Did Batman kill

[DarkAngel]

In some form, I know this has been discussed, but did Batman kill Joker at the end of ROTJ? Or, looking at it in another way, was Joker's actual death in the past by Robin's hand, or in the future by Batman? Maybe it's not important, but if in a conversation I told someone that Batman killed Joker, I was just wondering whether that would be an accurate statement. Also, if it could be said that Batman killed, then would it have to be considered bad given that the act was only done through the destruction of a chip?

[Calhoun07]

I will have to watch the movie again, but I am quite sure that it was Robin who killed Joker. Of course, the cut version makes it look more like an accident than actual murder, but Robin did kill the Joker.

[Clayface]

I thinkn what DarkAngel means is this: when Terry destroyed the chip at the end of the movie, did he kill? Would you consider it a killing, or just the destruction of piece of electronics.

[Inque]

i think he just destroyed a piece of electronics. he didn't really "kill" tim drake's body.

[Calhoun07]

You know, this is one of the hardest questions to answer! It is like in Star Trek, Data is supposed to be a sentient being, but in reality he is just an android. I would argue that a sentient being will experience some kind of after life, that their soul will go somewhere when they die, and Ecclesiasties tells us both animals and humans have souls that go down into the earth, and that their souls belong to God. For Star Trek to make the assertion that Data is a sentient being is just wrong, I don't care what argument they use. He is just perhaps the most advanced computer program EVER, but that's it. BTW, for those of you (all four of you!) who read my Q-Logy story on the fan fics board (and I thank you!) you may have noticed that I dealt with this in the death of Data. Data was there...then he wasn't, just like turning off a lamp.

With Joker, his soul would go to one of the destinations Ecclesiastes talks about. That is unavoidable. Not even with all the technology in the world, could he avoid that. Now, if he was able to program that chip into possessing his entire personality and even adapting as time goes on and even to possessing his entire memory, that's quite amazing, but that chip was no more the Joker than a wav file of me talking on a computer is me. When the chip got destroyed, the program got destroyed. That's all.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by calhoun07
For Star Trek to make the assertion that Data is a sentient being is just wrong, I don't care what argument they use. He is just perhaps the most advanced computer program EVER, but that's it.
...that chip was no more the Joker than a wav file of me talking on a computer is me. When the chip got destroyed, the program got destroyed. That's all.

That's interesting. But your saying Data's not sentient because he was created, right? But is Soong creating Data all that different from God creating us? Maybe different materials were used, but humans are as much creations as androids would be. So isn't it conceivable that Data might be sentient. That he might be as alive as any of us?
I understand what you're saying, and I've wondered the same thing. In Star Trek, the EMH's or androids like Data, I've figured they're just advanced programs. They say or do what they do based on what their programs allow. But then the fact is, we're creations too. Creations that have been designed (or programmed) to be able to act and make decisions, to have free wil and live. Couldn't it be possible, at some point, for humanity to be able to do the same with androids. Perhaps? I mean we were made in God's image and all...
And if Joker does have a soul that's going somewhere...if you admit that Data has a soul that's going somewhere...well, doesn't that mean they're alive? And wouldn't that mean they're sentient? I've always thought being alive and being sentient went together.

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by calhoun07
......but that chip was no more the Joker than a wav file of me talking on a computer is me. When the chip got destroyed, the program got destroyed. That's all.

I disagree. In my mind, what Tim Drake had was, give or take a strange twist of reality thanks to science fiction, a technology enduced versian of Multiple Personality Syndrome. Now this whole point is hard to argue, of course, since we don't know exactly how/what The Joker did to Tim in our time. So what I'm saying is merely opinion based on observation.

Even so, a wav file that is recorded can only say that one sentence that was recorded. The Joker thought, spoke and felt, just as I would, being alive myself. So I see it as a Multiple Personality Syndrome/clone type of deal. It was him, yet in a small way it wasn't (depending on opinion I suppose).

So did Batman kill? I'd just say he stopped him. When a patient is treated for MPD and cured, and the standing personality finaly regains total control, does the alternate personality "get killed"? I dunno. It just, ceases (well, if the person's treatment truly helps them permanently of course).

[optimal321]

First off, i'd like to say hey to DarkAngel for finally making it to the new boards! HEY!

Anyway, to your question:

The Joker inside Drake's head was just a microchip. And when Batman destroyed it, he just fried a piece of software (hardware? maybe i should just stick w/ "microchip"). The real Joker died years ago.

That, however, does nothing to support my case. I mean, when a person caps someone in the head, all they're doing is destroying a piece of tissue and organ.

This is such a tough question because, honestly, we don't know the answer. If you think about this from a totally unbiased and non religious viewpoint, how is a computer chip having a soul any less ridiculous than flesh having one? Of course, i believe that living things are more special than computers but it kinda makes you wonder...

Well, all that really matters is that, to Terry, he just destroyed a microchip. At least, we've seen no remorse, so maybe we can assume his conscience is clear. My complements, DarkAngel, for the tough question

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by optimal321
First off, i'd like to say hey to DarkAngel for finally making it to the new boards! HEY!

