Blend #4 - Video

[beenwaitinglong]

[Godot sits on the sofa in the living room of his new apartment. The room is bare except for a few small boxes, and a coffee table in front of him on which the communicator is resting. Something like 12 white coffee cups are scattered around the table's surface.]

Indulge me in a parable, my Imported amigos.

[You don't really get a choice, it seems, as he is all ready to go. It's time for Morality, Philosophy and Coffee Talk with Godot.]

There once was a doctor who lived in a small, peaceful town. He was very successful, and often called to other nearby villages to care for the people there.

The doctor returned from a long journey one day to find the door to his home left open. When he went inside, to his horror, he found his family, dead, all the victims of murder. He caught a glimpse of a man fleeing through the back window with a bag of valuables. The doctor gave chase, but could the man escaped into the woods. There were no other witnesses, and the doctor was left alone with nothing but his grief.

[He pauses for a slow, savored sip of the coffee in his mug. For a moment, it almost seems he's forgotten about the story, so concerned is he with the coffee. Just when it starts to become an awkward silence, he continues.]

The doctor left his home to continue his traveling practice, haunted by what had happened to his family. Years passed, and he finally felt able to move on with his life.

One day, he was working the back lines of a battlefield. The camp was small, and he was the only doctor working. A cry came out from one of the nurses, and the doctor rushed to help. A patient needed surgery, quickly, in order to live.

But when the doctor saw the face of the man lying unconscious in the bed, he recognized him. It was the same man he had seen fleeing from his home the day his family had died. Here, a man who had made a vow to save lives held in his hands the life of a man who may have committed the ultimate personal wrong against him.

His oath and his livelihood bind him to save this man. However, he could also do nothing-- or alternatively, twist the scalpel in his hands a little too far to the left or right, press a little too hard, and watch him die.

[Godot gives this part a long, dramatic pause as he finishes off the last of his mug.]

That's the end of the story. But the answer depends on the listener.

So tell me. Does the doctor save his life, or not?

Comments

video;

[manbanchoku]

Depends on what kind of doctor he is!

[Meet Mako, a chipper young lady who he may or may not recognize as a new coffee shop Batista.]

My daddy is a bonafide Back-Alley Doctor, and he's killed more patients then he's saved! Or at least, it was like that a few months ago...technically, he and the rest of my family helped a secret organization save a whooooole bunch of people then! But yeah. Really, it depends! 'Cuz, 'cuz if the guy is really did kill the doctor's family, wouldn't he possibly do it again? That way, the doctor would save bunches of lives by killing him!

[beenwaitinglong]

[Uh... huh.

He recognizes her, all right. Just didn't know she was the daughter of a backalley doctor.]

Good point. It all depends widely on what sort of a man the doctor is-- and what sort of doctor he is as well.

What if we suppose he was an ordinary, normal, non-backalley doctor?

video;

[earnedmystripes]

[Kotetsu normally isn't the type to engage in hypotheticals like this, but something about the question strikes a chord in him.]

He shouldn't kill him.

[That's the easy part of the answer, anyway. He doesn't believe in revenge, and never will. He's seen firsthand the damage it can do, how poisonous it is. How his partner had spent twenty years living with so much pain and rage and loneliness, existing for that sole purpose, and never really for himself.

The rest of it is more complicated. He thinks of Maverick, and if there were ever a situation in which he was in danger and Barnaby had the power to save him. He wonders what his partner's answer would be.

Kotetsu's kneejerk reaction is that he'd save him, of course he'd save him, that he wouldn't even have to think about it. But he's lived a good life. A happy life. He has no way of knowing what losing everything would really do to his soul, and so he has no choice but to look at it through the eyes of the person he is right now.]

If it were me, I'd save him.

[In the eleven years of his career, there have been people Kotetsu has failed to save, and it's always been something difficult for him to accept. He doesn't think he could live with the weight of his conscience if he knowingly and willingly failed to save someone because he didn't want to. That's not what a hero does.

No matter what happens, please be a Hero. Promise me that.]

I don't think I could live with myself afterward if I didn't.

[A really long silence, and finally, and absolutely reluctantly, he adds--]

....But. I don't think I could judge him, either, if he decided not to.

[beenwaitinglong]

An interesting blend, this conundrum.

[Siiiiiiiiiip.]

It depends quite heavily on how much taste one has for bitterness. Those unfamiliar to the flavor will almost always insist the doctor do his job.

And others...

[Another sip, followed by a short laugh.]

Ha...!

I just like to see where others stand, that's all.

audio;

[dragony]

Saves his life, of course.

[beenwaitinglong]

Mind elaborating why you think so?

text;

[infomodder]

[Depends on the listener, he says. Depends on the listener's way of thinking, and isn't that the rub?]

Man stole valuables, but there weren't any other witnesses. He might not have been the actual murderer. There may have been a partner to the crime that took it further than it was meant to go. Valuables thief was frightened about taking the fall, so he ran.

