Is Lelouch really good or bad?

I just finished Code Geass and around that time we started morality in school.In your perspective is Lelouch bad or good?He killed many people which is morally wrong but did it with good intentions. Can you also give me your arguements. I wanna see how other people think of him. For me, I think he's a bit more bad than good. He still killed people. I'm pretty sure he could've found a less blood thirsty way of making a better world.

Hitler had good intentions too.

Okay, Jesus fucking Christ, what’s with all these separate threads for this series? Why can’t you people just launch or necro a thread on this series and keep your discussions there?

I'm pretty sure we've had a similar thread to this recently.

My opinion was that Lelouch was good.

Oh great. Another Lelouch thread. inb4lock

I'll say he's morally gray and be done with it. Also, the Code Geass thread is this way.

And that is why I hate objective definitions of 'good' and 'bad'. People keep trying to shoehorn everyone in two moral absolutes when it not even applicable.

So I would say Lelouch is someone who was trying to accomplish something good for mostly good motives through mostly bad methods.

Oh hi heatth, it's been a while.

Again, there's the CG thread.

edited 27th Oct '11 5:26:52 AM by dRoy

Pinning down characters like Lelouch as objectively good or bad is difficult, perhaps impossible, because it's much more complex than that. He had good intentions, went about it in all the wrong methods, and yet the net action that happens is still overall good.

Anyway, this needs to be in the Code Geass thread. Questions like these hardly need their own thread.

Yes. It's the False Dichotomy. Obviously Lelouch had good intentions, but at the same time he did things that were wrong.

Try becoming a Moral Relativist and you will get a different answer. Every time.

I haven't gone anywhere.

I would argue that notion. It is mostly true but, as everything, it is not set on stone.

For Code Geass, Lelouch methods aren't that bad, for most case. He always avoided civil target and, for most time, attempted to always protect civilian (he failed concerning Shirley's father, though). Even when using his 'evil' powers, he always took care to not completely rob one's free will (except for the finale, of course). For a revolution leader he is actually a pretty civil guy.

Sure, the 'ideal' solution would be be nice with everyone, don't fire a single shot and resolve everything through diplomacy. But he didn't believe it would work (nor did I). He want for a 'bad' path while still trying to not cross the line way too much.

Of course, he did crossed the line a some times, even before the Zero Requien shit. But I don't feel it nullify all the good things he accomplished.

edited 27th Oct '11 5:34:32 AM by Heatth

You could also argue that the good he did doesn't nullify the bad, either. I mean, by all accounts his death toll ends up well in the millions by the end of the series.

You end up with the Watchmen dilemma, basically: There's no real answer to the question of "Does a reasonably good ending justify the enormous cost it took to achieve?"

edited 27th Oct '11 5:40:10 AM by Drakyndra

I already hollered for a lock on this thread, but who knows if the mods will answer it. We have the Code Geass thread guys. Use it.

CODE GEASS THREAD, MAN

edited 27th Oct '11 5:49:58 AM by LiberatedLiberater

Thread Hop

Lelouch is neither good nor bad. His ideas are for all. He has done fatal mistakes, yes. But didn't he, in the end, followed his original goal: to get revenge? Yes. But what is the result? Did he intended for that to happen? Yes. Did he held grudge against all who betrayed him? No. Did he planned to keep all the power to himself? No.

Yep. Let's not spawn endless threads. Please use the existing thread.