How Should We Judge vampires?

[Kana]

I posted this on BW and we all had quite a bit of fun with it.

This has come of the back of quite a few threads but I wanted to know peoples thoughts on how one would judge a vampire morally (if at all) and what implications that has for soulled vampires.

Do we judge them by our human moral standards? If a vampire is simply a demon do we judge it as a human or are they just our natural predator? Do vampires have free will and even if they do, do they not have certain psychological constraints like all beings (a vampire may argue a soul is a constraint lol)


Are Angel and Spike responsible for their actions? Now off the back of Jean Vic's Curse Thread (on BW) I came up with a few theories behind the curse or re-ensoulment of the vampires. Now I'm assuming in all these cases that there is no metaphysical difference between Angel and Spike aside from the fact Angel is cursed and he has a happiness clause. I'm also not assuming that the radical difference between Angel and Angelus and the fact that Angel has a photographic memory has anything to do with the nature of the curse.

I had three theories in the curse but I'll split into two.

Theory 1: SouledSpike and Angel are seperate from Angelus and SoullessSpike. That is to say there are two spirits inside each of them: the demon who killed without remorse and the human soul which left the body upon vamping and is now in control while the demon is unable to act. For whatever reason the human soul remember the actions of the demon as if they did them.

Theory 2: The soul is little more than a conscience so Angelus and Spike are just William and Liam killing, lacking the ability to feel guilty for their actions. Angelus was cursed with his conscience and Spike asked for his back and now they look upon their past actions with a different emotional perspective.

Now how should we judge them? In theory 1 are they responsible because their personalities informed the demon? Would that be like Willow feeling guilty for anything Vamp Willow did? Or in theory 2, if they did have a human conscience then can we judge them by human standards seen as most humans are born with a conscience? Would that be akin to 'not guilty by reason of insanity' or is it merely a choice and matter of perspective in terms of how we judge them based upon the idea that we can judge a vampire based upon human or personal moral values?

Ok to sum up. Is Angel responsible for the crimes of Angelus and is Spike responsible for soulless Spike's actions or can we judge a vampire by our moral standards be it human or personal? Maybe you may have other theories on the concept of their re ensoulment or maybe you have different theories for soulless Spike's apparent sensitivity. Please feel free to add to the discussion.

[Nico]

I like theory 2 the best, It is human Nature to judge anyone on our Own morals, weather human or not, we believe ur ways to be correct, even if they arent.

In Spikes Case, He never felt remorse before he got his, soul, like you mentioned Kana, he didnt feel guilty, he would have easily went back to killing again in a flash, all those times he said he wouldnt hurt dawn because it would hurt buffy, the only reason he never hurt her was because buffy would hate him it had nothing to do with how it made her feel, Angelus is the proof of that, Vampires dont feel guilt or remorse, but it doesnt make them stupid, they can stop and start killing whenever they please, its what they were sired to do.

When push comes to shove they are not human they are demons, they may not have commited the killings knowingly, but someone has to be held responsible, in angelus and spikes cases they were lucky, they both sought redemption when they were re-insoulled, They tried to make up for crimes they unconciousley commited (because of the demon) which makes it alot tougher to judge them, although im sure they people they slaughtered would see it alot differently.

[Lizzie]

kana said:

Do we judge them by our human moral standards? If a vampire is simply a demon do we judge it as a human or are they just our natural predator?

No, I don't think you can judge them by human moral standards - for the simple reason that they're just not human.

I think I agree with your theory 2 regarding Spike and Angel. I don't think they are responsible for the acts they committed as vampires - that wasn't them - it was the demon inside them. Right now, they're basically just Liam and William.

[Allan]

I agree that we can't judge them like humans. They have no soul, and ergo cannot fully distinguish the difference between right and wrong.

[Casi]

I have to disagree with them not being able to distinguish between right and wrong. I think it's more like...they don't care. They KNOW what is wrong because WE know what is wrong, if you take my meaning. They simply don't care, or perhaps it's that they don't see it as wrong.

In a way, I've always thought of Vampires as just another type of animal, sort of like Forrest talks about demons. They are the next step up in the food chain to me. Think of a Lion. A lioness will kill a gazelle and eat it. Is the Lion evil in the eyes of the gazelle? Maybe. But killed the gazelle does not seem like the wrong thing to do from the lioness's standpoint. Vampires can only be held to this to a certain degree due to the fact that they are as intelligent as us. But you have to wonder...at what point in the evolution of the vampire did it stop being a struggle for survival, as it surely was, and start being the joy of the kill, the delight in doing wrong, and belief that they are evil?

I think it's as much thier veiw point that colors it as it is ours. Angelus says he is evil, and he likes it. And we believe him because it is so obviously true. And then we have a vampire like Holden Webster, who says, again, that he feels the evil coursing through him, but isn't above catching up with an old schoolmate, inspite of that. *is purposely trying to avoid dragging Spike into this because this is not THAT argument* I believe, given the chance, any human, with a soul, could be just as evil as a vampire.

