Is the Hulk a Moral Agent? Also, intro to Subculture for the Cultured

Greetings fellow heroes,

Before we begin, there’s a reason the latest few posts are so far apart.  I’ve started writing for a second online source, the Subculture for the Cultured.  Its a great site, and I encourage you to check it out, especially if you love superheroes, comics, and taking these things seriously.

That said, enjoy the following, which is posted here, too.

 

Warning, spoilers abound.

Greetings, heroes!

After returning from viewing The Avengers this weekend, we decided to put aside our planned post and discuss the Hulk instead.

He made a compelling case

Joss Whedon’s interpretation of the Avengers is second to none (seriously, go see it), and the Hulk’s character is likewise amazing.  Whedon brilliantly captures the terrifying power of the Hulk and contrasts it with the demur and frightened Bruce Banner’s struggle to contain that power.  Because if Dr. Bruce Banner, brilliant physicist, becomes angry, he transforms into the Hulk and places all those around him in danger.  Any attempts to stop the monster directs the Hulk’s deadly fury against those who try to contain it.  While the Hulk is on his rampages, he lashes out at anyone and everything he perceives to be a threat while providing clumsy protection to those he loves.  But Whedon gave the Hulk a telling moment in The Avengers.  In the climactic battle, Captain America gives orders to each member of the team.  He concludes by turning to the Hulk and saying,

“Hulk, Smash!”

To which the Hulk smiles and proceeds to smash.  Effectively.

If anyone has the ability to give the Hulk an order, its Captain America.  And without denigrating Cap’s superlative leadership, telling the Hulk to smash is like telling a dog to sniff or a clock to tick; its in his nature.  But the moment the Hulk smiled and acknowledged the order, it implied that the Hulk had a choice, accepted it, and was pleased by the choice.

And that, fellow heroes, presents a dilemma.

If the Hulk has the ability to make decisions based on morality, he is what’s known as a “moral agent”.  This means that he can examine a situation, consider actions which are “right” or “wrong”, and understand and act based on that decision.

On the other hand, the Hulk may not have the ability to make moral decisions.  He may simply react to stimuli and respond without thought, in which case Cap’s order to him made him happy for the same reason a dog is happy when its master throws a ball.  He is like an animal, and at most his will follows the philosophy, as Arthur Schopenhauer wrote, that

“Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.”

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer#Quotes

in other words, the Hulk can “make decisions”, but simply doesn’t have choices: he makes the obvious decision available to him at any given time.

Determining the Hulk’s moral status may be impossible, and the consequences are tragic if he turns out to be a moral agent.  That would mean it is fully aware of its actions, and is thus responsible for the death and destruction it causes.  But in addition to being held responsible for ruining billions of dollars of military grade equipment, leaving thousands without homes, causing his part of the $160 billion to New York, and the collateral civilian casualties caused by his smashing, it also means that the Hulk is also being held as a prisoner by another individual: in short, the Hulk is illegally imprisoned inside Bruce Bannner.  Moreover, Banner is forced to serve as a caretaker to another moral being, regardless of his desire or ability.  This is problematic, as our society goes through great pains to remove moral beings from those who are incapable of caring for them, think of unfit parents. Thus, if Hulk is a moral agent, it creates a whole host of moral problems which would require the patience and wisdom of a saint to untangle.  This one may be beyond even Reed Richards’ genius.

Fortunately for human rights lawyers in the Marvel Universe, a group which includes Bruce Banner’s cousin, She Hulk, it would appear the Hulk is not a moral agent.  The Hulk has always served as an analogy of the nuclear age, and just as a nuclear weapon cannot be blamed for the damage it causes, the Hulk is merely a weapon which causes massive collateral damage amongst both friends and foe.  The Hulk means well, but like a bomb dropped with the best of intentions the devastation wrought is tragically more than predicted.  And there is no doing away with the Hulk.  There is no putting the nuclear genie back in the bottle, and the best the scientists like Bruce Banner can hope for is to contain the monster in as dispassionate a manner as possible.  The tragedy is that they will not always succeed.

Peter David’s Hulk: The End neatly illustrated this point.  After humanity was wiped out by, of all things, nuclear war, only the indestructible Hulk remained, suffering as a modern Prometheus for the decision to unleash nuclear fire into the world.

From Incredible Hulk: The End, 2006   From Incredible Hulk: The End, 2006

From: Incredible Hulk: The End

The story ends with Hulk, alone, without Banner or any living human anywhere.  The Hulk is finally by himself, the remnant of humanity’s nuclear ambition and a symbol of the uncontrollable power which destroyed it. But this decision, though satisfactory, does leave us with a moral problem.  If the Hulk is not a moral agent, who is responsible for what he does?  Do we blame Bruce Banner for being in the way when the gamma bomb went off?  Do we blame the military in the form of Nick Fury (and thus, the government) for not ridding of or at least containing the danger?

Unfortunately, neither answer satisfies, as neither can control the monster.  The nuclear problem is such that, just as in The Avengers, it would only take one decision maker, either government or scientist, one moment of unrealized anger and passion to unleash nuclear death on the world.  And this may be the ultimate message of the Hulk: the key is not to make the holder of the weapon angry, and if we are the ones holding the weapon, not to become angry ourselves.  While emotions have their place, when dealing with a Hulk or a bomb that has no moral agency of its own, we need to exercise our own moral agency to the absolute best of our abilities.  Because all of the Hulk’s strength ultimately lies in our hands.

And as Bruce Banner’s struggle for control demonstrates, the greatest strength is avoiding the power until it is truly needed.

Business Ethics #3- How Do You Play Fair and Play to Win?

Greetings heroes!

The previous two posts have dealt with the problem of conflicts of interest, which is a somewhat easy topic to discuss because there is a direct right and wrong: it is wrong to perform certain tasks if you have a strong competing interest which prevents you from fulfilling that task.

You can't be both an ok Deadpool and a terrible Green Lantern

But let’s say you get pas the conflict of interest and go to work in the business world.  You go to work every day, and you do your best to make money without breaking any laws or causing any harm.  Sounds simple, right?

Well, no, that’s not all.  Let’s pretend I was talking about sports instead of business.  If you were playing hockey, you would never play with the goal of just not breaking the rules.  In order to be a good game of hockey, you also have to try to win.  And that means playing to win without breaking the rules.  And these two goals are often at odds with one another.  If you don’t do everything you possibly can to win, its not a good game.  And if you don’t follow the rules, its also not a good game.  If you are on a team of superior players, this is not an ethical challenge: you simply play your best and you’ll win.  But what if you’re the underdog?

But here’s the other thing about sports: if you cheat at everything, you lose everything, too.  Because if the game becomes no fun to play, no one will want to play it.  And then there will be no game at which to excel.

But sports is only so strong an example because, even if you lose, at the end of the day you’ve only lost a game.  But what if the stakes are much, much higher?

For example, what about war?

How to heroically use violence

Now that you’ve decided to clean up your city as a vigilante, it’s time for action!  Pull on your solar-powered armor, jump into your flying hover cycle, and take to the streets!  Wait, what’s that below you?  Is that an elderly woman having her purse stolen?  No police in sight and the criminal is getting away.  Looks like you’re going to have to stop that thief, superhero!

Before you jump down there and knock that scoundrel’s lights out, I have a quick question for you: does your solution involve violence?  More problems in comics are solved through a strong punch than any other method.  This does not mean, however, that violence is always the most heroic action. As you seek to undertake heroic actions, your use of violence will either distinguish you from the villains you battle or place you within their midst.

Shown: Excessive