What Makes A Character Considered "Grey" In Terms of Morality?

[Cicada 5]

I see this conversation pop up in light of Infinity War and Thanos' motivations in that film. Some consider him a morally complex, grey character others see him as a monster.

In your eyes, what makes a character be considered grey in terms of morality?

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

 

[Bobular]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

Half of the Universe being dead is way worse than anything Killmonger could or would do.

Happiness for all? No not in any sense of the word. Less than half of existence, literally.

 

[Bobular]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

Half of the Universe being dead is way worse than anything Killmonger could or would do.

Happiness for all? No not in any sense of the word. Less than half of existence, literally.

No, I doubt anyone is happy about the outcome, not even Thanos, but that was his goal. He thought that by killing half the universe that the remaining half would be better off and live happier lives.

Killmonger thought that when he wins blacks will be happy and whites wont. His plan was to show whites what its like to be the slaves.

Thanos thinks he's doing the right thing, he doesn't even seem to plan on ruling the universe now he's achieved his goal, he's content to sit back and relax in the knowledge that he did what he thought needed to be done. Killmonger is burning down a corrupt world to put up a different corrupt world in its place with him as king, his short term as Wakandan king shows he doen't even really care about the black people under his rule.

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

Half of the Universe being dead is way worse than anything Killmonger could or would do.

Happiness for all? No not in any sense of the word. Less than half of existence, literally.

No, I doubt anyone is happy about the outcome, not even Thanos, but that was his goal. He thought that by killing half the universe that the remaining half would be better off and live happier lives.

Killmonger thought that when he wins blacks will be happy and whites wont. His plan was to show whites what its like to be the slaves.

Thanos thinks he's doing the right thing, he doesn't even seem to plan on ruling the universe now he's achieved his goal, he's content to sit back and relax in the knowledge that he did what he thought needed to be done. Killmonger is burning down a corrupt world to put up a different corrupt world in its place with him as king, his short term as Wakandan king shows he doen't even really care about the black people under his rule.

See, killing literally half the universe ends any reason to 'see their side'. I cant even stand 15 million murders, let alone a number that humans cannot even quantify.

Making a (misguided) Karmic point about the evils of slavery is not even close to as bad as KILLING HALF THE UNIVERSE!

 

[Bobular]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

Half of the Universe being dead is way worse than anything Killmonger could or would do.

Happiness for all? No not in any sense of the word. Less than half of existence, literally.

No, I doubt anyone is happy about the outcome, not even Thanos, but that was his goal. He thought that by killing half the universe that the remaining half would be better off and live happier lives.

Killmonger thought that when he wins blacks will be happy and whites wont. His plan was to show whites what its like to be the slaves.

Thanos thinks he's doing the right thing, he doesn't even seem to plan on ruling the universe now he's achieved his goal, he's content to sit back and relax in the knowledge that he did what he thought needed to be done. Killmonger is burning down a corrupt world to put up a different corrupt world in its place with him as king, his short term as Wakandan king shows he doen't even really care about the black people under his rule.

See, killing literally half the universe ends any reason to 'see their side'. I cant even stand 15 million murders, let alone a number that humans cannot even quantify.

Making a (misguided) Karmic point about the evils of slavery is not even close to as bad as KILLING HALF THE UNIVERSE!

Its defiantly an evil act, but it was done with good intentions. I'm not saying he's a good guy, I'm saying he's better than the guy who wanted to do an evil act with evil intentions.

Its the difference between Hitler killing the Jews because he's racist and Nazi soldiers killing Jews because they were brainwashed into thinking Jews are the cause of all their problems. One is evil for evil reasons, the other is evil for (what they think is) good reasons, neither is good but one is clearly worse than the other.

The only point against Thanos is he succeeds in his evil act. If Black Panther had ended with Killmonger winning and Wakanden troops marching down the streets of America shooting white civilians and letting black looters take everything from white families as other white families are rounded up and sent off to work camps I don't think Killmonger would have the support he does from fans.

