Please read the following article: "Why Doesn't the Batman Just Kill the Joker?" by Jesse Richards. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/why-doesnt-batman-just-ki_b_3686003.html
It brings up a few good points:
1. The Joker will continue to kill (but does Batman murder him for future crimes - could be dangerous - or past crimes? Joker has killed Robin, Commissioner Gordon's wife, and crippled Batgirl, Gordon's stepdaugher).
2. Batman's honor code of not killing is just a way for Batman to feel superior to the men and women of crime whom he is fighting.
3. Is Batman responsible for all of the deaths / mayhem / destruction since Batman first apprehended the Joker? Is that chaos Batman's to own, or should it be the Joker?
Additionally, it seems, on further reflection, that the Joker, especially the way he is portrayed in The Dark Knight, is the ultimate nihilist. Nihilism is an extreme skepticism that doesn't adhere to any moral or religious principles because they believe that life is meaningless. In some ways, nihilism condemns existence itself.
So, questions to answer:
1. In which of the scenarios of the Trolley Problem do you think best applies to this situation w/ the Batman and Joker (assuming it was the Joker who is the trolley)?
2. Should the Batman kill the Joker? Why or why not? And if so, for what crimes - past or to prevent future crimes?
3. Should our superheroes have a no-killing code? Why or why not? Does it just lead to more crime?
4. Is the concept of utilitarianism useful for real life decisions? Why or why not?
5. Is Batman a true Kantian in his refusal to kill the Joker (think Kant's practical postulates)?
Pick 3 of the questions above to answer.
Pick 3 of the questions above to answer.
300 words total for all 3 answers. Due by class on Friday night (11/13) by midnight.