My complements, DarkAngel, for the tough question

Thanks. And yeah, it took me awhile to get over here. I had some problems registering. My fault, though. I should have read the instructions properly before my initial attempt.

[DR. BELCH]

So by extention, would what Terry did to the mad computer genius in "Lost Soul" be considered murder, or just deleting a bothersome computer file?
This rather reminds me of a story I wrote about a man who arranges to have his brain implanted in a dead woman's body as part of an intricate scheme to seduce and destroy the guy who ruined his life nearly thirty years before. (I had the concept some months before "Out of the Past", but the parallels between the two stories didn't escape me.) Imagine if such a thing were possible. The law would be knocked on its a**. Legally you can't prosecute a man twice for the same crime...but what if it's Jack's brain in Joe's (or Jill's) body? Does double jeopardy still apply? Of course you can't sue a dead man or woman either...but if you're a judge and someone who died a year ago shows up in your court with a new brain in their skull, what the blazes can you do?
The chip in Joker/Tim's head (mind you, I haven't seen ROTJ yet, so bear with me if I sound like a mook) sounds more like a symbiotic relationship--each requires to other to "live", rather like certain tree fungi.

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by DarkAngel


That's interesting. But your saying Data's not sentient because he was created, right? But is Soong creating Data all that different from God creating us? Maybe different materials were used, but humans are as much creations as androids would be. So isn't it conceivable that Data might be sentient. That he might be as alive as any of us?
I understand what you're saying, and I've wondered the same thing. In Star Trek, the EMH's or androids like Data, I've figured they're just advanced programs. They say or do what they do based on what their programs allow. But then the fact is, we're creations too. Creations that have been designed (or programmed) to be able to act and make decisions, to have free wil and live. Couldn't it be possible, at some point, for humanity to be able to do the same with androids. Perhaps? I mean we were made in God's image and all...
And if Joker does have a soul that's going somewhere...if you admit that Data has a soul that's going somewhere...well, doesn't that mean they're alive? And wouldn't that mean they're sentient? I've always thought being alive and being sentient went together.

My assertion is that Data is NOT sentient, in case there was any confusion.

Joker's soul already went some where, when he got electrocuted.

Now, to get all religious on you all....In Genesis, God BREATHES into Adam's nostrils. That is Him giving us our soul. People are comprised of body, soul and spirit. The soul is from God, clearly, his Divine touch to make His creation unique in all the universe. The Spirit is man's, but because it is fallen, it requires to be born again and for man to be filled with the Holy Spirit, but the spirit alone is man's and fallen. Yeah, it could be said our brains are extremely advanced computers, but the life he breathed in to his creation makes us unique.

A scientist could create the most advanced android ever, but God did not give that android body, soul and spirit. He has a body, and perhaps if his program allows him to adapt to the settings around him and to have feelings and all this, as Data and the Holo doctor from Star Trek, it might be argued that they have a spitit of some sort, but they do not have souls, that breathed in gift from God that sets us apart.

When you deny the fact that God did this (and I am not a church going man, but I do believe that God did do this) and He set man and his creation seperate from everything else, you can forget that we are unique and His creation is unique and place too much importance on the creations of man. An android may feel emotions, may love, may express his own thoughts, but that is the spirit of the android being developed. He does not, however, have a soul, as God did not breathe one into him. In the end, the android is just an advanced computer program that is obliterated and gone once the life of the android is terminated.

And Joker's chip also had no soul. It just re-programed Robin's brain.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by calhoun07


In the end, the android is just an advanced computer program that is obliterated and gone once the life of the android is terminated.

And Joker's chip also had no soul. It just re-programed Robin's brain.

Okay, I understand what you're saying. I guess there's just one more thing I'd throw out there. Wouldn't it be possible that, once an android as complex as Data is created, God would breathe a soul into him. It's possible. The fact is, God is so far beyond us, that there is no way to determine or ascertain when this "breathing" occurs. The fact that we, humans, might be capable of creating androids does not eliminate the possibility that God would then step in and give it a soul. There's no doubt of God's capabilities (basically, he can do anything), so the possibility always remains.

[DR. BELCH]

DarkAngel:
The fact that we, humans, might be capable of creating androids does not eliminate the possibility that God would then step in and give it a soul. There's no doubt of God's capabilities (basically, he can do anything), so the possibility always remains.

Why did I suddenly have a weird image of God as the Blue Fairy in Pinnochio as I read this? If Carlos Carlotti were alive he'd roll over in his grave....

[Clayface]

Of course, all these argments are moot for those of us that don't believe in a "soul" in the first place, but since this isn't a religion board, I'm not even going to start up that argument.

[Inque]

Here's an argument. Does anybody here have the program "Cats" or the program "Dogs"? The dogs or cats just roam around your desktop. You "feed" them. You "discipline" them. You "train" them. You "play" with them. Does that make them alive? Do they have souls? Or are they just code and pixels on a screen?

Same thing applies with Pokemon, Neopets, etc.