 

[Elijin]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

That's... baffling. Killgrave watched inequality around the world and wanted to answer it by flipping the script and being the oppressors instead of the oppressed. Thanos watched a literal world burn itself out due to overpopulation, erasing its future and went 'Hey, I dont think people want to have no future.'


Like, his plan is dumb, and lacks any level of sense, since population levels arent a constant. Not every planet needs a wipe, hell lots of them probably got pushed below viable levels and actually died off. But, his intent was at least to prevent what he had been through, not simply be on the better side of it.

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

Whilst Killmonger had a point about racial problems being a problem world wide and Wakanda having tools to help, his solution was to violently overthrow the rest of the world and have blacks dominating whites rather than any sort of actual equality. In the end the world will be just as bad, if not worse, just with the roles reversed.

Thanos is kind of the opposite, he sees a problem where there is none but his end goal is happiness for all. So whilst his reasoning is wrong and his methods monstrous his end goal is good and to me that makes Thanos a more grey character than Killmonger.

Half of the Universe being dead is way worse than anything Killmonger could or would do.

Happiness for all? No not in any sense of the word. Less than half of existence, literally.

No, I doubt anyone is happy about the outcome, not even Thanos, but that was his goal. He thought that by killing half the universe that the remaining half would be better off and live happier lives.

Killmonger thought that when he wins blacks will be happy and whites wont. His plan was to show whites what its like to be the slaves.

Thanos thinks he's doing the right thing, he doesn't even seem to plan on ruling the universe now he's achieved his goal, he's content to sit back and relax in the knowledge that he did what he thought needed to be done. Killmonger is burning down a corrupt world to put up a different corrupt world in its place with him as king, his short term as Wakandan king shows he doen't even really care about the black people under his rule.

See, killing literally half the universe ends any reason to 'see their side'. I cant even stand 15 million murders, let alone a number that humans cannot even quantify.

Making a (misguided) Karmic point about the evils of slavery is not even close to as bad as KILLING HALF THE UNIVERSE!

Its defiantly an evil act, but it was done with good intentions. I'm not saying he's a good guy, I'm saying he's better than the guy who wanted to do an evil act with evil intentions.

Its the difference between Hitler killing the Jews because he's racist and Nazi soldiers killing Jews because they were brainwashed into thinking Jews are the cause of all their problems. One is evil for evil reasons, the other is evil for (what they think is) good reasons, neither is good but one is clearly worse than the other.

The only point against Thanos is he succeeds in his evil act. If Black Panther had ended with Killmonger winning and Wakanden troops marching down the streets of America shooting white civilians and letting black looters take everything from white families as other white families are rounded up and sent off to work camps I don't think Killmonger would have the support he does from fans.

At best and I use that word lightly, he is equal to Killmonger. Either way they are intentionally condemning a ton of people (again, use word ton lightly) for the sake of others. Just because Thanos is 'random' about it, doesnt make him more morally understandable.

I am not supporting any of them, I am just opposing Thanos more. If Thanos wants to kill a bunch of people to save resources, why not target ya know, bad people?

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

That's... baffling. Killgrave watched inequality around the world and wanted to answer it by flipping the script and being the oppressors instead of the oppressed. Thanos watched a literal world burn itself out due to overpopulation, erasing its future and went 'Hey, I dont think people want to have no future.'


Like, his plan is dumb, and lacks any level of sense, since population levels arent a constant. Not every planet needs a wipe, hell lots of them probably got pushed below viable levels and actually died off. But, his intent was at least to prevent what he had been through, not simply be on the better side of it.

It is far more reasonable to want to see oppressors get what they deserve than to randomly murder HALF THE UNIVERSE!

 

[Elijin]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

That's... baffling. Killgrave watched inequality around the world and wanted to answer it by flipping the script and being the oppressors instead of the oppressed. Thanos watched a literal world burn itself out due to overpopulation, erasing its future and went 'Hey, I dont think people want to have no future.'


