'Watchmen's' Dr. Manhattan Is Not As Logical As Alan Moore Thinks He Is

Watchmen is one of the most read graphic novels, but the book’s ending reveals that Dr. Manhattan is not as logical as Alan Moore wants him to be and in fact he fails a major logical test when he chooses to side with Adrian Veidt and murder Rorshach.

In the 12th and final issue of Moore and Dave Gibbons’ book, Veidt attempts to convince Dr. Manhattan to side with him by showing him media reports about the various countries of the world choosing to cease its hostilities with each other in order to focus on the artificial threat that Veidt had created with the giant squid creature that wiped out half of New York.

Veidt’s direct pitch to Dr. Manhattan is, “Can’t get away with it? Will you expose me, undoing the peace millions died for? Kill me, risking subsequent investigation? Morally, you’re in checkmate, like Blake. Let’s compromise.”

Dr. Manhattan falls for the ruse asserting, “Logically, I’m afraid he’s right. Exposing this plot, we destroy any chance of peace, dooming Earth to worse destruction. On Mars, you demonstrated life’s value. If we would preserve life here, we must remain silent.”

Veidt’s entire premise is built on the idea that the end justifies the means. He killed millions of people in order to bring about world peace. This is not a moral checkmate as Moore puts into Veidt’s mouth nor is it logical as he has Dr. Manhattan claim.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains:

A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting '“in order to be seen by men”).

The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts—such as fornication—that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is a moral evil.

It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress, or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.

Murder and mass murder is always wrong no matter if the intention (world peace) was good. Thus there is no moral checkmate as Veidt asserts. In fact, the moral imperative is to expose his crimes and bring him to justice.

Additionally, Dr. Manhattan might claim to understand the value of life, but he does not understand the fallen nature of man and the world he lives in. The assumption he appears to be working off of is that the fake threat will prevent any kind of conflict indefinitely.

However, all that we see happening from the media reports is that a temporary ceasefire is being called in order to focus attention on the artificial threat that Veidt has created. They have not been “unified and pacified” as Veidt claims. In fact, it’s likely safe to assume that the arms race that Veidt is trying to prevent in the first place will continue just with a new target in mind.

This immorality on both the parts of Veidt and Dr. Manhattan coupled with the cowardice of Nite-Owl, who agrees to a compromise, is why Rorschach comes away as the hero of the entire story. He refuses to compromise with the evil of Veidt and the false compassion espoused by Dr. Manhattan.

He remains committed to the truth. And he pays for that with his life.

We should emulate Rorschach and stand for the truth and especially rebuke those like Nite-Owl who buy the sweet lies of those wanting to push and protect evil by wanting to compromise with it and bury the truth.

NEXT: Rob Liefeld Obliterates Marvel And Says It’s Publishing The Worst Stories Ever