TF Views

It is not that he has a greater respect for life that I equate with being lobotomized. It is the fact he is completely irrational about it.

I like animals, and have put effort into saving more than a few strays. But, if those strays were trying to kill me or my species, I would put far less effort into helping them. If Prowl is assuming, rightly, that humans would not recognize the difference between Autobots and Decepticons then he is foolish for breaking cover to help the little girl, especially after seeing how ruthlessly they would kill TFs given the chance.


Aside: Can anyone tell what kind of car Deadend is supposed to be? Dragstrip is based on the TFU toy. Breakdown is based on Sideswipe, ala the convention exclusive. Wildrider actually looks to be a recolor of Silverstreak. Deadend looks like he might be based on Sunstreaker, but I cannot tell.

I know that Prowl and Prime are trying for radical, and necessary change. But, Prowl's change from being a straight rationalist, (as seen in "Spotlight" Kup"), to the character seen in recent issues is abrupt. (As a rationalist, Prowl should have been fine with Thrust or Breakdown getting killed.)


Dom

You know, I think it's safe to assume that the humans didn't actually succeed in killing Thrust by burning down that building. Prowl just believed that's what happened. We did see Skywatch capture him in AHM #16.

Dominic wrote:It is not that he has a greater respect for life that I equate with being lobotomized. It is the fact he is completely irrational about it.

How? He's clearly been thinking about the problem for the eight months that he stays in vehicle mode and rides along with the police. He's applied his considerable analytical abilities and decided that there's more to life than just the numbers. I don't see anything irrational about his ultimate decision. He's putting a life ahead of his own life and his own safety, but police and firemen do that every day. Are they irrational? I wouldn't say so.

What Anderson said. He didn't come by this flipantly and has apparently been brewing about it for some time. Besides, the last line says it all. "50 billion human lives. 10000 Cybertronian lives. I would give mine for any of them" meaning that he would give his life to save another, be they human, Autobot or Decepticon.

Good call on Thrust. He might have been alive in issue 16.


Prowl's thougth process seems to be "I see humans, now I like them", which shows a huge amount immaturity on his part. Yes, I know that kind of thinking is common. (I have seen people decide they like dogs after years of disliking them after seeing them at a park.) It is like Prowl heard some typical platitudes and slogans....and took to them. Sanctity of life makes for nice bumper stickers, but is ridiculous as a matter of practical morality. (And, not all of the distinctions one could make need to involved tortured reasoning.)

Prowl is different from police and firemen in 2 very important ways. They primarily work to help their own species, (or even just constituents), and occasionally subordinated species (firemen pulling a family pet from a burning building). And, more importantly, they are not actively trying to help *hostile* parties, which is what Prowl did. TFs do not have any meaningful track record of working well with humans. (For example, I might one day have a pet wolverine or something. But, that does not make humans and wolverines as a species friends.) The little girl was endangered specifically because of horse-play by *other* people. Prowl had no moral obligation or practical reason to break cover, endangering himself and whatever plans Prime had, to save her.


I am interested in where Costa is going with this. But, that does not justify Prowl's actions in context.

Dom

I think a better analogy would be to one of us watching animals in the wild (if we're really going to compare TFs and Humans to humans and animals). You know what? I think that's a bad analogy. This would more like a team of researchers studying one of the more primitive tribes on this planet. Sure, the researchers would have better technology and would mostly be morally obligated not to use said technology to interefere with the tribe that they're studying. Now if they witness members of the tribe doing something that is wrong even to other members of the tribe, should they just stand by and watch? That makes them guilty as well. I'm sorry, but if one sentient being is in a position to stop another sentient being from doing something wrong, they have a moral obligation to do so, regardless of species. What really makes Prowl seem retarded is the fact that it takes him 8 months to realize this.

Shockwave
-Notes that Prowl's attempt to save Breakdown apparently isn't going to stop Breakdown from trying to kill Prowl as part of Menasor.

Dominic wrote:Prowl's thougth process seems to be "I see humans, now I like them",

It's nothing of the kind. You're over-simplifying greatly.

