Could Demorphing be Considered Murder?

[DinosaurNothlit]

Consider, for a moment, the rationale behind why the Animorphs were so reluctant to morph sentient beings.  I'm sure you're all familiar with the basic concept, given that it was something that was touched on several times throughout the series.  Cassie compared it to being like a Yeerk, basically you create a 'sentient' creature, and then enslave it.

Try carrying that train of thought to its logical conclusion, though.  If every morph is to be treated as approximately equal to the creature that is morphed, then it must be noted that demorphing destroys that creature.  The Animorphs seem to start out with a blank slate every time they morph, given the fact that they have to re-conquer the creature's instincts each time.  Of course, this particular aspect could be argued either way, since it's also true that it's easier to conquer the instincts with subsequent morphs.  But, given that the basis of the morph is a strand of DNA which carries no psychological information on the creature's state of mind, memories, or life, I think it's fairly safe to say that each demorph destroys the individual creature (if it can be called such) that was created by that particular morph.

Ergo, if morphing sentient creatures is actually wrong for the reasons that Cassie states, then demorphing from those same creatures is murder.

Thoughts?  Please, feel more than welcome to poke any holes in my logic that you can find.  That's why I posted this as a thread, after all, to be discussed.  Please note, though, that I'm taking Cassie's original supposition that 'enslaving' a morph is wrong, as the basis for my argument, so, while you're free to poke holes in Cassie's morality if you want, don't think that doing so will damage my subsequent argument.

[Chad32]

You're not creating a sentient being. It has no self awareness. There is no point in the series where the Animorphs morph Humans, Hork-Bajir, or whatever and their morph starts talking to them or tries to control the body outside of basic instincts. It's not murder, and comparing it to Yeerks makes no sense. Yes you control something's instincts. You have to control your own instincts when doing something dangerous, assuming you do have self preservation instincts.

[yunyun]

I agree with Chad. The creature isn't really alive. It's just like a shell that the person controls, so I wouldn't consider demorphing murder


But that is a pretty interesting thought

[Estelore]

We always assumed that Cassie's reason for balking at the prospect of morphing sentients without their permission was because it gave the morpher the ability to impersonate the other being.  Her concern proved well-founded when
[spoiler]David morphed Marco and attacked the other Animorphs[/spoiler]. This ability to pass as somebody else is what made the action similar to the Yeerks.

[RYTX]

I wouldn't call demorphing murder anymore than I'd call morphing suicide.

We know that when you morph a creature of lesser mass, the excess mass of your body is stored in Z-space. You still get your body back when you demorph. Cleaned up, but not reborn.

A problem in morphing theory is we don't know where extra matter for larger morphs comes from-however, I suspect that once you do the larger morph, when you demorph that creature's mass would be kept in Z-space, same as human mass is when morphing a small creature.

It's not just matter transformation, it's matter relocation from z-space to normal space.

And though there may not be a lot of logic behind this idea, I do think it applies to small morphs as well, only because otherwise you need to different methods of morphing depending on original vs morph size.

So my problem with your argument depends on undefined-at least non canon defined-aspects of morphing science.

Ethically?
A morph is created when you will it. It is your creation, do what you see fit.
(And god strikes me with lightning in 3,2,1....)

[DinosaurNothlit]

You're not creating a sentient being. It has no self awareness. There is no point in the series where the Animorphs morph Humans, Hork-Bajir, or whatever and their morph starts talking to them or tries to control the body outside of basic instincts. It's not murder, and comparing it to Yeerks makes no sense. Yes you control something's instincts. You have to control your own instincts when doing something dangerous, assuming you do have self preservation instincts.

Like I said, I'm not even debating the validity of Cassie's claim that a morph is a sentient being.  To be perfectly honest, I'm actually with you, it is slightly ridiculous.  Heck, part of the reason I brought it up in the first place was to demonstrate how silly it is, by carrying it to its logical (and perhaps preposterous) extreme.  But, well, I hadn't wanted to call attention to my own opinions on the matter, because I was trying not to turn this thread into too much of a blatant Cassie-bash.

We always assumed that Cassie's reason for balking at the prospect of morphing sentients without their permission was because it gave the morpher the ability to impersonate the other being.  Her concern proved well-founded when
[spoiler]David morphed Marco and attacked the other Animorphs[/spoiler]. This ability to pass as somebody else is what made the action similar to the Yeerks.

Book #4, page 53:

"It will be strange morphing something so intelligent," Rachel said.

"Yes," I agreed.  Strange, and . . . wrong, somehow.  I felt a twisting in my stomach.  "How is doing this any different than what the Yeerks do?"

Rachel looked surprised.  "Yeerks take over humans," she said.  "Besides, they don't morph, they infest.  We don't take over the actual animal, we just copy his DNA pattern, create a totally new animal, and then-"

"And then control the new animal," I said.

"It's not the same," Rachel insisted.  But she looked troubled.

