POLL ADDED FOR DEBATE! Lojozz V Hope - Is Ben a good guy

Hope - You say that Ben didn't know that Daniel was ferrying people to the Freiter. He did. Ben said to Jack. You have to leave now within the hour, I understand that your people are currently being taken to the boat. Or something to that effect. So did all those on the boat deserve to die? They all worked for Widmore, but all the mercenaries had gone. On that boat were crew members and scientists. Couldnt they have knocked Keamy out and tied him up for at least a little while?

We seem to be avoiding the classical queston of "does the end justify the means.

Since we can only guess at the end we have to take a close look at the means

Means: Murder, kidnapping, psychological manipulation, terror, lying...all pretty harsh but not outside the scope of actions of nations, even ones considered good nations such as the US and the UK.

The only Ends we have is "protect the island" The stakes have to be pretty high to justify Ben's actions to date, especially ones motivated by personal interests such as indirectly causing Goodwin's death so that he could have a shot at Juliet.

If the end of protecting the island is that important then wouldn't Ben, if he were a good guy, avoid the loss of life unless absolutly necessary?

How about this...we do not actually know the true motiations of Charles Widmore though we all assume he is an evil man bent on capturing the island because of his actions to date. If we apply the same arguments to Widmore that we have applied to Ben to prove he is actually one of the good guys, do they make sense...could one reasonably come to the conclusion that Charles Widmore is one of the good guys?

I wonder if this isn't becoming bogged down in the notion that a good man is someone who only does good things.

That's not a man. That's a saint.

The reason I stated before that we ought to be questioning the integrity of what constitutes 'good' stems from a simple question I asked myself.

What has Ben done that is 'good'?

And I was hard-pushed to come up with a strong answer. Raising Alex? Well, he'd apparently kidnapped her first. Sticking to his word? True, but it tended only be on deals that had been made without him.

So hand's up who thinks Ben's a bad guy? Well. . . my hand stays down. Why? Despite all of the above, why? Surely it's not about the small actions, good or bad, of the man - but in the point we know Ben works on a higher agenda. Lojozz side-stepped the point (he tried to do it quickly, like a magician with a dove up his sleeve) about the greater good, but the greater good is everything.

You didn't notice the parallel between Ben turning the donkey wheel and Jesus Christ straining at the cross did you? The way he was sacrificing himself for the good of his people?

Some people have no problem believing in the absolute goodness of a God that allows famine and death to persist in the world. They say it's all part of a grander scheme, one we cannot question nor comprehend.

So let me ask the question of whether, say, the Island would consider Ben a good person? It's the most important thing to him. If we could ask, and the Island could answer, what do you think that answer would be? Me personally, I think the answer would be yes. Ben's been the Island's dutiful son; longstanding leader of The Others. We've witnessed Ben at the end of his reign, when his tenure had run out and his time to leave the throne up.

The bottom line is I cannot believe Ben is a bad guy. I think he serves a cause with devotion, and he believes that cause to be absolutely good. And maybe, when we understand that cause better, maybe then we'll be better fixed to judge.

"So hand's up who thinks Ben's a bad guy? Well. . . my hand stays down. Why? Despite all of the above, why? Surely it's not about the small actions, good or bad, of the man - but in the point we know Ben works on a higher agenda. Lojozz side-stepped the point (he tried to do it quickly, like a magician with a dove up his sleeve) about the greater good, but the greater good is everything."

OK AC firstly this debate is not 'Is Ben a Bad Guy', there is a fairly wide scope between not being a good guy and actually being a bad guy.

I side stepped the point of the greater good?, we do not know what this greater good is, we only have Ben's word that he is the good guy for all we know he could be acting for the greater bad and (As MSHL stated) Widmore could be acting for the greater good.

"You didn't notice the parallel between Ben turning the donkey wheel and Jesus Christ straining at the cross did you? The way he was sacrificing himself for the good of his people?"

Did you just compare Ben to Christ? Really? Remind me of the bible stories about Jesus murdering his father, oh that would be God wouldn't it. Remind me the bible stories of Christ kidnapping.

I notice you say 'some people' have no problem believing, you of course are not one of them, so using an argument you fundemtally disagree with seems a little churlish to me.

