Comments on: The Dark Knight http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/ The voice of Dharma Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:48:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Saketh http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/comment-page-1/#comment-65 Saketh Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:42:35 +0000 http://www.harvarddharma.org/wp/wordpress/?p=456#comment-65 Vikram, I look forward to reading what you have to say in the morning. Vikram, I look forward to reading what you have to say in the morning.

]]> By: vikram http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/comment-page-1/#comment-64 vikram Fri, 23 Jan 2009 04:24:05 +0000 http://www.harvarddharma.org/wp/wordpress/?p=456#comment-64 Let's have a debate! I'm going to post something tomorrow morning on whether or not "complete detachment [can] exist when there is no moral framework". My short answer is yes, but detachment without a framework is at best meaningless and at worst dangerous. I think the second point you make - "detachment implies that one is willfully renouncing objects of desire" - is the key. Let’s have a debate! I’m going to post something tomorrow morning on whether or not “complete detachment [can] exist when there is no moral framework”. My short answer is yes, but detachment without a framework is at best meaningless and at worst dangerous. I think the second point you make – “detachment implies that one is willfully renouncing objects of desire” – is the key.

]]> By: Saketh http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Saketh Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:17:29 +0000 http://www.harvarddharma.org/wp/wordpress/?p=456#comment-48 Vikram, you are saying that a solid moral foundation is a requirement for detachment. Here is support for your argument: <div> <ul> <li>The Joker explicitly claims to have <span style="font-weight: bold;">no rules</span> -- no solid moral foundation.</li> <li>Detachment implies that one is <span style="font-weight: bold;">willfully renouncing objects of desire</span>, which in turn implies <span style="font-weight: bold;">a capacity for attachmen</span>t. Given the Joker's character, there is no apparent capacity for attachment.</li> <li>Hence, the Joker has no "framework for reasoning about morality," or at least his framework is <span style="font-weight: bold;">a complete rejection of moralit</span><span style="font-weight: bold;">y.</span></li> </ul> <div>We are tending toward philosophical debate, but it affects significantly my interpretation of the movie.</div> <div> </div> <div>So now the question becomes -- can complete detachment exist when there is moral framework?</div> <div> </div> <div>Vikram, you find that the answer to this question is no. However, I think that by his <span style="font-weight: bold;">commitment to a lack of order</span> -- chaos -- Joker <span style="font-style: italic;">does</span> appear to have a strange sense of morality. That is how I saw it at least -- I could have grossly mis-viewed the movie, because I made this judgment early in the film (first 30 minutes) and maintained it for the rest.</div> </div> Vikram, you are saying that a solid moral foundation is a requirement for detachment. Here is support for your argument:

  • The Joker explicitly claims to have no rules — no solid moral foundation.
  • Detachment implies that one is willfully renouncing objects of desire, which in turn implies a capacity for attachment. Given the Joker’s character, there is no apparent capacity for attachment.
  • Hence, the Joker has no “framework for reasoning about morality,” or at least his framework is a complete rejection of morality.
We are tending toward philosophical debate, but it affects significantly my interpretation of the movie.
So now the question becomes — can complete detachment exist when there is moral framework?
Vikram, you find that the answer to this question is no. However, I think that by his commitment to a lack of order — chaos — Joker does appear to have a strange sense of morality. That is how I saw it at least — I could have grossly mis-viewed the movie, because I made this judgment early in the film (first 30 minutes) and maintained it for the rest.
]]> By: vikram http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/comment-page-1/#comment-47 vikram Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:12:16 +0000 http://www.harvarddharma.org/wp/wordpress/?p=456#comment-47 One brief comment: if the Joker is detached, it is only in the sense that Mr. Kurtz had "kicked himself loose of the earth". Detachment requires a solid moral foundation, or at least some framework for reasoning about morality. I actually stopped watching The Dark Knight only 30 minutes in because it was so disturbing. One brief comment: if the Joker is detached, it is only in the sense that Mr. Kurtz had “kicked himself loose of the earth”. Detachment requires a solid moral foundation, or at least some framework for reasoning about morality.

I actually stopped watching The Dark Knight only 30 minutes in because it was so disturbing.

]]> By: Priya http://www.swadharma.org/2008/12/29/the-dark-knight/comment-page-1/#comment-28 Priya Tue, 30 Dec 2008 23:31:12 +0000 http://www.harvarddharma.org/wp/wordpress/?p=456#comment-28 In a recent session, my Hinduism teacher explained to my sister, my mom, and me that when one has attainted enlightenment, he/she sees no distinction between "good" and "evil"; to him/her, everyone is an embodiment of God.  Though the concept - that there is truly no distinction between good and evil - remains bizarre to me, Saketh's most sheds some light. Even the most "evil" (as we unenlightened perceive it) person has qualities to look up to.  But this question befuddles me: Since the Joker practices complete detachment, does it mean that he has attained enlightenment? In a recent session, my Hinduism teacher explained to my sister, my mom, and me that when one has attainted enlightenment, he/she sees no distinction between “good” and “evil”; to him/her, everyone is an embodiment of God. 
Though the concept – that there is truly no distinction between good and evil – remains bizarre to me, Saketh’s most sheds some light. Even the most “evil” (as we unenlightened perceive it) person has qualities to look up to. 
But this question befuddles me: Since the Joker practices complete detachment, does it mean that he has attained enlightenment?

]]>