[Nightwing]

I'd say that's a different ballpark. Those little cat and dog things are programs that computer scientists can write. Unlike Robert Vance or the ROTJ Joker, these programs only do what they are told. Computers and programs can't think. Somehow, Bobby Vance and the Joker personality inside Drake's head CAN think as would a normal human being.

I may not necessarily believe in souls or that sort of etherial thing since we have no proof, but I don't think we as humans are advanced enough to say something doesn't exist, so the outcome is it most likely doesn't. So as stated, this sure is a moot point.

Even though I believe there is some kind of powers that be, or Ethereal power, frankly I don't often buy into the human mind in a robot body thing. Sure sentient Robots like Rosie from the Jetsons I'll go with because that's farther in the future where efforts in machines could be limitless. But for the most part, I'm with Terry's words from Lost Soul:

"You really think your Robert Vance don't you. But he was flesh and you're just binary, they don't go together."

As of know, I don't think they do. Maybe in another century or so we'll find a way, who knows.

[Calhoun07]

I know this isn't a religion board, and I really am not religious (tho I have an associates degree in theology), but sometimes it's debates like this that make these boards special.

I promise to not let this disolven into a Bible study, but because of the questions raised, you all made me curious so I had to go to Genesis and read what it said. In chapter one, verse 20, it reads, "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the movie creature that hath life (which is also means soul in Hebrew)...." And in chapter 2, verse seven, it says, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life: and man became a living soul." Here, it is evident that God gave a soul to all his creation when He created them. He doesn't have to "breathe" this soul into each being when they are born. This is just something that is a part of the blue print of life.

In regards to the question as to whether or not God would breathe life into an android, I doubt it. God in the Bible considers the works of man quite futile. And without getting into it more (I really don't want ANYBODY to think I am shoving religion at them, I am not!) I will just leave it at that and leave it up to the curious to pick up their Bibles if they want to and look up "works" in the index and see what it has to say about the works of men.

Well, this should be enough fuel for the fire for now!

[Maxie Zeus]

If I interpret him right, calhoun 07 says that to be alive and sentient (as opposed to being a program or an appliance) is to have a soul, and to have a soul is to have a certain kind of provenance: to be created by God. This means we can drop the middle term "soul" and just make a direct equation: to be alive and sentient is to be created by God.

This is an interesting hypothesis. Of course, non-theists will be dissatisfied with it; some theists may be too. (They may believe in God, and believe we are created by Him, but that these facts are not the best explanation for why, besides existing, we are alive and sentient.)

One thing in favor of this hypothesis is that some of our concepts actually work this way. Think of currency: What makes this piece of green paper in my pocket worth $20? It’s not the fact that it is printed on special paper, with special inks, with a special design. A forger can duplicate all of these. In fact, he can make a piece of paper that is physically indistinguishable from a genuine bill--that is, in all but its genuineness. So what makes my piece of paper but not his "genuine"? Because mine but not his was made and endorsed by the government. Similarly, Data and the Joker-chip are not "genuine" living and sentient beings, but clever counterfeits, because they have the wrong kind of provenance.

The thread begins with Dark Angel’s question: Is the Joker-chip the kind of thing that can be killed, and calhoun07 suggests it cannot because it is not a "genuine" living and sentient thing, but only a counterfeit. This broad claim invites its own question: What does it mean to be a "genuine" sentient being and not a "counterfeit" one. calhoun07 has one suggestion -- it is to be created by God -- but I suggest the question is open to other sorts of answers, which might be profitably explored. And without denigrating God, it is also possible to challenge the broad claim: Even an orthodox Christian could argue that "genuine" and "counterfeit" are the wrong metaphors to use in explaining what is going on with the Joker-chip.

I mention all this because this is a fascinating topic, and I would hate to see people tread either too carelessly or too gingerly around it because they think they’ll have to "get religious."

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus
This broad claim invites its own question: What does it mean to be a "genuine" sentient being and not a "counterfeit" one

Like you said, there are many ways of approaching this question. In my view, there is no limit to what we, humans, are capable of. When I say that, I mean that up to this point in time, we have continued to develop and create more advanced "things," whether it be electronic or otherwise. And so far, it doesn't appear that humanity's creativeness has faltered in even the slightest. We continue to push forward and I don't see any end in sight. I don't expect that some point in the future we'll run out of ideas or be unable to develop further. It doesn't seem possible to me. So, when looking specifically at artificial intelligence and giving programs the ability to choose, I don't see a limit. We've continued to have success in that field, continued to advance the possibilities, and I don't believe that will change. My feeling is that at some point, we should be able to give computers (for example) the ability to choose from an almost infinite amount of choices (like humans). And once that happens, I would say sentience has been reached. All that's needed is the ability for computers (or androids or whatever) to be able to gather information from the environment. Decisions and actions can then be made be based on that information. This may not be possible in the near future, but I would say it could definitely be accomplished by the 24th century like in Star Trek. An extraordinary amount coding would be required and a heck of a lot storage, but if those are possible, than I think a sentient Data or Joker as in ROTJ wouldn't be too far away. Is that too farfetched?

[Shriek]

I say Batman didn't kill. He stopped or put an end too. Joker was long dead. He only stopped him from coming back.