It's not just about knowing the difference between right and wrong. It's also about choosing. Warren CHOSE to do murder (though he hadn't anticipated who he would actually kill). Faith CHOSE to work for the Mayor. A human can choose to be evil just as some vampires choose to be good. *avoids it, avoids it like the devil*

So where does all this rambling bring me? I don't think there is a way to judge vampires. It's as simple as that. Each one is different, just as each human is different. Buffy slays them because it is what she was called to do. She is their preditor, just as they are ours. It's the laws of nature, and who are we not to heed them?

[Kana]

I have to disagree with them not being able to distinguish between right and wrong. I think it's more like...they don't care. They KNOW what is wrong because WE know what is wrong, if you take my meaning. They simply don't care, or perhaps it's that they don't see it as wrong.

I actually agree with that. Vampires are intelligent creatures. For example soulless Spike knows what Buffy would consider right and wrong. I think vampires review their actions under a new emotional perspective and considering that they have been informed of morality in the human life they come to conclusion that they must be evil if they don't care about killing or being cruel (Anne, William). Their seems to be this clarity that all vampires feel on an instintual level and therefore intellectually they reason that they are different from their human predecessors.

In a way, I've always thought of Vampires as just another type of animal, sort of like Forrest talks about demons. They are the next step up in the food chain to me. Think of a Lion. A lioness will kill a gazelle and eat it. Is the Lion evil in the eyes of the gazelle? Maybe. But killed the gazelle does not seem like the wrong thing to do from the lioness's standpoint. Vampires can only be held to this to a certain degree due to the fact that they are as intelligent as us. But you have to wonder...at what point in the evolution of the vampire did it stop being a struggle for survival, as it surely was, and start being the joy of the kill, the delight in doing wrong, and belief that they are evil?

Vampires used to be 'evil' purely on an instintual level then as they become more 'human' they reasoned evil on an emotional perspective. Lions are not necessarily evil because they don't have an abstract concept of the word whereas vampires do. Some vampires however have a belief that there is no good and evil, only perspective (Marcus) this means that vampires are 'different' psychologically from humans but consider themselves evil or not based upon their concept of morality when human. This could explain Angelus' strong belief in evil seen as when he was human he had black and white morality instilled in him by his father. As an vampire with that 'clarity' Angelus has to believe he is pure evil. Spike never gave it this much thought. He found vampirism profound and found a connection in it but it was a lot more joie de vie. This allowed him to be more compromising when it came to the good and plenties. We can see as far back as Season 2 that he doesn't value evil as a concept as strongly as Angelus and Dru. This is further confirmed in the Damage.

I think it's as much thier veiw point that colors it as it is ours. Angelus says he is evil, and he likes it. And we believe him because it is so obviously true. And then we have a vampire like Holden Webster, who says, again, that he feels the evil coursing through him, but isn't above catching up with an old schoolmate, inspite of that. *is purposely trying to avoid dragging Spike into this because this is not THAT argument* I believe, given the chance, any human, with a soul, could be just as evil as a vampire.

I agree with the above but I guess I've already brought Spike into it , but yes all vampires have a different take on this 'clarity'.

It's not just about knowing the difference between right and wrong. It's also about choosing. Warren CHOSE to do murder (though he hadn't anticipated who he would actually kill). Faith CHOSE to work for the Mayor. A human can choose to be evil just as some vampires choose to be good. *avoids it, avoids it like the devil*

A human with a soul usually has different reasons to commit acts many would think as evil. Ah bah, I'll mention Spike lol. Spike is motivated into certain actions by certain internal faculties just like any human. He's more predisposed to other action as psychologically he is different. How we want to judge him or other vampires is a matter of choice of the person judging him. If you want to call him noble for a soulless vampire that's fine. Spike does have a sense of honour in a way. He certainly seemed hurt that the scoobies didn't include him in the decision to ressurrect Buffy. If you want to call him a self serving pragmatist, that's also fine. Spike did ask for credit for not feeding on victims and if we can't judge him negatively on his unsoulled acts (which is what I believe) we can't really judge him positively either, it has to work both ways. We can however identify with him or even feel sorry for him, because we can identify with him emotionally, but that doesn't mean why objectively judge him one way or the other, if one can judge anyone is such a way.

So where does all this rambling bring me? I don't think there is a way to judge vampires. It's as simple as that. Each one is different, just as each human is different. Buffy slays them because it is what she was called to do. She is their preditor, just as they are ours. It's the laws of nature, and who are we not to heed them?

Buffy was called to kill vampires for our sense of self preservation. So Buffy's actions are favourable so therefore we think it's right. Vampires generally kill us and make us suffer so we deem it unfavourably and wrong. So it's more like it's in our best interests for vampires to be killed unless they can help us. If everything is just about emotional perspectives then if a vampire is guided by their emotions into certain actions does it make them anymore wrong just because they are vampires or is that just what we want to believe?