As for a talking Island, what? We have absolutely no idea what the island would say. Did the island not give Ben cancer? Is it not Jacob who is banishing Ben?

You finish in the same way you started saying you do not believe Ben to be a bad guy. That does not make him a good guy.

LJ, you're like Neo employing bullet-dodging techniques.

"Did you just compare Ben to Christ? Really? Remind me of the bible stories about Jesus murdering his father, oh that would be God wouldn't it. Remind me the bible stories of Christ kidnapping."

I stated there was a clear parallel of a man sacrificing himself for a greater good. I didn't say Ben was Jesus Christ. But the parallel was deliberate and apparent - and if Ben really is a nasty piece of work, the scene is actually borderline blasphemous!

"I notice you say 'some people' have no problem believing, you of course are not one of them"

Evidently, this is not the time nor the place for such discussion. But it's a fact that some people believe in a God, any God, and some people don't. My statement was accurate and bore no relation to my own personal opinion. My point was that people ratify goodness with unmitigated badness every day. If you like, you can think of all the bad things you've done in your life and ask yourself: Are you a good person?

Bad deeds alone do not make a person bad.

"As for a talking Island, what? We have absolutely no idea what the island would say."

Now you're being silly. Locke has talked of 'speaking to the Island' many times. The Island speaks in dreams and visions to its people. The Island talks, and you know it. Which brings me to:

"Did the island not give Ben cancer? Is it not Jacob who is banishing Ben?"

As I stated, we are witnessing Ben at the end of his reign. After years of good service, his time is up and the Island has apparently decreed that Locke is its new leader. That's a bitter pill for Ben to swallow, no question. But he lead the Island and its people for many, many years - the Island could have given him cancer or demanded he be banished much earlier had he not been 'good'.

The reasons you condemn Ben as bad are petty and/or arguably justified in a grander scale of the greater good. He is not a bad man driven to do bad things as the "sociopath" you have tried to paint him as. He simply isn't that guy.

If he is not a bad guy then he must be a good guy. Will Ben be the one that leads the O6 back? I think so. Will that be to the ultimate benefit and lead Lost to the 'happy ending' we ought to be delivered to? I think so. At the end the good he has done, the scale of his actions and the sacrifices he has made will be clearer.

"I stated there was a clear parallel of a man sacrificing himself for a greater good. I didn't say Ben was Jesus Christ. But the parallel was deliberate and apparent - and if Ben really is a nasty piece of work, the scene is actually borderline blasphemous!"

Ben did not sacrifice himself, he did not suffer on a cross he just gave up control of an island that no longer wanted him. "Forgive them farther for they know not what they do", "Well I hope you're happy now Jacob". Yeah you're right thats almost exact!

"Bad deeds alone do not make a person bad." but they sure as shit don't make him good.

"As I stated, we are witnessing Ben at the end of his reign. After years of good service, his time is up and the Island has apparently decreed that Locke is its new leader. That's a bitter pill for Ben to swallow, no question. But he lead the Island and its people for many, many years - the Island could have given him cancer or demanded he be banished much earlier had he not been 'good'."

How can you say that it was good service, there is no evidence of that, the only evidence we do have is that when somebody came along that was better the island got rid quick smart. That does not make him good.

"The reasons you condemn Ben as bad are petty and/or arguably justified in a grander scale of the greater good. He is not a bad man driven to do bad things as the "sociopath" you have tried to paint him as. He simply isn't that guy."

Petty? Murder, Kidnap, revenge, sending a man to death because of jealousy. These are not petty, there are few crimes worse. How can you say that Ben is not a Sociopath look at it logically and compare him with profile evidence, there is no doubt.

"If he is not a bad guy then he must be a good guy." What? Now who's being silly. So there are only two type of person good or bad. You have not even proved that he isn't bad and then you jump to this ridiculous conclusion that he must be good.

Actually, I was thinking (as you know by now, since I e-mailed it) more of the 'Father, why have you forsaken me?' angle in reference to Ben and his "I hope you're happy now, Jacob."