Save the life. Grill him for answers later. Otherwise, what truth he might have gotten out of him dies with him, and he risks murdering a man who never murdered anyone. Risks losing part of himself, risks losing closure, and risks his career if anyone ever finds out. And if this man is on the battlefield, he might have become a soldier in some attempt to redeem actions that he couldn't stop. Couldn't protect one family, protect the country or whatever the battle's over. If the doctor knew the pasts of every soldier he came across, there would be others with revolting histories he might want to do the same to. Then everyone would be in trouble.

[One day, the answer to this could be much, much different.]

[beenwaitinglong]

[Ah, now here's an answer that sounds like a lawman.]

A very astute answer. Considers the ambiguity of circumstances, the motive of the thief, and the letter of the law.

What if the situation was less ambiguous? Say, perhaps, the doctor witnessed this man performing the killing.

[incendere]

I suppose that would depend on how dedicated he was to his practice.

(He pauses and rubs the bridge of his nose. Not too long ago, he probably would have sided a little more with the decision to kill the man. He knew what it was like to be consumed by revenge, to make the person responsible for killing a loved one or friend suffer for their actions. He was so close to turning that monster into ash, only to be saved by his Lieutenant. If he had actually gone through with it, and if for some reason the Lieutenant had backed down on their promise, he wasn't sure he would even be able to face his own ambitions.)

While I could understand his reasoning for wanting revenge, actually going through with it wouldn't help solve the issue. If he's truly dedicated to his desire to save lives, then taking the man's life purely to satisfy his own wish to avenge his family would be foolish.

[beenwaitinglong]

Let's suppose, perhaps, that the thief is in poor condition on the table. He may die regardless. The operation is delicate, even for a skilled surgeon.

[Siiiiip.]

Does the doctor trust himself to operate, at this precise moment?

[notdaredevil]

Yes.

[As though this is indisputable and obvious.]

[beenwaitinglong]

Ha...!

[He is more than a little intrigued to hear from a fellow defender about this.]

Truly, the answer of a defense attorney, Mr. Murdock. You sound so certain.

[unbrkableteen]

Even if he did kill his family, the doctor shouldn't kill the other man as revenge. If he does, then that makes him no better than the murderer.

What he's after is justice, not vengeance.

[Okay, she totally stole that line from dad, but it was a good one, she thought.]

[beenwaitinglong]

What if the thief had killed other people? What if he would kill again? What if the doctor letting him die would save others?

video;

[iampretty]

What did he think about his family?

[beenwaitinglong]

[pffffffffffffff Hans]

That's open for your interpretation. It's just a parable.

[video]

[yatagarasu]

Save the man's life. Killing him won't bring anything back. And that would be something the doctor would have to live with all his life.

[beenwaitinglong]

So is the loss of his family-- and the knowledge that he may have let their killer slip through his fingers.

[A beat.]

I'm only playing devil's advocate, kiddo. Don't take that too seriously.

voice;

[enigmaestro]

Already a murderer -- twice over, now, both as a criminal and soldier. Who's to say the doctor won't be saving additional lives, by taking one?

[beenwaitinglong]

Ha...! A perspective no one else has considered.

[He sips his coffee... has to be at least his fourth cup in he broadcast.]

Who's to say the man isn't a habitual killer, that he won't kill again?

[Video]

[bullysandwicher]

No way.

[beenwaitinglong]

Vehement. Mind elaborating why?

[Video]

[granddevil]

It would depend on the doctor's own feelings. It's easy to say "save him" or "kill him" when you aren't the doctor, no?

[beenwaitinglong]

That's the reason why the doctor isn't better characterized. It allows the listener to make a few extrapolations for the sake of putting themselves in the scenario.

audio;

[dissemble]

Does it matter?

[beenwaitinglong]

I'd say it matters a great deal to the patient.

video

[chiefdefense]

I'd say the right answer is for the doctor to save his life and make damn sure the man survives long enough to stand trial for his crimes if you were asking me.

[beenwaitinglong]

Ha...! That's the lawyer answer, to be sure.

[He smiles at her as he switches to a fresh cup of coffee.]

What if there was no evidence to his crimes other than the doctor's say-so? It would be likely he wouldn't be able to bring the case to court.

text;

[blondtactician]

Not knowing the particulars of this war or battlefield, if they are so unprepared to receive a few wounded, the doctor is likely making life and death decisions, and knows they must be based on logic rather than emotion. He'd save the soldier if that's the best call to make, if his prospects of survival are good and move on. Not only would he have bigger concerns, but whether it's extracting information on the missing possessions or simply enacting twisted revenge, he's more valuable to the doctor alive than dead.

I have a hard time picturing this story without more information. But the name of the game is a simple moral quandary, right? You're not seeking my opinion on whether or not you've drawn up a probable scenario. It's simply a thought exercise, perhaps to understand who among us is trustworthy, or fitting a certain standard of moral rectitude? But revenge is not the only emotion which could compromise someone's integrity.

Instead, perhaps the doctor recognizes the victim as his new beloved, the person who's helped him heal after having lost so much. Or he recognizes his own child, whose tiny body was never recovered in the carnage, whom he has thought dead all this time, now grown.