Like, his plan is dumb, and lacks any level of sense, since population levels arent a constant. Not every planet needs a wipe, hell lots of them probably got pushed below viable levels and actually died off. But, his intent was at least to prevent what he had been through, not simply be on the better side of it.

It is far more reasonable to want to see oppressors get what they deserve than to randomly murder HALF THE UNIVERSE!

Your personal bias is disallowing you to see the point, that's fine.

Killgrave wanted to match oppression by....being the oppressor.
Thanos wanted to match extinction by losing lives now to ensure there was a future for the universe.

Both are stupid, both are 'I know what's best for everyone'. But Killgrave wanted power. Wanted to kick the man, and show them what a better 'the man' he could be. Thanos wanted to ensure the ongoing survival of the universe. Even though his world was already too far gone.

The 'grey area' is pointless if you're gonna say 'murder is bad and he did a bunch of it, mkay?'

 

[Saelune]

Oh, Thanos is evil, no doubt. He THINKS he is True Neutral (or maybe even Neutral Good...), but he is Lawful Evil to a T.

Now, Killgrave from Black Panther was morally gray. Like, I just wanted T'Challa to be like "Cool your horses, let us actually work together to implement your ideas, cause they aren't so bad, maybe just less use of weapons?"

Basically if you can say "Well, I see their point...but..."

(And seriously, with all the power having all the stones gives him, he could clearly fix the resource issues without mass genocide so big that 'mass genocide' is underselling it.)

That's... baffling. Killgrave watched inequality around the world and wanted to answer it by flipping the script and being the oppressors instead of the oppressed. Thanos watched a literal world burn itself out due to overpopulation, erasing its future and went 'Hey, I dont think people want to have no future.'


Like, his plan is dumb, and lacks any level of sense, since population levels arent a constant. Not every planet needs a wipe, hell lots of them probably got pushed below viable levels and actually died off. But, his intent was at least to prevent what he had been through, not simply be on the better side of it.

It is far more reasonable to want to see oppressors get what they deserve than to randomly murder HALF THE UNIVERSE!

Your personal bias is disallowing you to see the point, that's fine.

Killgrave wanted to match oppression by....being the oppressor.
Thanos wanted to match extinction by losing lives now to ensure there was a future for the universe.

Both are stupid, both are 'I know what's best for everyone'. But Killgrave wanted power. Wanted to kick the man, and show them what a better 'the man' he could be. Thanos wanted to ensure the ongoing survival of the universe. Even though his world was already too far gone.

The 'grey area' is pointless if you're gonna say 'murder is bad and he did a bunch of it, mkay?'

My personal bias is I am not a robot. Killing indiscriminately is worse than having a reason why they kill a specific person. Just like there is a difference between a person killing someone for wronging them versus killing someone cause they were there.

 

[Elijin]

My personal bias is I am not a robot. Killing indiscriminately is worse than having a reason why they kill a specific person. Just like there is a difference between a person killing someone for wronging them versus killing someone cause they were there.

No, your personal bias is 'killing is wrong and there is never any grey area'.

If Thanos and Killgrave were on a boat lost at sea, Killgrave would be calling for a mutiny, while Thanos would be considering how many lives need to be sacrificed for as many as possible to make it out alive.

Thanos is a monster, and his plan lacks any complexity and is really short sighted. But its a plan about survival on a macro scale, with no real gain for him.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Moral greyness doesn't really exist, it's just something evil people use to avoid admitting theyre truly evil.

Thanos has the ultimate power of the universe, and instead of using it to make more planets or infinite resources, he kills half of everyone. He's not only evil, hes stupid and the whole "save people from themselves" is just a weak excuse.

Same with Killmonger. His plan was to overthrow the world, install a brutal monarchy, and kill the children of anyone who resisted. Hes just a hotter, black version of Emperor Palpatine.

 

[Saelune]

My personal bias is I am not a robot. Killing indiscriminately is worse than having a reason why they kill a specific person. Just like there is a difference between a person killing someone for wronging them versus killing someone cause they were there.

