Are Second Generation Chaos Astartes "Evil"?

[Volt]

Although I am a moral and existential Nihilist, just going off the current modern perception of morality in the West, which would qualify all Chaos Space Marines as "evil", I was wondering though. Going off how those that are not mentally able to take responsibility for their actions, are those Chaos Astartes created by Chaos Astartes, IE second, third, etc generations made from the slaves and serfs owned by the various Chaos Warbands, actually evil? Or rather, able to take responsibility for their actions? Unlike their "fathers" from the Horus Heresy, these new generations know nothing but Chaos, and have been both utterly brainwashed into their current state of mind, and never could pursue any other course of action because of it. Unlike the Veterans of the Long War, those that know that they can be better, these new generations have been subject to the constant brainwashing of their elders, and much like the Hitler Youth don't know better.

 

So could you actually call the new generations of Chaos Space Marines "evil" per say, as they really don't seem to know better, or have any ability to take responsibility for their actions? Especially for possessed or the heavily mutated.

[Tiberius Cato]

Well, they could denounce the chaos gods and simply live as renegades and fight against chaos. But their chances of survival would be low, extremely low. Even if the don't want they life, it's one they have to live for the best chance of survival. So they may just go with the flow. But eventually, acting like a monster to appease monsters results in, well, becoming a monster.

 

So, yes. They are evil, not but choice.

[Slips]

As ArcticPaladin said but also because, even if they recanted and actively fought Chaos, the Imperium would still put a bolt shell in their heads just 'cuz they aren't Imperial Astartes. Not to mention those that truly follow Chaos would also want them dead.

[*Furyou Miko]

This is more of a philosophy debate than anything else. The question you're really asking is "Is it evil if you don't know any better?"

 

Which I would answer: yes, because evil as a moral label only works if it is applies universally, and redemption by an outside force is a possibility.

 

In 40k, redemption comes at the end of a gun.

[Machine God]

YES they are Evil!!!

 

End of.

 

Although This is Grimdark.

 

The Imperium are not Good either!!!

[Volt]

This is more of a philosophy debate than anything else. The question you're really asking is "Is it evil if you don't know any better?"

 

Which I would answer: yes, because evil as a moral label only works if it is applies universally, and redemption by an outside force is a possibility.

 

In 40k, redemption comes at the end of a gun.

 

So Schizophreniacs are evil? North Koreans are evil? The children of the Hitler Youth were evil? Or just anyone and everyone suffering from violent insanity is evil?

[*Furyou Miko]

All of those examples are capable of learning to either A) control their violent impulses, or B ) discover another way to behave, so... yes.

[Hellios]

 

This is more of a philosophy debate than anything else. The question you're really asking is "Is it evil if you don't know any better?"

 

Which I would answer: yes, because evil as a moral label only works if it is applies universally, and redemption by an outside force is a possibility.

 

In 40k, redemption comes at the end of a gun.

 

So Schizophreniacs are evil? North Koreans are evil? The children of the Hitler Youth were evil? Or just anyone and everyone suffering from violent insanity is evil?

 

 

I'd say no, why is a North Korean farmer evil?

 

But the vast majority of people are bad.

 

As for the Chaos Marines being evil... I'm sure some are, but others probably aren't; in fact they are the victims of evil.

[Volt]

All of those examples are capable of learning to either A) control their violent impulses, or B ) discover another way to behave, so... yes.

Without medical aid the insane are incapable of maintaining themselves- as a firebombing in my home city proved quite clearly just a couple years ago. But however, none of those parties can be held truly responsible for their actions, as they were neither in control of their development as children or as adults if influenced by another party, or if insane, well, cannot even be held accountable in a court of law.

 

Brainwashing however completely removes any and all freedomn of will in somebody and permanently wrecks their mind, which North Korea especially is testament to as the civilians there believe that their Dear Leader is an actual god incarnate and can hear every thought in their head, and thus believe that any attempts to put down dissdents are justified thanks to the propaganda endlessly stuffed down their throats. Astartes however, both traitor and loyalist, are so utterly brainwashed that the person they were before the exaltation to demigod-hood are dead for all intents and purposes, as their minds are altered completely beyond the state of a human by a combination of physical implantation/augmentation and hypnotherapy.

[*Furyou Miko]

Evil is an adjective, not a noun. Actions are evil. People who commit evil acts are evil by the actions they commit, not by some miracle of reasoning.

[Dosjetka]

Please keep direct real-world politcal references out of this discussion. They have no place here, as per the B&C rules.

[Hellios]

Evil is an adjective, not a noun. Actions are evil. People who commit evil acts are evil by the actions they commit, not by some miracle of reasoning.

 

Like many words in the English language, it can be used in different ways. Evil can be used as a noun, an adjective, and an adverb. And that is all fairly standard, if we take none standard English into account it is possible that evil has been used in other ways. Certainly, there is, at the very least, a modified form of evil that is used a verb.

