Are souls the same for everyone?

This, for me, is what makes unsoulled Spike so complex because he doesn't always act this way. In S5 'Forever' for example he brings flowers for Joyce and is simply going to leave them...because he liked Joyce. It doesn't have anything to do with Buffy.
He also helps Dawn with her resurrection spell, and while this isn't the wisest action, the reasons Spike does in aren't that much to do with Buffy, but to do with Dawn and how she is mourning/feeling.

I think this has more to do with Spike having emotions than having a soul. We do know vampires can like or love people, that's one of the reason they group like the Fanged Four did, or how Angel had this buddy vampire that he slayed in s1 of Angel. I do think Spike genuinely liked Dawn and Joyce. Like, Angelus would protect Darla and Drusilla. I think it's entirely possible for Spike to feel that way towards them without the soul. But I agree, sometimes it's a thin line between evil and good. I guess I do see more the soul as conscience. It's possible to do good without a conscience, especially if your motives are personal. but I think what is lacking is the understanding of why you should be doing such thing.

Let's put it this way, Spike sees Joyce on the street about to get hit by a car. What will go through his mind is "I like this lady, I wanna keep her around so I'll save her". The same Spike sees a stranger about to get hit by a car "Who cares, that'll make a nice dinner". Whereas with a soul you would have the understanding that you should save the person regardless, because it's the right thing to do. I don't think it's uncommon for vampires to want to save people they view as family, it's just that normally the family is other vampires, not humans.
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
Thats basically what I was saying yesterday.. the soul is the conscience.
I’m throwing random thoughts here hoping that they make sense....


Vampires are like animals, but humans are too just of a different race. We think it’s wrong to feed on other humans but have no issues (generally speaking of course) in eating animals of another race and we see them as food. The moment a human is killed and turned in a vampire he stops being a human, so he sees nothing wrong in feeding on humans because they are not of his same race. Also vampires are not just simple animals, they are vicious evil animals who enjoy the killing of their prey. It’s like saying that humans are cats, while vampires are tigers 😀


So I think the soul gives back the sense of ‘humanity’, and with it the innate belief that other humans are not food anymore. But this doesn’t mean that, just like humans, a souled vampire cannot kill. So if they kill or not, if they act good or bad, that’s not up to the soul but to their personalities, to the experiences they have done, the things they have learned and the goal they want to reach.
 
So I think the soul gives .. belief that other humans are not food anymore.
But that is incorrect. As Angel, even in season 1 of Buffy, was drinking human blood. So humans were still viewed as food, they just opt for the more humane fast food versus hunting their own dinner.
 
@Mr. Pole I think we agree on what the soul is, but we disagree on whether or not it is always there or not. To me Spike pre-soul simply has no conscience. But yes, the whole conscience thing makes sense. Actually, it goes a bit deeper than that. Because I think vampires do understand the concept of right and wrong, but it's in the way that they apply it that differs from soulled people.
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
" I think vampires do understand the concept of right and wrong," I concur with that as well.
I like this,but vampires were also originally human. Making Anya souled really screwed things up.

Vampires are actually a special case... loss of the soul is actually part of the creation process. With vengeance demons it's not... they become demons purely of their own free will, and they carry out vengeance because they think it's the right thing to do. They don't see themselves as evil. Vampires know they're evil, and don't care.

And demons are also literal beings in the B-verse. Angel, Spike and Harmony retained personality and memories. Harmony never got a soul. Angel did good with his only after he met Buffy. Spike was the Clockwork Vamp, but also retained memories and an excess of feelings. Both Spike and Angel did bad things souled, and Harmony did good ones without a soul.

My theory is that the soul is what enables humans to interface, spiritually and emotionally, with the rest of humanity. Basically, not having a soul makes you a sociopath. But sociopaths are capable of doing good things if they decide they want to. Absolute self-interest doesn't necessarily require hurting people every minute of every day. (Of course, vampires' survival requires regularly hurting people in order to feed, which they feel no remorse about.) And, of course, you can have a soul and still be a sociopath, and you can do evil things without being a sociopath.

