Existential Comics | Website
Alt Text
“At the heart of Batman’s being, like all theater kids, is a boundless narcissism that eats away at his core.”
Explanation
Many versions of Batman have a strict “no killing” rule, which is exactly the kind of intuition the Trolley Problem is attacking. Why is it different to actively kill someone vs passively letting five people die? In particular, Batman’s version seems to be a sort of “honor code”, which something close to a moral system, but it is entirely inward looking. In other words, fulfilling the honor system doesn’t do good for the world, it elevates the status of the honorable man. In a sense it’s the worst possible way to answer a moral question, “I want to kill the five people because I personally would lose something (my honor)”.
Also its pretty showy to dress up as a bat. One might even call him a weirdo.
Transcript
8 Panel Comic
Panel 1: The Riddler stands at the lever explaining his setup of the classic Trolley Problem. Tied to one track are 5 people, and tied to the diverted track is 1 person. A trolley is prepared to mow down the 5 people unless the lever is pulled, diverting it to the path with one person.
Riddler: Alright Batman riddle me this. A trolley is moving down this track and is going to kill five people, but if you switch tracks it will only kill one, do you pull the lever?
Panel 2: Batman shakes his fist at the Riddler
Batman: Curse your implausible games, Riddler!
Panel 3: Batman hesitates in front of the lever, his hand shaking.
Batman: The right thing to do is save five people, but I have sworn to my code of ethics to never kill!
Panel 4: The Riddler exults in the devious dilemma delaying Batman’s decision.
Batman: I cannot do it! I cannot be the one to kill directly!
Riddler: Looks like the Batman has failed Philosophy 101! HAHAHAHAHA!
Panel 5: Batman watches as the trolley splatters 5 people across the track as the Riddler continues in his exultations.
Panel 6: Batman now sits in his Batcave as his Alfred arrives with his dinner on a covered tray.
Alfred: But what I don’t understand Sir, is how upholding your moral code can have more value than their lives?
Panel 7: Batman smoking a cigarette puts on his best grizzled and hard boiled face.
Batman: Because I’m a narcissist, Alfred. I value my own ego above everything, and I didn’t want to lose the “no killing” thing, because I like bragging about it. That’s all.
Panel 8: Alfred is shocked at Batman’s response.
Alfred: Really, I never thought so…
Batman: I dress up as a bat to fight crime. Of course I’m a narcissist. Your kind of a moron, Alfred, honestly.
Literally, why stop at the Joker? Other guys don't have as high of a kill count, but once The Joker Is dead, one of them is going to be the new kill leader. The exact same argument for killing the Joker also applies to whoever's in first place after he dies.
I think you are the one who misses the point. You and I know that the Joker will escape from Arkham and kill again, but Batman doesn't. Even if Gotham PD is extremely corrupt, even if it's possible for convicts to escape Arkham asylum, Batman has to believe that it is possible for justice to be served, because if he stops believing that then he'll become the most prolific mass murderer in history.
There is an ocean of difference between your average serial killer and the amount of people Joker has single-handedly killed. Every argument about morality of killing someone just doesn't work if you're arguing about the Joker.
And yes, Batman absolutely does know this. But he has personal issues that are so deeply fucked up he'll literally save Joker from death if someone else tries to do what he can't.
I will argue Batman is already a mass murderer, by virtue of not killing the Joker.
I love when y'all try to lemmysplain Batman to me, as if you've ever read any of the comics or watched any of the shows or movies or know anything about the character outside of these circlejerks on the internet. Next you're going to tell me that Bruce Wayne could do a lot better for Gotham if he simply opened up free medical clinics and homeless shelters and started jobs programs, right?
Its a legitimate complaint, but we are also talking about an 80+ yr old charector, so there are endless iterations of what could be right and what could be wrong for him to do, since hes done so much to so many.
Also, Gotham has an ancient unfathomable curse, so it can't ever be "good," no matter how much money Wanyetech pours into it.
Then again, maybe Superman boy can PUNCH FUCKING REALITY again and make every arguement irrelevant till they wrap around again.
Um. Yes. You know Batman the Animated Series?
Also watched Justice League Unlimited. Read some pretty good early 2000s comics. You have no idea who you're talking to.
Except Bruce Wayne is actually doing this. The Nolan movies don't show much of that, and neither the animated movies, but he is actually trying to buy up plots and build shelters, clinics, and schools.
Emphasis on "try", because the corruption goes so deep in Gotham there is a whole court of rich people with a vested interest in keeping Gotham the way it is.
You would know if you've read anything from batman outside of these "circlejerks on the Internet".
Clearly it's necessary.