse side, the impoverished minority defines good as a world in which they and their families can live without fear of starvation or dying from easily curable diseases due to their lack of income. And so, Robin Hood appears to steal from the rich and give to the poor.
Did he do something evil? Yes and no. From the perspective of the rich, Robin Hood violated the law and committed an evil act. However, according to James, because the rich minority was exploiting the impoverished majority, it is in fact the rich committing the truly evil act by infringing upon the demands of the majority. Therefore, in this scenario, Robin Hood did not commit an evil act.
Let's apply this to Seymour in FFX by first listing the demands:
Good #1 : This is the good defined by Seymour. His view of good is the total annihilation of humanity so as to liberate everyone from their suffering.
Good #2 : This is the good defined by the majority of Spirans. Their view of good is their continued existence despite the hellish reality crafted by Sin. They hope and dream of a world free of Sin and persist in their existence so that they may one day see this day.
Because the majority of people living in Spira still cling to the hope that one day Sin will be truly defeated, their demand on the world is the good of the majority. Seymour is just one man, and as referenced several times (particularly by Auron who claims that Mika and Seymour are not of one mind), Seymour's demand is the good of either only one man or a minority with so few members that we don't even know if anyone else subscribes to his vision of goodness. In any case, we can safely say that Seymour represents the demands of the minority, and therefore, any acts he has taken to infringe upon the good of the majority can be construed as acts of evil.
In sum, yes, Seymour is evil insomuch that his vision of good is the total annihilation of the Spirans. Despite wanting to spare them from pain, it does not make him any less evil because the majority of Spirans desire to live despite their pain.