You must have a tightly constrained definition of evil than I do. I
never noticed that having an internal moral ethos mattered much in the
doing of evil whether a Torquemada, Hitler, Senator McCarthy, or other
self-serving avenging angel. Though some attention was given to his
internal logic in rationalizing his killings I am not sure what the
duty of Chigurh was in killing the driver of the car he wanted after
escaping from the sheriff at the beginning.
I am not very conversant with philosophical thought, but it seems a
stretch to me considering that pursuit of a large amount of money is
the motivation for almost all the players and the one that walks away
does so with the least acceptance of his fate. Somehow leaving a
trail of bodies behind to get your $10million seems hardly stoic. But
you may be right if he accepts that he is an insane, psychopathic
killer, but says it is good.
I think that someone might argue that the sheriff who expresses dismay
that he is not in control of his job takes control of his life and
retires. Seems like that is the perfect stoic solution.
I vote that is more about nihilism.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On / January 5, 2008 CE, at 3:34 PM, Andrew Fildes wrote:
> I see no implacable evil - Chigurh is inexorable but not amoral - he
> has a clear sense of 'duty', a moral ethos. Just not one that we
> agree with or find sensible.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|