[POLL] Company good/Adam bad, Adam good/Company bad [Archive]

Super Rocky

11-05-2007, 09:49 PM

I think the company is caught inbetween. Bob seems to be in charge and bad right now, but with the amount of morals Mohinder brings to the table it has been making him better but Mohinder worse at the same time. Kind of balancing each other out.

Mello Penelo

11-05-2007, 09:51 PM

Well, Bob did say in it's history, The Company has gone through a lot of directors who push their own agendas while in charge. Thompson was bad and his administration aversely effected The Company itself. Now Bob is in charge-- he's cleaning up Thompson's mess.

gunste1n

11-05-2007, 09:54 PM

Well if Kensei/adam has lived with hate hundreds of years I doubt anything good can reach through to him........

Mello Penelo

11-05-2007, 09:57 PM

I bet you Hiro is the reason Adam is a bad person in the future.

Son of Kal-El20

11-05-2007, 11:19 PM

I think the Company and Adam are bad. Noah is looking pretty bad too.

slayer

11-06-2007, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
The Company is good. Adam is bad. HRG is bad too.

no way! hrg is just doing right by his family.
the company may have changed, i'll give 'em that, but adam...pure evil

STFanatic

11-06-2007, 12:38 AM

IDK, someone who can pull a trigger without a second thought is right up there on the top of the list for pretty darn wicked bad.
Last season and the first part of this one I really liked the character, but now... maybe not.

Sweetie

11-06-2007, 07:42 AM

Adam is bad,the compagny is bad too.I don't trust Bob at all.I think he is a good lier.They used the heroes's powers for evil purposes.See what they said to Nikki..We are going to cure you if you do us favors and they are doing this with everyone.Now,they want Claire...I understand Noah for wanting to protect her without hesitation.

JudasAce

11-06-2007, 02:28 PM

Everyone's bad.

Except Matt and Molly!

Barogrei

11-06-2007, 02:41 PM

I wouldn't say that Matt is unconditionally good. We saw in the alternate future that he was willing to persecute people with powers, many of which may have been innocent, as a means to ensuring the safety of the masses. I'd say Mohinder Suresh or Hiro Nakamura are pretty good moral compasses of the show myself. All of the other characters seem to have been compromised by some situation or another or have made many suspect decisions. I think that if Hiro or Mohinder made mistakes, they were mistakes of prudence, and generally not of a moral nature. I don't trust the company, at this point, and I trust Adam and whoever he's working with even less. I think that it will be up to individual heroes, such as Peter Petrelli and Hiro Nakamura, to help man elude this horrible future, and that many of these constructed allegiances will either fail to stop it, or, perhaps, with Adam and whoever is helping him, help to facilitate mankind's doom.

JudasAce

11-06-2007, 02:59 PM

Mohinder is so morally confused and compromised that he doesn't know which way is up. And Hiro puts the fate of the world in jeopardy every time he pops a stiff one (See his abandoning his quest to save Claire in Season 1 to chase after Charlie and now risking the entire timeline to get his mack on with the princess)

Future Matt, who didn't have the bond with Molly and hadn't overcome his father may not have been totally in the right, but most of the characters in that timeline were morally grey at best.

Barogrei

11-06-2007, 03:10 PM

I'm not entirely sure how well I remember that timeline, but, from what I recall, Mohinder was one of the uncompromised ones. His working under Sylar was a result of his honest ignorance, and when he discovered that "Nathan Petrelli" had a plan to commit genocide against the "heroes", he was staunchly opposed to this. Mohinder acts as a moral compass because he often refuses to do something that violates one person, even if others believe it is of the greatest utility. Eventually, at the end of the episode, he disobeys his orders and frees the Hiro from the past, recognizing the importance of him being able to return to his own time. I think the reason you consider Mohinder to be so confused or whatever is because he is more hesitant to go into grey areas than alot of the other characters. His misgivings with even commiting the lesser of two evils, in alot of cases, is a sensitivity which gives him moral strength, not weakness.

flying_girl

11-06-2007, 04:22 PM

molly, micha, and micha's cousin, and peter with his memory are all good.

