Again, I'm not saying that Ward wasn't a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It's right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn't matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they're willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it's not his fault because of his life, simply because he's their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
to:
Again, I\'m not saying that Ward wasn\'t a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It\'s right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn\'t matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they\'re willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it\'s not his fault because of his life, simply because he\'s their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It's not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It's as simple as that.
to:
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It\'s not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It\'s as simple as that.
Changed line(s) 13 from:
n
That's not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn't do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
to:
That\'s not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn\'t do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly, nor was Simmons planning on keeping him there for a long-period of time.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don't say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
to:
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don\'t say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said
to:
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because we chose not to let it to.\" So either way, it goes against the ideals espoused by the protagonists.
> There is a difference. Coulson gave him a choice to get the new memories. Fitz never had a choice. And I was talking about after it, where Coulson was in fact willing to let Ward walk free with his memories intact, and only decided to go after him went Ward kidnapped and tortured one of his agents. If anything, the fact that they were willing to forgive Ward at all at that point backs up how Fitz was treated after the Framework arc.
Except the choice Coulson gave was either new FakeMemories or be killed. Again, I\'m not saying Fitz had a choice in having his life rewritten; I\'m saying he had a choice to not pull the trigger on Agnes, or to torture, or to order the missiles that killed Mace, and he still chose to. Again, to say he never had that because his whole life was rewritten is to pretty much say that people are defined by the lives they\'ve lived, and not by their freewill or ability to choose, which, once again, goes against what Team Coulson had initially said, which was, and I repeat \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because who chose not to let it to.\"
And while I do admit that, yes, Coulson was temporarily willing to let Ward walk free, the rest of the team wasn\'t and even stated on the Bus that they wished Skye had managed to kill him and that they were never going to forgive him, so much so that Simmons even tried to kill Ward while they were on a mission together.
So no, the team wasn\'t willing to forgive Ward, no matter what. Their treatment of Fitz is completely different. Whereas Ward was only given the option of potentially not being killed on the condition that he received FakeMemories, which was a condition he only obtained because Coulson had no other options, which Coulson wasn\'t happy about, and even then Ward continues to receive hatred and vitriol from the team, and a murder attempt; Fitz was not only immediately forgiven, but the team even says that none of his actions were his fault because he lived a bad life in the Framework, despite having previously stated that trauma is no excuse to do evil.
Again, I'm not saying that Ward wasn't a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It's right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn't matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they're willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it's not his fault because of his life, simply because he's their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
to:
Again, I\'m not saying that Ward wasn\'t a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It\'s right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn\'t matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they\'re willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it\'s not his fault because of his life, simply because he\'s their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It's not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It's as simple as that.
to:
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It\'s not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It\'s as simple as that.
Changed line(s) 13 from:
n
That's not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn't do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
to:
That\'s not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn\'t do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don't say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
to:
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don\'t say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said
to:
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because we chose not to let it to.\" So either way, it goes against the ideals espoused by the protagonists.
> There is a difference. Coulson gave him a choice to get the new memories. Fitz never had a choice. And I was talking about after it, where Coulson was in fact willing to let Ward walk free with his memories intact, and only decided to go after him went Ward kidnapped and tortured one of his agents. If anything, the fact that they were willing to forgive Ward at all at that point backs up how Fitz was treated after the Framework arc.
Except the choice Coulson gave was either new FakeMemories or be killed. Again, I\'m not saying Fitz had a choice in having his life rewritten; I\'m saying he had a choice to not pull the trigger on Agnes, or to torture, or to order the missiles that killed Mace, and he still chose to. Again, to say he never had that because his whole life was rewritten is to pretty much say that people are defined by the lives they\'ve lived, and not by their freewill or ability to choose, which, once again, goes against what Team Coulson had initially said, which was, and I repeat \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because who chose not to let it to.\"
And while I do admit that, yes, Coulson was temporarily willing to let Ward walk free, the rest of the team wasn\'t and even stated on the Bus that they wished Skye had managed to kill him and that they were never going to forgive him, so much so that Simmons even tried to kill Ward while they were on a mission together.
So no, the team wasn\'t willing to forgive Ward, no matter what. Their treatment of Fitz is completely different. Whereas Ward was only given the option of potentially not being killed on the condition that he received FakeMemories, which was a condition he only obtained because Coulson had no other options, which Coulson wasn\'t happy about, and even then Ward continues to receive hatred and vitriol from the team, and a murder attempt; Fitz was not only immediately forgiven, but the team even says that none of his actions were his fault because he lived a bad life in the Framework, despite having previously stated that trauma is no excuse to do evil.
Again, I'm not saying that Ward wasn't a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It's right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn't matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they're willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it's not his fault because of his life, simply because he's their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
to:
Again, I\'m not saying that Ward wasn\'t a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It\'s right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn\'t matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they\'re willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it\'s not his fault because of his life, simply because he\'s their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It's not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It's as simple as that.
to:
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It\'s not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It\'s as simple as that.
Changed line(s) 13 from:
n
That's not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn't do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
to:
That\'s not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn\'t do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don't say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
to:
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don\'t say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said
to:
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because we chose not to let it to.\" So either way, it goes against the ideals espoused by the protagonists.
> There is a difference. Coulson gave him a choice to get the new memories. Fitz never had a choice. And I was talking about after it, where Coulson was in fact willing to let Ward walk free with his memories intact, and only decided to go after him went Ward kidnapped and tortured one of his agents. If anything, the fact that they were willing to forgive Ward at all at that point backs up how Fitz was treated after the Framework arc.
