The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Who is the most evil character in the Dresdenverse?
forumghost:
--- Quote from: groinkick on December 02, 2017, 12:22:37 AM ---the problem with these beings is they are bound to demons that feed on these emotions... I don't know... I'd say they are almost comparable to a great white shark. The shark will eat you, not because it's evil, because it's the creatures nature.
--- End quote ---
Not really. As he says, the White Court is perfectly able to pick and choose what emotions they feed off of- Madrigal, for example, is a member of House Raith that decided to feed on terror because he gets off on it. And Thomas proves that they can... 'diet'? if they so choose.
They aren't really much different from Humans, psychologically speaking (which makes sense, because they were human until they hit mid teen-early adult years).
Arjan:
Besides if you take free will into account what is then the status of those beings that personify evil? Whose nature is evil? Evil with a capital E does not have free will anymore, it is still evil.
groinkick:
--- Quote from: forumghost on December 02, 2017, 09:46:15 AM ---Not really. As he says, the White Court is perfectly able to pick and choose what emotions they feed off of- Madrigal, for example, is a member of House Raith that decided to feed on terror because he gets off on it. And Thomas proves that they can... 'diet'? if they so choose.
They aren't really much different from Humans, psychologically speaking (which makes sense, because they were human until they hit mid teen-early adult years).
--- End quote ---
that's up for debate... Thomas did not choose how he ate. He didn't choose to kill his first victim when his demon took over. Raith's daughter didn't have control when her demon was driving her to feed on Harry.. How, and why the families feeding habits changed is up for debate. You will notice that in the different families they all feed the same way. It's not like any of Raith's children feed on fear, they all feed on lust, just as in the other families they all feed on a specific emotion. That's evidence the demon specifically has a feeding preference, and not the mortal person.
Thomas's "diet" is like a constant never ending drug addiction. So the "evil" they do is still evil but they are being pushed every moment towards it. Free will is technically there but not much. They do have to feed no matter what though, or they go insane. So they cannot stop eating entirely, they will do it to some extent.
Evil? yes. More evil than different people in the Dresdenverse who do evil, and have more free will? I don't think so.
wardenferry419:
--- Quote from: Ananda on December 02, 2017, 07:31:55 AM ---Thanks and sure.
It is a term that is generally meant to refer to some behaviour considered to be anti-social to the person describing it, but also carries some sort of morality judgment. But, what that is differs from person to person and doesn't even exist outside a person's head. Sort of like beauty; both are just concepts that require a perceiver and subjective discernment. Further, though, "evil" tends to be tied with a belief structure whereas "beauty" doesn't.
Sorry, that was a long answer and maybe not very satisfying, but it's an easy term for people to toss around, but it doesn't hold much meaning in itself.
Anyway, I stick with my answers:
Outsiders are objectively the most destructive.
Genoskwa (or whatever) is the character I think Dresden reacted to the most.
--- End quote ---
It seems that you believe "evil" to be a subjective idea that varies from person to person based on perspective. And, while I believe that has elements of being true; I don't believe it to be the whole truth. I feel that "evil" has some objective qualities that are widely accepted as elements of "evil." I would say that it requires a cognitive being that understands these widely-held acts of good (like forgiveness) and evil (like murder); who then chooses for personal reasons to perform acts of the latter over the former could be defined as evil. I can, also, believe that the repetition, frequency, and scale that these universally accepted evil acts occur is indicative of that person's depth of evil. I can, also, believe that the positive or negative intentions of performing the acts are a factor as to whether the person is good or evil. Finally, the last indicator of whether a person is considered good or evil involves the historical and contemporary context of that person's actions, basically, the winners write history.
exartiem:
I think it is impossible to come to a consensus on the most evil because everyone's feelings on what 'evil' is is different. For me, one should consider themselves evil. Most people we think of as evil see themselves as good or justified. Nicodemus thinks he is saving the world or making it a better place. Beings like Dracul are just looking out for themselves, which they see as the right thing to do. The Outsiders even are destroying reality because they think it is the right thing to do.
Shagnasty is the one, I think, that actually takes pleasure from the suffering of others, from acts that it knows are evil.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version