It looks like in the Buffyverse, for a living person, the mind and awareness are connected to the body, not the soul. With a normal death, the body dies and the mind moves on to the afterlife where it is reunited with its soul. Being vamped releases the soul, but keeps the mind with the body. The soul is replaced by a demon spirit which has no sentience of its own, but influences the vampire to commit evil deeds. Like humans, though, some vampire spirits are better or worse than others... from diabolically, pro-actively evil (Angelus) to kind of passively self-interested (Harmony).

But if the vamp is resouled, the soul can be damned for the deeds of the demon. Hardly fair, that.

I can't remember any instances where the original human soul was punished for the deeds of the vampire that replaced it. That would be like you getting arrested because somebody committed a hit-and-run with a car they bought from you. We know that Darla's soul made it to heaven, at least. Her self-sacrificing death (under the influence of a borrowed soul) would hardly be enough to offset the thousands of murders she committed in nearly 400 years as a vampire.
 
But that is incorrect. As Angel, even in season 1 of Buffy, was drinking human blood. So humans were still viewed as food, they just opt for the more humane fast food versus hunting their own dinner.

I was seeing it from a moral point of view and morality obviously is not the same for everybody, vampires included. Using again the humans-eating-animals example we also have different situations: we have those who refuse to eat anything animal related, those who eat some animals but not others, those who eat but don't hunt them and so on. Also things change, people change and moral values change with them. So Angel in BTVS S1 drank human blood, ATS S5 Angel didn't. 
Mr. Pole: Right, therefor you cant really say they dont see humans as food, as they still drank human blood. Angel turned, more or less, into a vegan towards the end.

Angel drank human blood. It was his choice and it has to do with his morality not with what I said, which was a general thought not aimed at Angel in particular. There are always exceptions. But if you want to know what I think about Angel specifically, I'll say that Angel was (and still is) a work in progress 😛
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
Right, therefor you cant really say they dont see humans as food, as they still drank human blood. Angel turned, more or less, into a vegan towards the end.
I can't remember any instances where the original human soul was punished for the deeds of the vampire that replaced it.

This is what happened to Angel in 'Becoming', he was condemned to hundreds of years in a hell dimension for something that Angelus set in motion. Poor schlub.
 
I am now confused.. as it seemed "innate belief that other humans are not food anymore" now means something else.. Angel drank human blood when he had a soul, Spike drank human blood when he had a soul. If they are not drinking it because it's believed to be food, why are they drinking it?
 
@Mr.Pole, The difference is that Angel doesn't kill more human beings to get food. This is what it's about soul's presence. Change perspectives and ways of perceive about life.
Also, I'm convinced that "Angel drink human blood" in season one is a continuity error with Becoming, when Whistler told him how and where to get pig's blood
 
@Mr.Pole, The difference is that Angel doesn't kill more human beings to get food.
Right, but he still views them as food. "continuity error" I know, but I still have to bring it up!
 
Right, but he still views them as food. "continuity error" I know, but I still have to bring it up!
Sure! He is a vampire, is its nature. But here's the catch, right? With the soul he has the option to choose which life he want to live.
Soul as opportunity to make choices and choices also carry the responsibility for his actions.
 
I am now confused.. as it seemed "innate belief that other humans are not food anymore" now means something else.. Angel drank human blood when he had a soul, Spike drank human blood when he had a soul. If they are not drinking it because it's believed to be food, why are they drinking it?

I don't remember souled Spike drinking human blood.. it isn't really relevant to my point but I'm curious: when did it happen?

Now, it seems that you want an absolute answer that explains everything but I haven't it and I'm very much convinced that no one has.

Anyway my thought is that the soul gives the souled vampire the "innate belief that other humans are not food anymore" and this to me means that he should have issues in killing humans to feed on them. But the effect it has changes depending on the subject (for example I'm sure it would have had no result with Kralik).

Also it changes with time. Take Angel for example. He obviously didn't have many issues, in fact in the first two years after being souled he went on killing humans. But he chose as victims those he believed that didn't deserve to live: rapist, murderers. He couldn't kill innocents, unless he justified it somehow as he did with Sam lawson. I'd say that, soul or no soul, his morality and conscience are very much corrupted especially at the beginning but with time (a LOT of time), he changes and evolves. That's why I said that he is a 'work in progress'.