Except the choice Coulson gave was either new FakeMemories or be killed. Again, I\'m not saying Fitz had a choice in having his life rewritten; I\'m saying he had a choice to not pull the trigger on Agnes, or to torture, or to order the missiles that killed Mace, and he still chose to. Again, to say he never had that because his whole life was rewritten is to pretty much say that people are defined by the lives they\'ve lived, and not by their freewill or ability to choose, which, once again, goes against what Team Coulson had initially said, which was, and I repeat \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because who chose not to let it to.\"
And while I do admit that, yes, Coulson was temporarily willing to let Ward walk free, the rest of the team wasn\'t and even stated on the Bus that they wished Skye had managed to kill him and that they were never going to forgive him, so much so that Simmons even tried to kill Ward while they were on a mission together.
So no, the team wasn\'t willing to forgive Ward, no matter what. Their treatment of Fitz is completely different. Whereas Ward was only given the option of potentially not being killed on the condition that he received FakeMemories, which was a condition he only obtained because Coulson had no other options, which Coulson wasn\'t happy about, and even then continues to receive hatred and vitriol from the team, Fitz was not only immediately forgiven, but the team even says that none of his actions were his fault because he lived a bad life in the Framework, despite having previously stated that trauma is no excuse to do evil.
Again, I'm not saying that Ward wasn't a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It's right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn't matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they're willing to turn around when they're friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it's not his fault because of his life, simply because he's their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and be portrayed as justified both times, then it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
to:
Again, I\'m not saying that Ward wasn\'t a bad guy, but the morality and justification of the protagonists does play a crucial role in Protagonist-Centered Morality. It\'s right there on the main page. If the protagonists are willing to punish a man and use the justification it by saying that doesn\'t matter what he went through in life, he chose to do bad, but then they\'re willing to turn around when their friend, when placed in the exact same position, also does bad, say that it\'s not his fault because of his life, simply because he\'s their friend, then it does qualify as protagonist-centered morality. They are holding two people to [[MoralDissonance two completely opposite, contradictory standards]], and are portrayed as justified both times, so it is Protagonist-Centered Morality.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It's not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It's as simple as that.
to:
> You really do not get the whole deal with Ward, do you? It\'s not merely his actions, but that he refused to repent them that justified their treatment. Fitz at least had the decency to actually regret his actions. Ward never did stop being evil, and went out of his way to wreck any chance at redemption he had. Fitz did not, and as soon as he got his memories back, became good. Ward is punished because he continued to be evil no matter what circumstance they gave him. Fitz is not punished because he became a legit good guy after regaining his memories. It\'s as simple as that.
Changed line(s) 13 from:
n
That's not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn't do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
to:
That\'s not really a punishment, considering Fitz didn\'t do anything aside from talk to Aida briefly.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don't say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
to:
> And your analogy fails for several reasons. First of all is the fact that if it is keeping with the show, guy 1 would plead innocent and get a longer sentence then guy 2, who would plead guilty and get a reduced sentence. The judge would also have to add on the fact that guy 2 had a mental defect which prevented him from fully grasping the situation (because amnesia is in fact a mental condition). And most importantly, don\'t say that Fitz merely got amnesia and someone else told him this. He got most of his entire life rewritten and given a new personality by an A.I. who then manipulated him into acting his part. In order for the analogy to be correct, the person manipulating guy 2 would not only need to be extremely detailed, but force in new memories somehow, and then lead guy 2 into murdering.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said
to:
If you really believe that a Fitz had no control simply because of what his life was rewritten, A) it is honestly no different than believing that someone who does have amnesia has no control over their actions or the ability to choose, which is not the case, B) if that were the case, then it goes against everything the protagonists initially preached whenever they said \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because we chose not to let it to.\" So either way, it goes against the ideals espoused by the protagonists.
> There is a difference. Coulson gave him a choice to get the new memories. Fitz never had a choice. And I was talking about after it, where Coulson was in fact willing to let Ward walk free with his memories intact, and only decided to go after him went Ward kidnapped and tortured one of his agents. If anything, the fact that they were willing to forgive Ward at all at that point backs up how Fitz was treated after the Framework arc.
Except the choice Coulson gave was either new FakeMemories or be killed. Again, I\'m not saying Fitz had a choice in having his life rewritten; I\'m saying he had a choice to not pull the trigger on Agnes, or to torture, or to order the missiles that killed Mace, and he still chose to. Again, to say he never had that because his whole life was rewritten is to pretty much say that people are defined by the lives they\'ve lived, and not by their freewill or ability to choose, which, once again, goes against what Team Coulson had initially said, which was, and I repeat \"We all had traumatic lives and it didn\'t turn us into psychopaths, because who chose not to let it to.\"
And while I do admit that, yes, Coulson was temporarily willing to let Ward walk free, the rest of the team wasn\'t and even stated on the Bus that they wished Skye had managed to kill him and that they were never going to forgive him, so much so that Simmons even tried to kill Ward while they were on a mission together.
So no, the team wasn\'t willing to forgive Ward, no matter what. Their treatment of Fitz is completely different. Whereas Ward was only given the option of potentially not being killed on the condition that he received FakeMemories, which was a condition he only obtained because Coulson had no other option, and even then continues to receive hatred and vitriol from the team, Fitz was not only immediately forgiven, but the team even says that none of his actions were his fault because he lived a bad life in the Framework, despite having previously stated that trauma is no excuse to do evil.