It is like Prowl heard some typical platitudes and slogans....and took to them.

He spent the better part of a year up close and personally watching policemen go out and risk their lives in appalling conditions to help strangers and try to maintain social order. Watching people under stress and hard times is perhaps the best way of seeing what their character is really made of, and that's exactly what Prowl saw. The best, most selfless behavior, petty crime (which he talks about with contempt) and the worst (at least one murder victim is shown). It's not a matter of platitudes, it's a matter of Prowl being in the trenches and experiencing what the police experienced and learning from it.

If he can't grow and change his views after that, I don't know what it would take.

Sanctity of life makes for nice bumper stickers, but is ridiculous as a matter of practical morality. (And, not all of the distinctions one could make need to involved tortured reasoning.)

Either life is inherently valuable because it's precious and irreplaceable, and without it we've got nothing at all, or it isn't. And if it isn't, and if life's value is based purely on situational ethics, then potentially anything goes. If sanctity of life is nothing but a slogan, then there's nothing wrong with murder.

The little girl was endangered specifically because of horse-play by *other* people. Prowl had no moral obligation or practical reason to break cover, endangering himself and whatever plans Prime had, to save her.

I don't get this at all. Are you saying Prowl would only have an obligation to help her if he had personally put her in danger?

I know Prowl had nearly a year to think about it. But, the comic just says "in the course of a year, this happened", rather than showing how or why. Normally, I forgive this sort of thing easily. But, I expect to see more of the process in a series that is supposed to be about innery change, learning and growth. If I had not been reading the main book, this one-shot would have made almost no sense.

And if it isn't, and if life's value is based purely on situational ethics, then potentially anything goes. If sanctity of life is nothing but a slogan, then there's nothing wrong with murder.

Is it really such a binary choice though? Life can have value. But, not all life will have the same value. Emergency responders make those sorts of decisions when using triage. (In that case, lives are valued by how easily saved they are.) We assign higher value to children than to adults.

To say that all life is precious at the same level in every situation devalues the human, (and in this case, Transformer), capacity for free will. I try not to hurt other people. I try to avoid eating animals whenever possible. I am a pacifist in terms of principle, in the sense that I think a stable peace would be nice. But, I am not a pacifist in that I see violence as a wrong unto itself.

What about warfare, or self defence, which often necessitate killing?


Dom
-to be continued.

Of course, the above gets away from Prowl's actions in the comic.

I don't get this at all. Are you saying Prowl would only have an obligation to help her if he had personally put her in danger?

He certainly would have had more of an obligation to help her had he been the one to endanger her.

This gets into Trekkie's question about interference. I suppose the purpose of the observation would at least partially determine the scale of obligation. Of course, the more ownership one takes for a problem, the more responsibility one bears for it.

As it is in the comic, Prowl twice puts the lives of non-Autobots, (the little girl as well as Breakdown), ahead of Autobot interests.

It's not a matter of platitudes, it's a matter of Prowl being in the trenches and experiencing what the police experienced and learning from it.

I am not saying that Prowl could never change. But, in this comic, (especially discounting the main book), it comes off as "Prowl gets a clyester of nice". This is the same guy who designed a propaganda machine using parts from a beloved old man. (I never said he was wrong to do this mind you.) And, now, he is taking an extremist view about the santity of life.


Dom
-is actually in class now.

Dominic wrote:This is the same guy who designed a propaganda machine using parts from a beloved old man.

This is probably my favorite way of describing what Prowl did in AHM. Thank you for that, Dom.

I think the main problem with this issue is that it's only one issue. Eight months of inner conflict and and change is a lot to cram into 22 pages. Like Dom already admitted, the end results are believable, it's just how they go about happening that comes off as forced, and that's more because of space constraints than anything else, as far as I can tell. Maybe if they'd spread this out over a couple issues, showing more experiences and a more gradual change for Prowl, it would've worked a bit better. Frankly, I'm fine with it personally, but I can see where people like Dom would take issue.