gategod

11-06-2007, 04:27 PM

I'll go with Adam good/company bad because BOB is no way in hell good, Mohinder is just stupid for trusting him. Bob could be lieing about Adam for all we know, Kensei may not even be adam and just says he is. Adam doesn't seem all that bad to me :p

Barogrei

11-06-2007, 05:56 PM

Micah was more than happy to go with the illusionist and destroy the voting system (so that Nathan Petrelli would win), when it was in his interest to do so. Also, Micah had no qualms with using his power to take money from the ATM. Although we may not hold Micah as responsible for some of the things he does due to his younger age, I believe that he has the potential to use his powers very irresponsibly, if he thinks it's in his interest. Although I don't find Micah reprehensible, I wouldn't necessarily call him unconditionally good, either.

KryptonzGirl

11-06-2007, 06:03 PM

Adam is Bad..but I'm not so sure on the company yet..people like HRG could just be making it seem they are bad. So I'm not completely sure..

thedarknight

11-06-2007, 08:38 PM

Both are bad, how is the company good when they keep sylar alive?

pycer

11-06-2007, 09:15 PM

HRG is in the realm of good in my book. I'm a father with a little girl myself, and as I have stated before, if its required to keep my children and family safe, every single person on the face of the planet is expendable.

As far as the topic of the thread is concerned, however, right now im going with both bad, with the possibility the company, or parts of it, may be trying to move towards good.

flying_girl

11-06-2007, 10:11 PM

Barogrei your right so scratch micah from the list. hrg is defintly not good. he joined the company and did things for them long before he ever felt anything fatherly for claire. he might now be doing things for claire but up until he got his glasses he didnt let himself get close enough to her to care. hrg cant be used as a moral compass. im not saying he is evil i just wouldnt call him moral or ethical.

Mischael12

11-07-2007, 12:58 PM

I find him far from moral or ethic, but at the same time its one of those things that as long as your family is not involved your willing to do anything, but once family is put into it well thats a different story.

Oh and adam...more than likely bad remember the promise he made to Hiro in the end?

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 01:06 PM

Well, I don't think that the fact that Noah Bennet justifies many of his actions in the name of protecting his family, and namely Claire, grants him the carte blanc as far as what is morally permissible for him to do. Although it is human and understandable to allow our sentiment for particular individuals to be overwhelming, I think that there could be situations in which the right thing to do would be to disregard that sentiment you have for particular people. For example if, in order to keep Claire perfectly safe, Noah had to kill 10 innocent people, I don't care what paternal instinct would motivate those murders they still would be impermissible. Pycer (sorry if I mispelled your name) said earlier that, if his daughter was in danger, any human lives would be dispensable in order to facilitate her surviving. But would you seriously kill hundreds or even thousands of innocent people in order to achieve this end? Would that even be what your daughter would want?

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:09 PM

Whether or not she would want it would be irrelevant, really, and to answer your first question would I seriously do it-yes, without a second thought. Now, I think HRG is doing the whole secrecy thing once more just for that reason, he knows he has to go pretty far to keep them safe and Claire and the rest of the family wouldn't be okay with it.

Mischael12

11-07-2007, 01:13 PM

Its that thin line really how far do you go to protect someone you care about.

If someone was threatening someone you were close to would you not do all you can to eliminate that threat? What is going on does not just affect the company taking Claire but it also effects his entire family as well it would cause a break down of the family.

Again is he morally or ethically covered hell to the no but i don't judge him for it.

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 01:15 PM

You believe the interests of the person of your affection are irrelevant? I would like to believe that if someone cared about me personally that they would at least take into consideration what I would have wanted if acting in my "interests." I think the moral permissibility of Noah's killing Ivan rests on how much risk Claire and his family would have been in if he had done any other action. If Noah could have used the Haitian to somehow formulate Ivan (not that this is perfectly ethical either) that there would be minimal risk to his family, I think that would have been the route to go. Unless Ivan was a risk to many other people in addition to Claire, and killing him achieved a much greater cause than protecting his daughter, which may very well be true.

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:17 PM

Yes, safety first, desires second. So once her safety is secured, than I can address her desires, but if there is a conflict between what she wants and what keeps her safe, safety wins out.