No, your personal bias is 'killing is wrong and there is never any grey area'.

If Thanos and Killgrave were on a boat lost at sea, Killgrave would be calling for a mutiny, while Thanos would be considering how many lives need to be sacrificed for as many as possible to make it out alive.

Thanos is a monster, and his plan lacks any complexity and is really short sighted. But its a plan about survival on a macro scale, with no real gain for him.

R...really? You think I think that? I almost feel flattered. I guess you would be shocked to hear my opinions on Nazis and the KKK.

While I do support the use of over-simplified metaphors to make a point, I think yours is not a good one. Without the racial aspect, Killgrave would also just be a 'Do what we must to survive' person, though I suppose they only really mentioned all that in passing when talking of his military and mercenary training and experience.

I wont deny I have bias...cause we all do. You do and it is affecting your views here, but you clearly are misinformed on what my biases really are. I am someone who finds things like The Purge particularly abhorrant due to the senselessness of it. Something like the original Saw movies are less abhorrant (though Jigsaw is definately evil) cause atleast he is targetting people he thinks do not value life and he wants to instill value for life in his victims.

I would find Thanos less aweful if maybe he went world to world playing 'Judge' and actually figuring out which half of the world deserves death. It is senseless to just randomly kill off half of every world and expect it to work out. Atleast be some form of pragmatic about it, let people who can help the world revocer over those who would persist as a burden to that world.

 

[Saelune]

Moral greyness doesn't really exist, it's just something evil people use to avoid admitting theyre truly evil.

Thanos has the ultimate power of the universe, and instead of using it to make more planets or infinite resources, he kills half of everyone. He's not only evil, hes stupid and the whole "save people from themselves" is just a weak excuse.

Same with Killmonger. His plan was to overthrow the world, install a brutal monarchy, and kill the children of anyone who resisted. Hes just a hotter, black version of Emperor Palpatine.

I am reminded here, that I mainly used Killmonger as an example due to both being MCU villains and being so close together in releases. There are grayer villains to choose from than Killmonger.

 

[Elijin]

I disagree. Killgrave was arrogant, and felt he personally knew best. He would feel whoever was in charge of the boat was the fault of them being lost, and his leadership would be far superior.

Thanos not judging is kind of the point though. Who is he to judge someone's life? Let chance/fate decide, and retire knowing the universe will continue.

It's a stupid plan. But he's the mad titan. His world burned because no one would make a hard choice. Now he sees the whole universe as some hard choice nails, and would you look at that, he's a hammer!

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

In its colloquial usage? it means someone whose goals seem relatable and even agreeable but who goes about accomplishing them in a way that appears radical or downright reckless. Thanos wants to solve the problem of overpopulation, which seems like a valid goal. He wants to do so by killing half of all life in the universe. Which seems like a needlessly cruel method to do so.

 

[Abomination]

Both Killmonger and Thanos are wrong in both their actions and objectives.

Killmonger dresses it up that racism is bad but flips it on his head and attempts to do the same thing in reverse, using past atrocities to justify modern atrocities.

Thanos appears incapable of understanding how quickly populations can replenish themselves. Is he going to snap his fingers every 3 generations indefinitely to keep his population controls in check? What if, by luck, the majority of scientists and people who upheld the structure of a civilization were killed and it suffered a critical systematic failure? In his effort to save life he dooms it. Also, is he going to potentially kill himself with a snap of his fingers? Or does he exclude himself so he can continue to right the universe every 3 generations or so?

Both are products of their environment but both are wrong due to their incapability of seeing how their actions will create the very thing they're ultimately trying to prevent.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

The antagonist of Black Panther, by the way, was named Kilmonger, not Kilgrave. Kilgrave, Wikipedia tells me, is a villain from Jessica Jones. Though I don't blame anyone for confusing them, seeing how everything Marvel Studios makes is pretty much the same.