Murder? Who did he murder? Keamy? Understandable. He deserved it. And since we've not seen him carry out any threat against Penny yet you're holding him up for a crime not yet perpetrated. Anyone else? His father? Yes. Again, justifiable (30 years of parental neglect, of being blamed for his mother's death) and arguably Alpert was the real mastermind.

Is Alpert a bad person? Are all The Others bad people? Where are you taking this line of logic, exactly?

Goodwin? We don't know the truth about Goodwin. For all we know he burned himself sabotaging operations at The Tempest, secretly planning a mass murder of all its people on Widmore's behalf using the chemicals there.

We don't know the full picture. You're quick to condemn without full knowledge of the facts.

If Locke is commanded by Jacob, or Alpert, to kidnap 'good people' who happen to land on the Island - knowing the purpose behind such kidnap - does that make Locke a bad person?

There's a form of blinkered, narrow-mindedness to your argument that more and more convinces me to err on the side of 'good Ben' than otherwise.

You're parralel does not work, Jesus was on the cross dying and calling out to be saved. Ben is throwing out a petulant remark to Jacob.

OK AC here is what I suggest, go back and read my arguments from the start. I have answered all of these points previously.

"Is Alpert a bad person? Are all The Others bad people? Where are you taking this line of logic, exactly?" What line of logic, where did you bring that from from. Let me remind you yet again that I am debating against Ben being the good guy.

"There's a form of blinkered, narrow-mindedness to your argument that more and more convinces me to err on the side of 'good Ben' than otherwise." Again! I am debating that ben is not a good guy, I do not think it is being narrow mind to point out the bad things Ben has done.

So far I have not been given a single (not one) instance of Ben doing anything that could fully be considerd good. I have however pointed out many things that no matter how you cut it are most definetly not good.

"I have however pointed out many things that no matter how you cut it are most definetly not good."

Like your spelling of the world 'definitely', that last statement is not true.

The line of logic against Alpert being bad was that it was he who was involved in engineering 'the purge'. Ben sided with them. You level his patricide as a chief reason to label him bad. So the line of logic follows that Alpert is bad. All 'the hostiles' are bad. The Others are bad. Jacob is bad. . .

Hey! Remember that time Sawyer shot dead Tom in cold blood? Laugh a minute, that. But Sawyer's still a good guy. So's Hurley - for running over those other Others and killing them. Total good guy. When Jack pulled the trigger on Locke, he was being a good guy. See also: Charlie shooting Ethan. Ana killing Goodwin. (Goodwin snapped Nathan's neck, by the by. Seems he wasn't Mr. Innocent!) Michael killing Libby and Ana Lucia. . . Mr. Eko killing two Others. . . Locke throwing a knife in Naomi's back. . .

If Ben's bad not good what the hell are all these other people?

Hey AC and Lojozz, wow this is way better than Itchy and Scratchy Show, or is that the AC and Lojozz Show. I think that the winner of the debate is AC .... aaaaaahh ............. oooops, that's right he is not eligible. Damn!



Stitch

Stitch

AC we are not debating if any of those other people are good guys we are debating if Ben is a good guy.

You can not say killing your father in cold blood without any remorse is good - no way.
You can not say showing Juliet Goodwins body the way he did (regardless of 'making up' stories about what Goodwin might have done) was good.
You can not say killing Keamy was good. They happily captured the Losties and kept them in cages, why couldn't he have done the same.
You can not say his reaction to causing the freighter to blow was good.
I could go on.

I have still not been given one tangible piece of evidence that shows Ben is good. Not one single thing he has done in the 3 season we have seen him can be described as good.

Ben does not exist in a vacuum. We cannot view him in isolation, nor his action, and hope to arrive at any level of conclusion over whether he is good or bad.

I know that's what you want to do, because then you can get all puritanical about good and bad, but that's not how the world, or Lost, works.

Goodwin snapped a man's neck in cold blood. A man he knew was wrongly imprisoned. He could have let him go. He didn't. That makes Goodwin bad. (So Ben's treatment of him, probably knowing more about Goodwin than Juliet ever did, doesn't seem so bad!)

Ben's killing of Keamy, the man who killed his daughter and then taunted him about how she "bled out". . . Instead of Alex, imagine it's your wife. Do you want to put Keamy in a cage or do you want to stab him in the neck?