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 01:20 PM

Yes, but if you were in a situation where keeping her safe, or even alive came into conflict clearly with what she would want, her safety would trump? Say if a villain took 10 of her friends and her, and said that either her 10 friends would die, or she? Your daughter is screaming at you to save the lives of her 10 friends, and take the latter option. I think that part of loving someone is your sentiment for them and their safety, but another part is respect for what they themselves want. You would, without hesitation, sacrifice innocent people, even when your daughter was begging you not to do so, in order to save her?

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:21 PM

Your damn straight.

Mischael12

11-07-2007, 01:22 PM

That is true it is, but in the case of Claire in which she is clearly a child, you are the one who has to take the matters for yourself.

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 01:27 PM

I would not say at all that Claire at this point is a child, she probably qualifies as an adolescent. And even if you do consider her a "child", she still, at this point, is very capable of having her own values. And if she would not want her father to go around the world killing everyone and anyone (including the very innocent Molly), in order to maximize her safety, I think that Noah ought to consider this. I don't think love is limited to your desire for them to live, but an honest respect for what they would want. If I love someone, I respect their desires, and I do not simply have a compulsion for their safety. Would we keep our loved ones in a perfectly secure fortress in the sky, if they wanted to be free and to know the world?

flying_girl

11-07-2007, 01:30 PM

i didnt have a problem with him killing ivan, the guy was a murderer, he taught hrg how to kill without feeling anything. killing ivan didnt just save claire it saved alot more. if ivan were caught and an american citizen he would of been up for the death sentence.

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:38 PM

All I can say, Borogrei, is wait till your a parent, then you will understand.

flying_girl

11-07-2007, 01:41 PM

pycer, how old is your daughter? just curious, you dont have to answer if you dont want to.

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:42 PM

3 and a half :)

flying_girl

11-07-2007, 01:51 PM

cute, but would you travel halfway across the world to kill someone you think might be a danger to your daughter? if need be i might shoot someone or bean them with a bat who was trying to hurt my family but i would not travel somewhere to go hurt them.

pycer

11-07-2007, 01:55 PM

In this situation, something Ivan was doing/was going to do/ whatever would a threat, even though he would be staying far away. Now, because I ain't rich, I wouldn't really have the option to fly across the world to take care of it, instead I would basically be forced to sit in wait for whoever/whatever he sent to show and take em out one at a time, but had the freedom to take him out first and save the trouble, of course I would.

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 01:59 PM

I guess there's something to be said, in the instance of a 3 and a half year old, who doesn't necessarily understand all of what was going on, and would be incapable of making decisions regarding her safety. But with Claire, I would at least hope that Noah would hesitate to pull the trigger if she told him that it isn't what she wants, especially if it was pertaining to someone who was innocent, like Molly.

flying_girl

11-07-2007, 01:59 PM

which brings up an intresting question. how could hrg afford to fly to russia to kill ivan. he worked at a copy king and he no longer worked for the company and the haitan doesnt have a job anymore.

pycer

11-07-2007, 02:01 PM

He did hesitate with Molly, hence shes still alive.

And good point, Flying girl, maybe has like a rainy day 'go bust some caps' fund somewhere...

Barogrei

11-07-2007, 02:02 PM

I'm surprised you don't yourself, :)

pycer

11-07-2007, 02:03 PM

lol, if I could afford it I probably would!

flying_girl

11-07-2007, 02:05 PM

pycer, i'd think he would have used his rainy day money on getting his family a new id. i hear that can get very expensive

pycer

11-07-2007, 02:06 PM

One would think...maybe had a regular rainy day one, then like a really bad thunderstorm one :)

JudasAce

11-07-2007, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by pycer
HRG is in the realm of good in my book. I'm a father with a little girl myself, and as I have stated before, if its required to keep my children and family safe, every single person on the face of the planet is expendable.

I think you're saying that if there were people directly threatening your daughter, then they're expendable. Out of curiosity, given the current situation on the show, if the only way to save billions of people was to let your daughter die, would you let them die or would you sacrifice your kid?