It sounds to me that, initially at least, Cassie was much more concerned with the ethics of controlling the morph, rather than the threat of impersonation.  Perhaps the impersonation issue factored in later, particularly when they started morphing things like Hork-Bajir and humans.

RYTX, that's a good point, about morphs being stored in Z-space the same way a person's original form is.  That would make a lot of sense.

[Noelle]

I agree that, according to passage four, that seemed to be the worry that Cassie had in mind.  They were "stealing" the animal's body to do with whatever they wished, and then dismissing it into non-existence whenever they were done with it.  (Which is really the same as death, if you are going by this logic.)  I think that this is consistent with Cassie's early on beliefs about the spirituality that animals contained.

At that point of time, they had no real idea how morphing worked.  Without Ax there to make it somewhat understandable to them what happened (if he ever really could), morphing probably had more of a mystical quality rather than a scientific quality to them, and to Cassie in particular.  It is reasonable to assume that she could be worried that they would be stealing the animal's essence more than their DNA, and their temporary inability to control the morph in the beginning would probably reinforce that thought.  They are essentially creating animals to just bend them to their will, basically be their slaves.


However, as Rachel said, that is illogical.  They merely swapped DNA, didn't create a whole new being.  They were still themselves no matter what form they were in.  However, in the beginning when they were new to the idea of becoming new creatures, it probably created a strange disassociation in their mind that might have created the belief they were becoming something else.  But as the series progressed, they gained a better understanding that they were their morph.  But Cassie probably never lost the feeling that they were doing something against nature, humans aren't supposed to be able to 'steal' the bodies of other animals to use it to their aims.  Animals were pretty sacred to Cassie, and it probably isn't a large stretch of imagination to imagine her thinking "a wolf would never want this Hork'Bajir dead, what right do I have to use a wolf body to kill it?"


Like Estelore said, I think the more practical worry is using someone's explicit identity to deceive others and use that body for acts that the person who's identity was stolen would not agree with.  Most of the other animorphs would agree to that, being humans themselves and understanding the implications, but they didn't extend that courtesy when thinking about animals.  To them, animals didn't have identities, but to Cassie they did, and there was no difference between stealing the identity of an animal and the identity of a human.


Still, illogical, (well, perhaps not illogical, but not practical at all when you have the world riding on your shoulders) but I don't think it is so off the mark that she thought that way.

[Jetstream]

No. Cassie's argument was ridiculous then and it's ridiculous now. I really need to figure out which of the books where she gets REEEEALLY preachy-moralizy and see how many of them are ghostwritten books vs. how much of this the K.A. team actually wrote.

Anyway, no. They're not creating anything. They're changing THEIR shape to be identical to something else's shape. It's not immoral in any sane universe.

[Chad32]

The thing is, none of them are going to use the morphs to do something illegal or highly immoral. Yes David did what he did, but he was off. There are good and bad ways you can use just about anything.

I don't really know the answer to that, Jet. Cassie didn't really bother me too horribly except a few times. the no morphing Humans rule was insulting, as it implies that any of them would use the Human morphs to commit crimes. Leaving the group because your morals are being questioned was wrong because she was choosing herself above the world. Giving the enemy the morphing cube was just awful. It wasn't too long before that when she said it would be the worst thing in the world if they got their hands on the cube.

I guess we really shouldn't let this devolve into a rant against Cassie.

[Noelle]

Well, in Cassie's defense, I think her leaving if she simply couldn't bring herself to do the job was the right thing to do.  It's more responsible to leave if you must, rather than break down during a critical moment when they need you, or drag the rest of the group down.

I think one of her biggest failings was that she DIDN'T stay away.

(Trying not to derail this into a Cassie bashing thread...)

[AniDragon]

The thing is, none of them are going to use the morphs to do something illegal or highly immoral. Yes David did what he did, but he was off. There are good and bad ways you can use just about anything.

Thing is, it's not always about illegal or immoral. Sometimes it can just be reputation, and not always on purpose, either.

Take when Marco morphs that one guy at his place of work, while he was trying to spy on Visser One. If the person that found him had bothered coming into the room, she would have seen her co-worker in a too-small skin tight suit that was ripping at the seems, by himself in a dark room. That would set off some alarm bells. He says he's using someone else's computer because his doesn't work. What if this office dealt with client credit card numbers, and had strict privacy laws? If he has the password for someone else's computer that he might not be allowed to have, that could put his co-worker in trouble for "giving him the password". That's two people who could potentially loose their job because Marco morphed a human being, without even doing anything wrong, just by being suspicious.

[Chad32]

Oh she could do the job. She'd just have to change her black and white morality a bit in order to accommodate reality. It's not that she couldn't fight the Yeerks anymore. It's that she wasn't the pure and clean little girl she wanted to be anymore.

Ok I can see the point there with reputation. Obviously Marco didn't mean to endanger people's livelihoods, but their careers could have been screwed if he messed up.