To answer (finally) your question: human blood may be food for souled Angel and Spike but humans are definitely not. Or do you really believe that looking at Cordelia, Wesley etc, Angel just saw a lunch? or that Spike thought of Dawn, Buffy etc as happy meals on legs? So, if you see a contradiction in this it's because there is a contradiction, but it has nothing to do with what the soul is.
 
I think this has more to do with Spike having emotions than having a soul. We do know vampires can like or love people, that's one of the reason they group like the Fanged Four did, or how Angel had this buddy vampire that he slayed in s1 of Angel. I do think Spike genuinely liked Dawn and Joyce. Like, Angelus would protect Darla and Drusilla. I think it's entirely possible for Spike to feel that way towards them without the soul. But I agree, sometimes it's a thin line between evil and good. I guess I do see more the soul as conscience. It's possible to do good without a conscience, especially if your motives are personal. but I think what is lacking is the understanding of why you should be doing such thing.

Let's put it this way, Spike sees Joyce on the street about to get hit by a car. What will go through his mind is "I like this lady, I wanna keep her around so I'll save her". The same Spike sees a stranger about to get hit by a car "Who cares, that'll make a nice dinner". Whereas with a soul you would have the understanding that you should save the person regardless, because it's the right thing to do. I don't think it's uncommon for vampires to want to save people they view as family, it's just that normally the family is other vampires, not humans.

Yes, but how many humans will drop everything and risk death for a stranger. Definitely far fewer than those who will do so for someone they know, and even more will do so for someone they love (a child in particular). We all tend to have that bias. And I'm not sure 'nice dinner' is all that much better than 'ooooh, look at the blood' (grab phone and record). 
But that is incorrect. As Angel, even in season 1 of Buffy, was drinking human blood. So humans were still viewed as food, they just opt for the more humane fast food versus hunting their own dinner.

It's the source that counts here, I think. I mean, I never understood why animal blood was better than Red Cross rejects.

In fact, that's right up there with how they did souls. In season one, Angel's refrigerator has blood donation bags - human blood I would assume. In LA he is drinking animal blood. Spike gives up human blood when he is chipped, but must go through withdrawal when he begins "feeding" again. Of course, then I start to wonder if they kill the LA otters, or simply cage and drain them, and I want to find a pedophile to throw at a vamp!. 
Right, but he still views them as food. "continuity error" I know, but I still have to bring it up!

Blood can be food without harming the donor - which would mean anything with blood is also regarded as food.

I think I would call Angel a vegetarian - not a vegan. I guess artificial blood would be vegan. But removing human blood from the list of approved food is a step in that direction. Incidentally, Spike became a vegetarian at about the same time. 
Vampires are actually a special case... loss of the soul is actually part of the creation process. With vengeance demons it's not... they become demons purely of their own free will, and they carry out vengeance because they think it's the right thing to do. They don't see themselves as evil. Vampires know they're evil, and don't care.

Which brings us to the nature of evil and how it affects the soul. B-verse seems to hold that killing, maiming, torturing, and dark magic areall evil in and of themselves. But Anya did just that for 1000 years, and he soul wasn't damaged? If believing you are right is all that is needed to protect the soul than every psychopath out there would still have a pure soul.

Interesting thought, really.


My theory is that the soul is what enables humans to interface, spiritually and emotionally, with the rest of humanity. Basically, not having a soul makes you a sociopath. But sociopaths are capable of doing good things if they decide they want to. Absolute self-interest doesn't necessarily require hurting people every minute of every day. (Of course, vampires' survival requires regularly hurting people in order to feed, which they feel no remorse about.) And, of course, you can have a soul and still be a sociopath, and you can do evil things without being a sociopath.

First off - I do want to throw psychopath in there. I would call Angelus a psychopath - he planned his murders and carried them out in a controlled fashion. Spike was a sociopath - not much for planning, liked the crash and the crunch. Once that is said and done I think what you have here is a perfect explanation for chipped Spike saying "I'm still evil!"

It looks like in the Buffyverse, for a living person, the mind and awareness are connected to the body, not the soul. With a normal death, the body dies and the mind moves on to the afterlife where it is reunited with its soul. Being vamped releases the soul, but keeps the mind with the body. The soul is replaced by a demon spirit which has no sentience of its own, but influences the vampire to commit evil deeds. Like humans, though, some vampire spirits are better or worse than others... from diabolically, pro-actively evil (Angelus) to kind of passively self-interested (Harmony).