[GodEmperorOfMankind]

Read Dead Sky, Black Sun, by Graham Mcneill, the issue is kinda dealt with there

 

 

 In it, the creation of chaos aspirants sometimes results in failed mutants that get flushed away, these are called the unfleshed. The unfleshed make an existence for themselves underground, and worship the Emperor as a divine being, ultimately helping Varro Tigurius storm the Iron Warriors fortress, and Varro comes to realise they are not evil  

 

[Visitor13]

They damn well should be, as should loyalist Astartes. Only the latter should have more elaborate excuses.

 

Down with mutant loving, guardsman hugging, cuddly Space Marines of all kinds. Well, except the Death Guard.

[Vesper]

Although I am a moral and existential Nihilist, just going off the current modern perception of morality in the West, which would qualify all Chaos Space Marines as "evil", I was wondering though.

Technically, they wouldn't. It would depend on the agendas of those who get to talk about them. They could be presented as brave freedom fighters, or the ultimate EVUL terrorist threat. That perception could shift at will, depending the evolution of the situation. They would even be armed and trained by the West to do nasty things the West can't do but really wants to see happen.

That's how the West works these days.

[Uprising]

I really dislike the term evil, for it does not exists, only shades of grey existed, IMO. 

 

I say they live with the hand they are given because they have nothing else, and base their decisions on their environment they grew up with.  Morality is of little concern, because they are doing the right thing, and their purpose of life. 

[incinerator950]

Well with how GW has been re-rolling the imps and chaos into distinctive moral alignments, it's unofficially evil.

[Bryan Blaire]

Really, the question should be "Can anyone in Warhammer 40K actually be judged as good when looked at from all angles?"

 

To me, the answer to that question is a resounding "No". Which is as it should be.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Good and Evil are inherently religious judgments, invoking concepts of opposing divine alignment as the basis for one's actions.  Right and Wrong on the other hand are moral judgments, based entirely on a person's (or a society's) general codes of conduct.  So are Chaos Space Marines evil, regardless of generation?  They fight for Chaos, a divine force driven by the need to dominate and destroy, so yes.  However judgments of right and wrong depend entirely on Legion/Chapter of origin and the reasons for why they turned.  Angron is a good example; he is a servant of Khorne and thus is evil.  However, by the standards of him and his Legion, he is righteous because he turned to Chaos specifically to pull down a man he viewed as an unforgiven tyrant and thus he's doing the universe a favor.  Obviously by the Imperium's view, he's in the wrong because the Emperor is the shining light of what good is left in the universe and if he dies, Very Bad Things Might Happen.

[the jeske]

Wait wait wait. Rebelion against the legal goverment per see makes you automaticly evil. So they are bad from both moral and religious point of view. Although how in the west it is judged maybe different. WE or 1ksons are more or less lobotomised.

[ElectricPaladin]

I think this conversation is pretty doomed from the start. I mean, I just don't see the OP's point. "I don't believe that this thing exists, but let's talk about whether or not it's present here" is really not a great way to open up a debate.

 

The real problem is in defining evil. There are probably three times as many definitions of evil as there are people engaged in the conversation!

 

Some people define evil as unnecessary cruely and aggression, in which case most Chaos Marines are certainly evil, because whatever their motivations, they certainly perpetrate unnecessary acts of violence and aggression against mortals; however, other Chaos Marines are not, because they simply pursue their agenda - usually the conquest of Terra - and don't waste time torturing innocents outside of that agenda.

 

Alternately, you could define evil in a more metaphysical, Tolkien-esque way. Evil is the spiritual condition of being twisted up, your mind turned into self-defeating patterns. By this, admittedly rather "woo-woo," definition, the Chaos Space Marines are certainly evil. Their stated goal is to survive forever in glorious bloodshed and/or conquer Terra and bring about the human golden age Horus was too weak to achieve... but their actions will, in fact, lead to the degradation and destruction of humanity and, eventually, themselves.

 

Or you could say that evil is knowing the right thing to do and choosing the wrong thing. By this definition, some Chaos Marines are evil, while others are not because - as the OP pointed out - their freedom of choice was stolen from them by brainwashing.

 

Personally, I try to avoid any interpretation of Space Marines that removes their free will, because that would suck all the fun out of them, for me.

 

Additionally, I don't really find "evil" to be a terribly interesting concept. I like playing loyal (well, in my case, loyal but Renegade) Space Marines because I enjoy the aesthetic of the heroic last stand. The malignant, self-defeating awfulness of Chaos does not appeal to me - but, you know, whatever floats your boat. I don't think that the question of "good" or "evil" is terribly interesting. Although I wouldn't describe myself as a "nihilist," I certainly don't believe that "good" or "evil" exist as abstract ideas that real things approach, in the same way that "square" or "blue" are actual concepts that can be described mathematically, which real things can be, to varying degrees.