And at that same moment, the general of the army is brought in. For the sake of the story, he can only operate on one of them, and both have the same chances at survival and need the same procedure. The right thing to do is to save the general - losing her ultimately effects the outcome of the entire war. She is, by virtue of circumstance, more important.

In that case, he must decide who to save. Do you think most people would save the general, or their most precious person, even if it meant condemning many more soldiers, perhaps even the entire land, to losing the war?

[beenwaitinglong]

It's a bare bones scenario for a reason. To characterize the doctor further allows the listener to make assumptions about what he would do.

Left a blank slate, those who answer can only offer two variations: what the doctor should do, morally; and what they would do, were they in the doctor's position. To predict what a man they do not know would do in any given situation is an impossible question.

I like your variation too. In that case, the doctor should save the general.

However, I sincerely doubt the majority of people would be able to make that choice when one of their own beloved was the cost.

The heart overrides the head in the heat of the moment.

audio

[closetshark]

How very Tiger or the Lady.

If I were the doctor I would have tracked down the man's family and killed them and stolen back what he had taken from me. If I was unable to do so I would wait until I was, that is the fairness of the world. He stole from me without provocation and thus the equivalent must be retrieved.

The doctor, however is human so it becomes a matter of anger and grief. It is a battlefield, people die despite the actions of doctors on those all the time especially given the presumed timeframe of the narrative. Doctors rarely travel or live near woods deep enough for thieves to escape from in modern times.

Depending on his cultural heritage he likely kills him. Family and honor to it was often greater than a doctor's oath.

[beenwaitinglong]

The Tiger.

[Siiiiiiip.]

But you're right. I never did specify where and when this took place. That's a good observation.

[Man, what's with all you weird people and your wholesale murder for familial honor?]

A question like this tells you a lot about the measure of an individual.

[video]

[glassinine]

Of course he does.

[beenwaitinglong]

Forgive me, but I absolutely predicted you'd say that.

video.

[andallbite]

[ Switch a few things around and this is somewhat similar to a past event in Eren's life. As a result, it's not difficult to answer—but even if it wasn't, he'd still be able to say: ]

Why should he? Someone like that shouldn't be alive.

[beenwaitinglong]

What if there were extenuating circumstances? Perhaps the doctor didn't see what he thought he saw.

Don't take it as a defensive response. I'm merely playing devil's advocate.

video

[khajidont]

It looks like you've got a lot of answers already, Mr. Godot. But what's yours?

[beenwaitinglong]

Ha...!

[Ooh, kid saw through him.]

I'm more interested in hearing from others.

[Nice dodge.]

video;

[godly]

Obviously this is all a question of morality; an anecdote about a doctor, which in turn asks, "what would you do?" The big question -- the pressure -- moves from character to audience.

I think most would respond with "he should still save his life". Do you think the responses you've gotten accordingly are sincere, or an automatic, "correct" response to a clear moral dilemma?

[All of that is spoken clearly and almost casually, as if he's thought of this many times before.]

Re: video;

[beenwaitinglong]

There are two ways of answering this with the information given. One is the moral answer-- what the doctor should do-- which is to save his patient.

The other involves, as you said, a measure of putting oneself in the doctor's shoes. It becomes what the listener would do.

Even that difference becomes an interesting study of a person.

( video )

[abadidea]

[ While Isaac does initialize the video feed, he doesn't answer right away, instead looking thoughtful as he sips at his own cup of coffee be proud, Godot.

When he does speak, his words are fairly heavy. ]

I think he'd save him. If...he'd a doctor, then peoples' lives mean more to him than what vengeance would. I mean, he'd have had to sign up to be a field doctor, so high tension situations must have suited him. He probably wouldn't even hesitate to save the man. He may not like it, but he wouldn't be able to live with himself if he just let the guy die, no matter what he'd done to him.

[beenwaitinglong]

[Good man.]

A doctor does take such vows. One would imagine he'd know himself well enough to serve in such a role.

Should the doctor trust himself to do the right thing, even if instinct is driving him?

Voice

[purgation]

Your narrative suggests that the patient may have committed the ultimate personal wrong against the doctor. Either he did, or he did not - there can be no in between unless the doctor himself is ultimately uncertain.

With theft being the greatest of sins, and the theft of personal life chief among them all, it stands to reason that if the doctor acts on his uncertainty and takes the patient's life, he is as much a man of sin as the man who murdered his family. Furthermore, if the doctor acts on the certainty that it is the same man and kills him, it is still an act of evil.

Rather unfortunately, if the doctor struggles with his decision for too long, the patient will inevitably die anyway, and it will be no different from having twisted the scalpel himself in the end.

Is it not better to save the patient, as it is his sworn duty to do, and to see the man answer lawfully for his presumed crimes thereafter?

[beenwaitinglong]

Mr. Petrov. [It's been a while, but he greets him all the same.]

I would probably say so, as would any man of the law.

However, what a man should do and what he does in the heat of the moment is a rather large difference, sometimes.