Since the soul is gone, and the demon is part of the darkness, then a vampire would be a personality who is kept happily in some level of darkness. Once the soul is returned then there is access to a larger range of feelings and realities.

I can't remember any instances where the original human soul was punished for the deeds of the vampire that replaced it. That would be like you getting arrested because somebody committed a hit-and-run with a car they bought from you. We know that Darla's soul made it to heaven, at least. Her self-sacrificing death (under the influence of a borrowed soul) would hardly be enough to offset the thousands of murders she committed in nearly 400 years as a vampire.

Hellbound:

A completely naked Spike is lying on the floor, cringing in the fetal position, as Pavayne leans over him taking mad joy in torturing him.

PAVAYNE

Disappointing.
(Spike shudders in pain)
I expected more from soul of vampire. Too much conscience, perhaps, weighing it down.

A portal opens up in the basement right in front of Spike. It's black and slick like oil. The portal has a deep hole in the center, and long black tentacle-like arms reach out toward Spike threatening to pull him in.

PAVAYNE
Look... hell knows you're ready, plump and ripe. Beginning to understand, aren't you? The soul that blesses you... (Spike has flashes of a vision of someone being tortured)...damns you to suffer forever. (holds Spike's head up toward the portal) You go now, William, so I can stay.


 
Which brings us to the nature of evil and how it affects the soul. B-verse seems to hold that killing, maiming, torturing, and dark magic are all evil in and of themselves. But Anya did just that for 1000 years, and he soul wasn't damaged? If believing you are right is all that is needed to protect the soul than every psychopath out there would still have a pure soul.

Interesting thought, really.

If you want to quantify evil, I'm not sure it's possible to use any notion of universal morality. It simply changes too much from culture to culture and time period to time period. Anya was born into a Viking culture. Vikings were mass murderers and thieves who were considered evil by everyone else in the world, but heroic by the terms of medieval Scandinavian culture. Killing people for vengeance was not only acceptable but praiseworthy in her culture, and in many other cultures... right down to the present day.

The only reliable way to define evil in concrete terms is "performing an act that harms others which you know to be morally wrong, but choose to do anyway of your own free will."

Psychopaths don't believe they're right. They simply don't care about any moral judgment. They understand that society defines their actions as evil, they just don't care. Some believe that what they're doing is noble or necessary, but they are delusional and so not morally responsible for their actions.

You could argue that anyone who deliberately chooses to unnecessarily harm another person is mentally ill in one way or another. But of course that would make a system of laws completely irrelevant. So the law requires an insanity defense to prove that the defendant wasn't able to tell the difference between good and bad. Sociopathy can't be used as an insanity defense because sociopaths do know the difference. They know what society considers unacceptable, and they can avoid committing those acts if they choose. When they choose to commit them anyway, they are morally responsible.

Hellbound:

A completely naked Spike is lying on the floor, cringing in the fetal position, as Pavayne leans over him taking mad joy in torturing him.

PAVAYNE

Disappointing.
(Spike shudders in pain)
I expected more from soul of vampire. Too much conscience, perhaps, weighing it down.

A portal opens up in the basement right in front of Spike. It's black and slick like oil. The portal has a deep hole in the center, and long black tentacle-like arms reach out toward Spike threatening to pull him in.

PAVAYNE
Look... hell knows you're ready, plump and ripe. Beginning to understand, aren't you? The soul that blesses you... (Spike has flashes of a vision of someone being tortured)...damns you to suffer forever. (holds Spike's head up toward the portal) You go now, William, so I can stay.

I was under the impression that Pavayne was using magic to send Spike to Hell. Since Hell dimensions are physical places in the Buffyverse, it's possible to send people there whether they deserve it or not.

Which brings up the question of who judges souls in the Buffyverse? An all-powerful God who judges souls the same way a court judges criminals? Or do people judge themselves, and end up in the afterlife they know they deserve? If that's the case, do sociopaths get a free pass to Heaven? Or does death cure them of their sociopathy so they can look back on their own lives and judge them objectively, based on their actions?