[Sheesh Mode]

Good and evil exist. To say good and evil don't exist is to deny the purposeful act of causing suffering - and potentially death - for selfish reasons. More importantly it is to deny the existence of selfless action, which is in itself intrinsically love. Incapability of controlling one's self does not preclude them from committing evil acts, they themselves may not necessarily be evil but their actions certainly are. Furthermore, a person's actions come to define and create them - lack of control or not - they will inevitably become what they do. 

 

Most of the confusion surrounding the definitions of Good and Evil can be pin pointed to a misunderstanding of Free Will. Free will is not a constant state, most things we do are predetermined due to habit, environment, and general nature. We have a very small series of opportunities each day to make decisions. Exercise, meditation, and general healthy living make a large difference between how much control we have over ourselves and our environment each day. 

 

Most of you are going to disagree with me. That is understandable, it's a strange concept that the variety of decisions we make on a daily basis are barely that. The daily process we take to get up in the morning, whether it is almost identical on a daily basis or has rough similarities, it is what we do right before we 'proceed' that makes the difference. For example: I just went out partying last night. I am now exhausted. When I woke up this morning at home (after a long process of finally getting here from a hotel) I had a variety of decisions in that moment because I had not acted on anything yet. I chose to get up and eat some food and talk to family, after that I was faced with the decision of going back to sleep or going on the laptop. 

 

If I had not gone on the laptop I would not be typing this post. It simply would not have happened. It is something I have done almost every time I have gone on the laptop. Furthermore I would not be having this conversation with you fine people or friend over skype. 

 

Now some of you will say: "Well this is just habit, that's how habits work and habits can be changed or replaced." Exactly. 

[ElectricPaladin]

Context: my two favorite philosophers are Camus and Spinoza, and I'm pretty fond of Kant. I don't really see much evidence - in the world of evidence - of the intrinsic meaning or value of anything. However, I do believe that as the only meaning-making machines out there, we (ie. humans) have the power to assign value to whatever we like. When we do this together, building a consensus, it's called "culture." However, none of these things are real. They don't exist in the same way that shapes, colors, sizes, weights, mass, natural laws, and the like, exist. You will never show me a bucket full of "evil," but you can show me the math that proves what stars are made of or the fossil record that shows how we came to evolve to our current shape.

 

So I suppose, in the end, your definition of evil as as good as any other, ultimately subjective idea of what constitutes "bad" and should be avoided and/or punished. That's fine. But while I use my life to create what I want to see in the world, while I tell stories about the things that I want to be real, I can only believe in what can be proven. 

[Emperors Immortals]

Wait wait wait. Rebelion against the legal goverment per see makes you automaticly evil. So they are bad from both moral and religious point of view. Although how in the west it is judged maybe different. WE or 1ksons are more or less lobotomised.

Now this is interesting, and coincidentally the basis of human domination under the Emperors reign. Since any who rebel against the Imperiums legal right to rule is declared heretical, and thus morally wrong (evil) and thus are segregated and destroyed in a galactic pogrom does it not stand to reason 2nd or 3rd gen CSM rebels who instead of promoting the imperiums downfall offer sanctuary and the chance to build a permissive empire are in fact not evil?

 

Had to type fast on a phone so please ask if anything not clear.

[Sheesh Mode]

Context: my two favorite philosophers are Camus and Spinoza, and I'm pretty fond of Kant. I don't really see much evidence - in the world of evidence - of the intrinsic meaning or value of anything. However, I do believe that as the only meaning-making machines out there, we (ie. humans) have the power to assign value to whatever we like. When we do this together, building a consensus, it's called "culture." However, none of these things are real. They don't exist in the same way that shapes, colors, sizes, weights, mass, natural laws, and the like, exist. You will never show me a bucket full of "evil," but you can show me the math that proves what stars are made of or the fossil record that shows how we came to evolve to our current shape.

 

So I suppose, in the end, your definition of evil as as good as any other, ultimately subjective idea of what constitutes "bad" and should be avoided and/or punished. That's fine. But while I use my life to create what I want to see in the world, while I tell stories about the things that I want to be real, I can only believe in what can be proven. 

 

Just because we cannot currently analyze or conceptualize evil on a mathematical scale does not mean it does not exist. However, the best way to determine whether or not something exists is by comparing it across cultures: do people from location X think event B is as terrible as people from location Y think event B is? How a society faces these challenges is not necessarily indicative of the 'evil' of a given action, some societies execute their rapists, others imprison them for a determined time. What is common between the two is the desire to stop the action from occurring again. Forms of punishment vary too much to make an effective basis for comparison. It would imply that certain aboriginal groups that do not confront people who commit wrong doing and evil acts in a punitive way, but instead in a familial and accepting way, actually do not hold those actions as negative.