In the 2008 movie, The Dark Knight, directed by Christopher Nolan, multiple explosions occur in the Gotham City Hospital as the Joker walks down a street like nothing happened. Mayhem breaks loose as there is another possible two hospitals that he may blow up as well, how does the community deal with the Joker? Do they kill him or leave him be? This might be one of the most controversial debates in the comic community, should Batman kill The Joker? The Joker has done many Per many different philosophies and philosophers, there are many ideas that he should kill the Joker, but also are many that state he shouldn’t kill the Joker. With respect to the other side, Batman should kill the Joker do to many different factors that would make the community
…show more content…
No city wants to lose multiple lives in a terrorist type attack, but would rather kill the one person behind all the attacks that kill innocent men and woman. The Joker is that “terrorist” type criminal that Gotham City is unfortunately stuck with. His attacks on the community are ruthless and he shows no remorse at all in what he just did. He makes these attacks for no reason and as the Joker said in the 2008 movie, The Dark Knight, directed by “Do I look like a guy who has a plan?” as he was talking to Two Face a man who the Joker trapped in a fire, causing half of his face to be burned off. The Joker just wants to cause mayhem in Gotham. The one way to deal with his mayhem and have him stop killing innocent people is to have Batman end the Joker’s life. Many will argue that this goes against Batman’s virtue ethics and that would he be able to stop killing after killing the Joker or will Batman keep killing his enemies. It is a very good point to bring up but, killing the heart of the source will help kill this sort of bacteria thus saving thousands of innocent lives. What also needs to be thought about as well is utilitarianism, this is because this idea of physiology states that it is better to lose one life than multiple lives. As stated in the article “Should Batman Kill the Joker?” the authors state the idea of utilitarianism and said “Based on the work of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, would probably endorse …show more content…
The ones that say shouldn’t be killed argue saying that it is going to go against Batman’s ethics and how Batman said “I don’t want to become that which I hate” (White and Arp, Should Batman Kill The Joker). Batman does not have to be the one is going to kill the Joker but rather have the Joker be killed by the government through the death penalty. With this in place, it would not ruin Batman’s ethics but it would still end the Joker. Many would argue back that the death penalty takes about 15 years on average to completely go through and that the Batman would just break out of jail like he always does in Gotham, but with this brought into a real-world scenario and jail, that wouldn’t happen. It wouldn’t be that easy for the Joker to break out of jail. A philosopher known as Thomas Hobbes believes that “all citizens should enter a social contract with the state, where they agree to be ruled absolutely by the government” (Davis, Should Batman Kill The Joker? Perspectives from Five Famous Philosophers). Though his views are severe, it gets the point that the Joker can be killed by legal actions through the government with as well as keeping Batman’s
No city wants to lose multiple lives in a terrorist type attack, but would rather kill the one person behind all the attacks that kill innocent men and woman. The Joker is that “terrorist” type criminal that Gotham City is unfortunately stuck with. His attacks on the community are ruthless and he shows no remorse at all in what he just did. He makes these attacks for no reason and as the Joker said in the 2008 movie, The Dark Knight, directed by “Do I look like a guy who has a plan?” as he was talking to Two Face a man who the Joker trapped in a fire, causing half of his face to be burned off. The Joker just wants to cause mayhem in Gotham. The one way to deal with his mayhem and have him stop killing innocent people is to have Batman end the Joker’s life. Many will argue that this goes against Batman’s virtue ethics and that would he be able to stop killing after killing the Joker or will Batman keep killing his enemies. It is a very good point to bring up but, killing the heart of the source will help kill this sort of bacteria thus saving thousands of innocent lives. What also needs to be thought about as well is utilitarianism, this is because this idea of physiology states that it is better to lose one life than multiple lives. As stated in the article “Should Batman Kill the Joker?” the authors state the idea of utilitarianism and said “Based on the work of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, would probably endorse …show more content…
The ones that say shouldn’t be killed argue saying that it is going to go against Batman’s ethics and how Batman said “I don’t want to become that which I hate” (White and Arp, Should Batman Kill The Joker). Batman does not have to be the one is going to kill the Joker but rather have the Joker be killed by the government through the death penalty. With this in place, it would not ruin Batman’s ethics but it would still end the Joker. Many would argue back that the death penalty takes about 15 years on average to completely go through and that the Batman would just break out of jail like he always does in Gotham, but with this brought into a real-world scenario and jail, that wouldn’t happen. It wouldn’t be that easy for the Joker to break out of jail. A philosopher known as Thomas Hobbes believes that “all citizens should enter a social contract with the state, where they agree to be ruled absolutely by the government” (Davis, Should Batman Kill The Joker? Perspectives from Five Famous Philosophers). Though his views are severe, it gets the point that the Joker can be killed by legal actions through the government with as well as keeping Batman’s