Don't get me started on that piece of work that is Roger Linus. (A 'murder' already nullified by Alpert and The Others' involvement anyway.)

My point with all the other people I mentioned was they have done far worse, far less justifiably, yet you have no truck with labelling them as good people. Why? Because you understand why they did what they did. Your failure to understand why Ben does what he does is just that: your failure.

You condemn a man for your own failure to comprehend. Puritanical indeed.

You say you don't have one piece of evidence that he has done anything good. I say Ben's actions will prove the great majority of everything he did was for a greater good.

I'm not sure who you are debating with AC but you once again fail to address my points and argue the ones you make up.

My point with all the other people I mentioned was they have done far worse, far less justifiably, yet you have no truck with labelling them as good people. When did I label these people good? What are you talking about?

"Your failure to understand why Ben does what he does is just that: your failure." We have no evidence to know why Ben does what he does.

"I say Ben's actions will prove the great majority of everything he did was for a greater good." I hope you are right because that is how I would like the show to go, but it is not relevant to this debate.

Just give me an example of something good Ben has done. Something that you can say hand on heart in that one instant he was the good guy. Let alone labeling him has a good guy full stop.

Yeah yeah. . . you avoid my points, I avoid your points, and so goes this little dance of ours.

I think I've laid out more than enough reasoning as to why Ben is good. You've just continued to repeat the same accusations over and over like an unreasonable, hardline puritan - ignorant to context and motivation and unknown justification.

If you just watched Jack kill Edward Mars, smothering him in his tent, you'd label Jack a killer and a bad person. Ignorant of Mars being terminal, and Jack doing him a favour and easing his suffering.

I've said more than enough. You've just used a lot of words that amount to the same thing: not much.

How about this….
Let us first agree that the most important character in the show is the island itself. That is the main focus of this story. Jack, Ben, Locke, Kate, whoever, are all sub characters. Their interaction with the island, outside from flash/forwards/back’s is how we see these people and draw our conclusions about their character. Their inner-workings. Their motivation for being in this universe(of LOST).

I think Ben’s major motivation for turning the wheel(doing what he thought Jacob wanted him to do) was to ultimately save the island and all the people(native Others) that lived on it.
So far the only non-natives we have seen, other than the crash survivors, are Ben(as a kid), and Juliet.

We haven’t seen it yet, but I believe ever since his first vision of his mother, and his meeting with Alpert the first time, Ben has bided his time. Waited and waited and learned everything he could, about what the island was, from both Dharma and Alpert. (We know he had time to learn Hungarian, and Arabic in his spare time). Two sides of History. He chose to help Alpert because something Dharma was doing was ultimately wrong. He believed and trusted Alpert more. He believed that the Others cause was more just. And from what we have seen, became some kind of messiah to the Others. He purged the island of all Dharma (minus Kelvin and Mikhail and Danielle, but that is another argument all together right there) and the island became sole property once more to the natives. Plus they got some cool new clothes and houses and a power station… and a bunny multiplier.
Ben was doing what he believed was right. What he believed would bring peace to the island at whatever the cost.

We don’t completely know what Dharma was up to. But from what we have seen (orchid station not really a botanical garden) that they were covering up what their real research was.
Ben never had a real home. His dad was a total baboon sphincter. He never knew a mother outside of an old photo that he probably saved from his dad tearing up. Everything he knew about family and home came form the Alpert and the Others, who accepted him as one of their own.
I think everything Ben has done, was done to benefit his family at all costs. Breaking eggs to make an omelet.
Now this is all GOOD to Ben and the Others. But when the new crash victims get in the way… well they just get in the way, and they must be removed.

Then the rules break (that’s a good debate right there, “what the rules are”). And now he’s on a vengeance quest to get back at Widmore. Take Penny’s life first. Then get back to the island, something Charles couldn’t do. Maybe even take Penny back to the island with him. Just imagine Charles knowing that his daughter is with Ben Linus, on that island he can never find again.

But, yeah, I think Ben is the good guy, but a good guy that does what needs to be done.
(think Dirty Harry, Die Hard,)

Anywhos… Back to what I’m paid to do…