Angel and Spike are basically sociopaths who were cured of their condition, look back objectively on their actions while soulless, and judge themselves based on that. We might say that neither one of them deserves to go to Hell for what they did while soulless, but neither of them would agree... at least not yet. They are both pursuing the Shanshu, which symbolizes the "Holy Grail" they're both after... doing enough good to finally offset the evil they did. They approach it in different ways, though: Angel tends to treat it like a mathematical equation, like he has to balance some cosmic ledger. Spike seems to be going more with Xena's Rule of Redemption: "Do good, and you are good."
 
Or does death cure them of their sociopathy so they can look back on their own lives and judge them objectively, based on their actions?
Oh man. That would be torturous. To live your live 'sick' only to be 'cured' to see how 'sick' you were and then, after being 'cured' you get to be sent to a hell dimension and tormented for it. Would be better to remain 'sick' in that case, honestly.
 
I don't recall their spirits being spoken of too much in the buffyverse. Is there?

I think the subject of the soul in this world is very complex.. I honestly don't think it was too often thought out when
the soul is being used into a storyline. We know Vampires have souls, or can do good without one. Spike wasn't the only
vampire who did good. Then all of the other demons were spread from very-bad to very-noble.

When Angel becomes Angelus, where does his soul go? Is it lost, floating, taking the backseat? Buffy as well.. I would
think she (soul included) went to the dimension that she compares to heaven. Doesn't Angel take his soul with him
when he goes to the hell-like dimension at the end of Becoming?
 
Oh man. That would be torturous. To live your live 'sick' only to be 'cured' to see how 'sick' you were and then, after being 'cured' you get to be sent to a hell dimension and tormented for it. Would be better to remain 'sick' in that case, honestly.

More accurately, you would send yourself to a Hell dimension out of remorse for what you'd done while sick. It wouldn't be strictly fair to yourself, but you would have the memories of having committed all that evil deliberately and gleefully.

Knowing what I know about Joss, I'm pretty sure his world doesn't have an all-powerful God sitting in judgment of souls. The only one that can really damn you is yourself.

Angel only truly becomes Angelus when he loses his soul for some reason (e.g. his curse, or having it voluntarily extracted for reasons). The demon spirit Angelus is always there, but is powerless when Angel's soul is present and active. But it can come out if something suppresses his soul. When he loses his soul, it apparently goes out into the ether where somebody who knows how can retrieve it. A soul doesn't seem to go to the afterlife unless the body is dead and the mind is freed to go with it.
 
More accurately, you would send yourself to a Hell dimension out of remorse for what you'd done while sick. It wouldn't be strictly fair to yourself, but you would have the memories of having committed all that evil deliberately and gleefully.

Knowing what I know about Joss, I'm pretty sure his world doesn't have an all-powerful God sitting in judgment of souls. The only one that can really damn you is yourself.

Angel only truly becomes Angelus when he loses his soul for some reason (e.g. his curse, or having it voluntarily extracted for reasons). The demon spirit Angelus is always there, but is powerless when Angel's soul is present and active. But it can come out if something suppresses his soul. When he loses his soul, it apparently goes out into the ether where somebody who knows how can retrieve it. A soul doesn't seem to go to the afterlife unless the body is dead and the mind is freed to go with it.

I think there are some lawyers in a wine cellar who might disagree on the powerless aspect...if they were alive. He can chose to hear either the soul or the demon. His greatness is in chosing to hear the soul. It wouldn't be much of a struggle if the demon was all fixed by having a soul. It's being tempted to follow the demon and choosing to follow the soul that makes him great.

It's why Wesley wasn't dead. Angel could have ripped his heart out, broken his neck, done far more damage. If he wanted Wesley dead he would be dead.
 
If you want to quantify evil, I'm not sure it's possible to use any notion of universal morality. It simply changes too much from culture to culture and time period to time period. Anya was born into a Viking culture. Vikings were mass murderers and thieves who were considered evil by everyone else in the world, but heroic by the terms of medieval Scandinavian culture. Killing people for vengeance was not only acceptable but praiseworthy in her culture, and in many other cultures... right down to the present day.

The only reliable way to define evil in concrete terms is "performing an act that harms others which you know to be morally wrong, but choose to do anyway of your own free will."

