In Judgment City, the recently deceased are judged based on if they overcame their fears.
But what about a serial killer who overcame his fear of being caught by the authorities for performing terrible acts on victims. Dahmer-esaue or worse. The serial killer’s joy is in being evil. Does that person move on to the ‘next level’ to use 52% of their brain? Does that judicial system not take any morality into account and only approve the brave regardless of their actions?
Comments
Reminders for Commenters:
All responses must be A) sincere, B) polite, and C) strictly watsonian in nature. If “watsonian” or “doylist” is new to you, please review the full rules here.
No edition wars or gripings about creators/owners of works. Doylist griping about Star Wars in particular is subject to permanent ban on first offense.
We are not here to discuss or complain about the real world.
Questions about who would prevail in a conflict/competition (not just combat) fit better on r/whowouldwin. Questions about very open-ended hypotheticals fit better on r/whatiffiction.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
The way they define the term seems to imply that highly immoral actions are caused by fear in the first place, so a mass murderer is giving in to fear by choosing to kill people.
It doesn’t quite line up with our definitions, but we’re only using a tiny fraction of our brains compared to those people so we should assume they know better then we do.