Of course. I mean, there were a few humans that seemingly had no conscience. Or very little. But I assume they still had a soul. Soul doesn't equate to conscience by default.
Angel was born out of dealing with the guilt of Angelus. Liam was just a young man rebelling against his father. I think Spin the Bottle suggests that Liam was not really all that happy with Liam. I don't think he was quite as awful as he appears in some of the flashbacks.
I think the writers were attempting to explain Whedon's thought process of what the soul is, as he mentioned previously that the soul just means a person (or a vampire) is more apt to do right. As an atheist he really didn't care what the soul was and meant it synonymous with a conscience. Maybe by stating that in the comics it was to inform those who had not watched the show what the ramifications of the curse was.
It much depends who you listen to in terms of the soul. I'm sure the Ancient Greeks saw it simply as "a spark" that animated an essential humanity already present in the body. Aquinas though everything had a soul (but only humans had immortal souls). The idea of redemption being an intrinsic part of the soul is (I think - I'm not an expert on theology) a relatively late addition. The difficulty I have with the soul in Buffy is a) the idea of good/evil is neither timeless not culturally universal and the conscience, inasmuch as it relates to the Super Ego, is cultural. I'd have problems reconciling that with the notion of an eternal soul. For me, the soul is simply a convenient marker for separating humans from animals. A conscience is something that perhaps is a better marker of humanity but not intrinsically related to having a soul. What is important (I think) as a restraint is the idea (not the actuality) of losing the soul - it's this fear that bridges the soul and the conscience. Thus the soul becomes an important ideological tool.
Why would he not have a conscience? It's not as though we were shown that Liam lacked a conscience. Even if he were a drunken layabout- and I am not saying it as if it's a bad thing mind you, I aspire to one day be a drunken layabout- he still never had death and destruction on his hands before. So... I don't see where it's that big of a deal that Angel had a conscience. Hell, arguably, Spike had one before he got a chip or a soul.
Liam lost his soul, to become Angelus, not his conscience. The soulless demon just made it easier to ignore his conscience. Just as the soul made it easier to listen to it.
Until S5 Spike, at least, I think both shows were pretty clear on the soul = conscience i.e. ability to feel remorse and empathise with human suffering.
I agree. It's far better to have a soul and do evil. You can really cherish it. That's why Warren is such a great character and has one of the better arcs in the show.
But that goes against what Whedon first described it as; it's simplifying it. Just like the text in the comic did.
😵😵😵
Not really - the soul being what makes a person more apt to do right makes sense if it is a conscience, because as we see with humans a soul doesn't guarantee goodness/morality, it's just enables access to the whole moral spectrum. A person can choose to ignore/go against it. Therfore 'more apt' makes sense. Without a soul there is no resistance to the impulse of violence, pain and destruction.
But that's not what he said initially, when he first described what a Buffyverse soul did (this was around S3 I think). The way he spoke of a soul was the way you would speak of a conscience. The way he spoke on it is that even without a soul it was still a choice between doing right or wrong, just you had more of a desire to lean one way versus the other.
It was something like that, but I thought it was on a commentary... I never watch those Paley Fest things.