Psychopaths don't believe they're right. They simply don't care about any moral judgment. They understand that society defines their actions as evil, they just don't care. Some believe that what they're doing is noble or necessary, but they are delusional and so not morally responsible for their actions.

You could argue that anyone who deliberately chooses to unnecessarily harm another person is mentally ill in one way or another. But of course that would make a system of laws completely irrelevant. So the law requires an insanity defense to prove that the defendant wasn't able to tell the difference between good and bad. Sociopathy can't be used as an insanity defense because sociopaths do know the difference. They know what society considers unacceptable, and they can avoid committing those acts if they choose. When they choose to commit them anyway, they are morally responsible.

Vikings conquered and enslaved about a millennium ago, yes. but the modern countries, not so much. In the B-verse revenge and mass murder are wrong. How can anyone complain about any of the Fanged Four and accept Anya? Anya had an informed choice - Anya kept her soul - Anya tortured, murdered, and helped destroy entire countries. Anya has no remorse. No, this does not fit any of the B-verse doctrine

Exchange the word Psychopath for Vampire - vampires don't believe they're right. They simply don't care about any moral judgment. They understand that society defines their actions as evil, they just don't care. Some believe that what they're doing is noble or necessary, but they are delusional and so not morally responsible for their actions. Yeah - that works. 😀

If you argue that anyone who deliberately chooses to unnecessarily harm another person is mentally ill in one way or another, you must also abrogate history. Harm is a human norm - illness would presume that it is not.

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/forensic-focus/2010/07/sociopathy-vs-psychopathy/
She's a forensic psychologist. She explains the difference between the two.
Neither one is forbidden as an insanity defense, and there have been many psychopaths convicted. Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer - serial killers in general. Sociopaths (who have the same affective disorder from nurture rather than nature) are more likely to dress up like the joker and kill people in a theater.


I was under the impression that Pavayne was using magic to send Spike to Hell. Since Hell dimensions are physical places in the Buffyverse, it's possible to send people there whether they deserve it or not.

Which brings up the question of who judges souls in the Buffyverse? An all-powerful God who judges souls the same way a court judges criminals? Or do people judge themselves, and end up in the afterlife they know they deserve? If that's the case, do sociopaths get a free pass to Heaven? Or does death cure them of their sociopathy so they can look back on their own lives and judge them objectively, based on their actions?

Angel and Spike are basically sociopaths who were cured of their condition, look back objectively on their actions while soulless, and judge themselves based on that. We might say that neither one of them deserves to go to Hell for what they did while soulless, but neither of them would agree... at least not yet. They are both pursuing the Shanshu, which symbolizes the "Holy Grail" they're both after... doing enough good to finally offset the evil they did. They approach it in different ways, though: Angel tends to treat it like a mathematical equation, like he has to balance some cosmic ledger. Spike seems to be going more with Xena's Rule of Redemption: "Do good, and you are good."

I'd definitely say Angelus is a psychopath and Spike is a sociopath.
From the link:

The last main difference between psychopathy and sociopathy is in the presentation. The psychopath is callous, yet charming. He or she will con and manipulate others with charisma and intimidation and can effectively mimic feelings to present as “normal” to society. The psychopath is organized in their criminal thinking and behavior, and can maintain good emotional and physical control, displaying little to no emotional or autonomic arousal, even under situations that most would find threatening or horrifying. The psychopath is keenly aware that what he or she is doing is wrong, but does not care.


Conversely, the sociopath is less organized in his or her demeanor; he or she might be nervous, easily agitated, and quick to display anger. A sociopath is more likely to spontaneously act out in inappropriate ways without thinking through the consequences. Compared to the psychopath, the sociopath will not be able to move through society committing callous crimes as easily, as they can form attachments and often have “normal temperaments.” The sociopath will lie, manipulate and hurt others, just as the psychopath would, but will often avoid doing so to the select few people they care about, and will likely feel guilty should they end up hurting someone they care about.


I don't know that Spike was all that concerned about Shanshu - he won the fight and then gave it away. I suspect he's happy as a vampire. OTH - your description of them is great! Cosmic ledger vs Xena philosophy! 😀

Personally I'd say that Spike has daddy issues, too.
 
Back
Top Bottom