[Alan Fangor]

Consider, for a moment, the rationale behind why the Animorphs were so reluctant to morph sentient beings.  I'm sure you're all familiar with the basic concept, given that it was something that was touched on several times throughout the series.  Cassie compared it to being like a Yeerk, basically you create a 'sentient' creature, and then enslave it.

I have always considered this matter pretty ridicoulous. When you morph, you simply reproduce a creature that already exists, you don't create nothing. And this creature are YOU, it's not your pet or a cloned animal that you breed. It's just you in another shape. The creature has only basic istincts, no real toughts, no memories. IMHO, there is absolutely no difference between sentient and non-sentient beings in morphing. It doesn't make sense. Morphing in a flea or in a chimpanzee is definitely the same thing : the chimpanzee continues to live as it always did and it doesn't care about your morph.
And it's the same with Hork-Bajir or human morph : you don't "steal" anything, no body, no mind, no memories, it's like a disguise...but much more sophisticated 

The only problem is that a "morpher" could use a human morph for evil purposes. E.g., you could acquire your rival in love, go to his/her girl/boyfriend and say "I betrayed you with your best friend", or other things that could damage a reputation or deceive people. In this case, obviously, you shouldn't use a human morph. But the question "sentient or non sentient", logically, does not exist at all.

I think that this problem of "sentient beings" is simply a narartive expedient to add an issue, a moral question to argue about and to show different opinions, a way to differentiate psychology of each character.

[MissySelenity]

I don't think it is, when they demorph they keep the DNA stored somewhere for them morph into again. The DNA is just a copy of a original animal and they become the animal so I don't think it's killing the animal. Plus it's the only weapon the Animorphs had against the Yeerks.

[Aquilai]

I think a lot of fans (often those who are more easily impressed by the "magic") just wilfully ignore the mechanics of how these things might actually work. Scientifically speaking (as far as I'm aware) morphing is virtually impossible. The closest scientific approximation would be an energy-matter converter which would actually be less biological and more to do with physics.

The purely biological approach has a number of problems. One of the problems include the rapid creation of fluids that are not inherently biological eg hydrochloric (stomach) acid. Under the biology route, accelerated cell replication (and decay) could arguably be the basis for what is described as "growing" and "shrinking" when morphing. This should leave behind a lot of biological waste such as dead skin or limbs. One way to explain this away would be it all miraculously gets dumped into Z-space (ewww). Then there is also the issue with where the morpher's mind/brain/consciousness is stored especially if you think about insects which don't have certain sections of the brain (cognitive abilities) a human/Andalite would need.

A cleaner explanation for morphing lies in physics as a form of energy to matter conversion. The most obvious example being the replicators from Star Trek. Energy can be used to form matter, in this case the biological bodies that are morphed/demorphed. With this understanding it is not too dissimilar to the popular sci-fi teleportation (note: Not bending space-time to move). Your body is stored as data, gradually destroyed/dematerialised (if you're human you could call it murder) and then reconstructed again from the stored data.

Obviously there's no reason why it can't be a combination of the two since this is just all fictional conjecture. If your entire body were teleported ie your body seemingly vanished completely you could say you were killed until you were rematerialised again. A bit like how someone could be "dead" for several minutes then resuscitated. With morphing however, you are biologically speaking still alive and conscious throughout the transformation so I wouldn't say that it's murder. You'd need a new legal definition for murder if ever there came a day where teleportation became commonplace and "accidents" occurred. I digress...

One very key point with morphing is the idea that you are not creating a new body. It's accepted that it is you yourself that is changing to become something else. You often hear the Animorphs talk about the animal's mind surfacing. In a way, you could argue that it is the animal that is the "Yeerk" and trying to control your shape-shifted body. Chronologically speaking, you owned your body first and the animal mind came in later even though biologically speaking the source of the body is not naturally yours.

Now when you are in morph though you share the brain of the morphed/host body. In a way this is very much like a Yeerk+host situation which I think is a key point. Two potential views:

• You can say that when you demorph you are simply converting all your cells back to form your original body. That is to say the host-mind (the morph's consciousness) is only instinctive behaviour from a temporary body. It never had self-awareness or intelligence.
• On the other hand, if the host body and brain was exponentially intelligent, it would reach self-awareness and argue for control of the body. This is to say that all morphed bodies have the potential for individuality but because of the 2h limit this is never an issue.

The latter would definitely support the idea of killing a creature when you demorph. Really though it is completely arguable either way because it's fiction. It is more convenient for everyone to just think that morphs are yours to do what you want because it suits you but I don't think Cassie is wrong in her observation. It takes a very perceptive mind to notice this.

You could say that Tobias (as a nothlit) never has a problem with the hawk wanting to assert it's own will or he never notices the hawk's individuality. This is probably because he literally becomes the hawk living exactly how his hawk would live. Not to mention every remorph "resets" the morphs' minds. If the host was more intelligent (loosely described) sentient then it could be more significant, making the issue with morphing sentient beings more of an issue.

In the grand scheme of things though, and if you believe this as killing morphs, humans have caused worse suffering to more animals for even less reason. Without morphing Earth would be screwed.