[CC#10] The Meaning of Justice and Evil (Patreon)

When I was young, I watched heroes fighting for justice in live-action TV shows. Animation also captivated us with bold ideas and a grand sense of scale that live-action productions could never achieve. In those stories, justice represented the most righteous order and morality found in everyday life. Anything that sought to destroy that order was evil.

Even if parents teach children what is right, children do not always follow those lessons. Likewise, when they see other children doing the right thing, it can sometimes seem as though they are simply obeying adults, making them feel embarrassed to act honestly themselves.

To truly understand morality is to understand the relationship between yourself and others. That is one of the most important aspects of a child's growth. Even when children hesitate to do what is right, heroes carry it out with confidence. I don't know what moral education is like today, but I believe heroic stories present it in its purest and most understandable form.

What is justice? What is evil? Defining them is not easy, but I have my own definition that I use whenever I create a story. It is this:

Justice is subjective and relative. Evil is objective and universal.

Justice Is Subjective and Relative

For example, the idea that "people with ability should receive great rewards" is not generally considered wrong. However, it is only one way of thinking. If we continue asking why it is right, its foundation ultimately lies in an individual's values and personal standards. In other words, it arrives at an extremely subjective way of thinking.

Justice exists only within ourselves and within the limited sphere that our beliefs influence. What we believe is part of who we are, so it is only natural that our opinions differ from those of others. Those different beliefs are both forms of justice, and even when they conflict, we do not call it a conflict between justice and evil. That is because evil is not the opposite of justice.

Viewed this way, justice is inherently relative, making it extremely difficult to share completely with others. Even if someone declares, "This is the right thing to do!" and many people agree, the reason behind that belief exists only within that person's mind. Ask those who agreed why they did so, and each will give their own subjective answer. It would not be an exaggeration to say that each of those answers is already a different form of justice.

Evil Is Objective and Universal

What, then, is evil?

In contrast to justice, which exists in as many forms as there are individuals, the things we recognize as evil share certain common characteristics. They possess an objectivity that leaves little room for personal interpretation.

We would not normally call it justice to "break the law, cause suffering to many people, and gain enormous wealth." Most people recognize such actions as wrong. In this sense, evil refers to actions that destroy society's shared morality and order.

For that reason, evil actions and ideas are shared and recognized by many people. This is the universal nature of evil. No matter who judges them, they are regarded as wrong. When they threaten people's lives or livelihoods, that shared feeling becomes even stronger.

I believe this sense of common understanding comes from humanity's social nature. When people form communities and seek to maintain a stable society, what they need is not a definition of what is right, but an understanding of what must not be done. Those boundaries become social norms, eventually taking shape as laws and institutions.

I am not very fond of social media. One reason is that many people present what should be subjective ideas of "what is right" as though they were absolute justice that everyone must follow. Looking at today's online discourse, this misunderstanding can be seen everywhere. People impose their own standards of justice on others and fiercely condemn anyone who strays from them, even slightly.

This happens when subjective righteousness is unconsciously replaced with supposedly universal and objective righteousness. It reveals an arrogance that comes from believing one's own sense of justice is shared by the entire world.

The Origin of Heroic Stories

Our world is built upon two things: our own subjective sense of what is right, and society's shared, objective understanding of what is evil.

Realizing that our own sense of what is right is not the only correct answer in the world can sometimes be painful. That is why it is all the more important to remain humble. Recognizing that justice is relative allows us to respect the sense of justice held by others, which in turn helps maintain social order and avoid unnecessary conflict.

Perhaps I have expressed this simple contrast in a rather philosophical way, but I believe this structure is the very origin of heroic stories.

When a hero fights for justice, the hero is denying evil. Therefore, this is not a conflict between people with different beliefs. A hero's role is not to fight for personal justice, but to defeat what society recognizes as evil.

Heroes suffer. They wonder why they must sacrifice themselves to save others. But there is always a reason. It may be fate, destiny, or a bond from the past. Each hero has a different story. The heroes I admire struggle with the burden of fighting, yet I am deeply moved by the way they continue to live while carrying that destiny.

In my mind, there is a clear distinction between stories for children and stories for adults. That distinction lies in this definition of justice and evil: Justice is subjective and relative. Evil is objective and universal. By clearly separating these two, the classic theme of good triumphing over evil can be achieved.

Then what makes a story for adults?

It is the absence of evil. I consider a story to be for adults when each side has its own sense of justice, and those beliefs become the reason they fight. Some people would call that realism.

When a story portrays characters through subjective emotions such as desire, honor, and the pursuit of power amid conflict, the life experiences of the viewer—or the player—naturally overlap with those characters, creating a wide range of emotions. This is something children without real experience in society cannot fully understand.

In Japan, we have the word gokko.

Gokko refers to children playing by pretending to be characters from television dramas or animation. For example, in pro wrestling gokko, each child becomes their favorite wrestler. They do not fight seriously, but imitate wrestling moves and enjoy the atmosphere. In Ultraman gokko, one child plays Ultraman while the others play monsters and pretend to battle.

Mega Man depicts battles between robots in the near future. However, there are no scenes of deliberately killing people or destroying their lives. That is because it is a form of gokko play. Even the enemy characters, which serve as the targets, are not designed to appear disturbing. When they are defeated, there are no realistic depictions of destruction.

Dr.Wily's motive for trying to conquer the world is left vague. But that is exactly as it should be. There is no need to reveal the subjective feelings within his mind. As long as world domination is presented as an objective and universal form of evil, the story of Mega Man works.

Players recognize that evil as the target and fire at it. Mega Man is a target-shooting game. It is a shooting game. There are no complicated human relationships behind those targets. If players begin to feel sympathy or guilt toward them, then the game has failed.

Creating games for children is extremely difficult. Adult developers cannot be certain whether the order of the game world they create from their own experiences is truly appropriate. Morality and ethics also change over time. That is why justice and evil must be clearly defined. Conversely, if that foundation is firmly established, it becomes possible to create a children's game world that is free of contradiction.

(Automatic translation by AI)