Are Second Generation Chaos Astartes "Evil"?

[Tenebris]

Technically speaking an adeptus astartes is effectively a geneforged killing machine whit most of his brain patterns rewired, tempered by a brutal conditioning and consequentially emptied of any emotions which are not of use in combat and with accentuated emotional switches such as anger, hatred, loyalty, devotion. All this is coupled to a genetically engineered body, with an advanced suit of nigh sentient power armor and enhanced by the dogma of the very faction who sponsored his creation.

 

In an Ultramarine killing a heretic considered evil?

 

In a Word Bearer killing a heretic considered evil?

 

No in both cases, for in both cases the tag " heretic" is decided prior the conflict by the very organization which sponsored the creation of the said marine and indoctrinated him. For all intents and purposes both marines are doing their duty. How can a marine form a "social awareness" when his life is constantly shaped by the very organization which created him, when the same organization is his entire life and most probably even the reason of his death. 

 

Stepping on the moral line between good and evil requires a certain sense for the society surrounding you, an understanding of the cause and effect in social interactions, especially with mortal beings. An interaction hard to grasp for a demigod in the first place, a social awareness based solely upon the indoctrination as a second. Hence to consider a second generation chaos space marine evil, or any marine evil, is moot, for the very object of this measurement is a creature which has very little of humanity or social construction left. 

[Conn Eremon]

 

 

 

 

One could say that the Heresy happened because the Space Marines were tools, in the hands of the Primarchs. Where it went wrong was that the Primarchs were not, and they had everything they needed to tear down what they had built.

But we still have many examples of Astartes turning in the "hands" that wielded them. Every legion had both loyalists and traitors, and in some of the legions (Dark Angels, for example), the split was nearly 50/50. That's pretty poor reliability for beings that are tools, not people.

Not necessarily. If we go with the idea that they were tools, then they have two, I don't know, "handlers." The fact that they flipflopped between the two doesn't necessarily say anything other than which was the dominant handler.

You make a very compelling point, but I should be honest - you would need to convince me that Astartes having no agency is the only valid interpretation before I would accept it because of the degree to which I think it would make for an incredibly boring story. Characters with limited free will are interesting - characters with no free will aren't characters.

I have no intention of convincing you of it being actually true, just saying that if one side is going to say that it could be true, then the Heresy's existence wouldn't necessarily disprove it in their eyes, as it could still fit in that perspective.

[Frater Cornelius]

Good and Evil are very ambiguous terms that vary from society to society. Before one can argue that an act is evil, we need a clear and objective definition of evil, which is not possible. It is always going to be subjective.

[Emperors Immortals]

Maybe instead of Good and Evil, we are referring to Lawful or Unlawful - as Tenebris, Furyo and several other have pointed out.

 

Thats what excites me most about the A D-B BlackLegion series - its giving us the legitimacy for our actions that we lacked before. Some may have seen it as a lack of higher motivation.

 

The Gods of Dev may yet smile on our faction.

[tdemayo]

Why bother with good vs evil or law vs chaos. The big division in 40k is obviously spikey races vs smooth races.

[Carrack]

Personally the only black and white race is tyranids. They are mere animals feeding themselves to survive. The other fractions are merely different shades of grey.

I know this topic has been beaten to death in other forums but I can't restrain myself.

 

First the individual Nids may not be sentiment, but the hive mind as a whole appears to have something approaching sentinence. Yet they still devour other sentiment beings and strip all life off of planets. It seems that with their level of sophistication they could develop farming or domestication of animals.

Secondly, genestealer cults retain at least some of the original humanity, the transformation may overwhelm their free will, but I seem to recall reading somewhere of an infected person at least having a moment of lucidity. (Sorry about the vague reference I don't have time to scour the books in my attic)

 

Thirdly, evil, if defined as acting outside of societal norms in a malicious way, occurs in the animal kingdom as well. Their are species of monogamous animals that mate for life, but a minority break their commitments regularly. Some Big cats occasionally maim other predators leaving them to starve when they have the opportunity for the kill. I know this point relies on a subjective view of morality, which I personally find flawed, but a natural morality or divine mandated morality is incongruous with the grim dark future.