She doesn't care that much. Remember, she was and is still a criminal at heart. She has lines she won't cross but those lines aren't "hurt innocent people for nothing more than personal profit". She prefers making profit by helping people but her priority is still on making profit, so if she had to choose between not hurting an innocent person and making a profit, she'd choose the latter every single time. Ciaran is not good. Themes of "it was for the greater good" should not apply to her. Don't try and post-facto justify her actions just because you can't stomach the thought that your PC is actually a bad guy.
Have you ever met or read about a bad person who thought that they were bad?
As it happens, I agree that Ciaran is by any objective measure an evil person. I disagree that she would see
herself as an evil person though.
the 'incredibly minor narcotic that's legal to sell' variety (cf. marijuana, at least if you're in certain US states; alcohol might be a better analogy).
And yet, look at what prohibition unleashed in the US. Not only in terms of the criminal enterprises it fed, but also in terms of the unhealthy consumption habits people adopted in reaction to the new situation.
Darra is a terrible person to use for comparisions in this case. In canon she has been dead for several years by now.
Hah! Well that is ironic.
Okay. Some people don't see it that way. And that's probably why it seems so weird. After all, we only have one pair of eyes with which we can look at things with. Some people don't think that what Ciaran does is bad. Some people think it's somewhere in between. Some people think it's bad. Admittedly, that same controversy is likely part of why people like Ciaran's character. It's a complex moral situation portrayed well in writing, that doesn't come with it's own judgement on what's good or bad. That's a rare thing to read. Kudos to Dr. Snark, for that sort of characterization.
Really? 'Cuz since Dr. Snark took over I have felt that the moral ambiguity of Ciaran has been rather neglected.
Objectivism (the ideology most known by playing Bioshock because the books are too dry) says that people don't give money because it's the right thing to do, we do it because it gives us this warm fuzzy feeling inside called happiness. It makes us feel as though we fulfilled so karmic quota so that we can do a bad thing later on. Ciaran's selfishness might be responsible for some bad things, but it's also responsible for a lot of good (Taris and Kalee being the best example).
People have run experiments to test if anyone actually thinks in objectivist terms. So far, the evidence is that only sociopaths do.
Now not all sociopaths are socially unacceptable - for example, there is a very high prevalence of sociopaths among the ranks corporate CEOs and politicians.
That's called being a businesswoman. Greedy, yes? Corrupt, oh definitely? But that doesn't qualify her for evil, just self-centred.
See, I would say that greed and corruption are evil. Especially corruption is enormously hurtful to other human beings. If someone is self-centered in a way that leads to intentionally inflicting great harm to their fellows, there is no "just" about it. No matter how good someone who indulges in such things is, when they give into their greed or their corruption, they are still doing evil acts.
It's just a different sort of evil from puppy murdering evil or sadistic evil.
its like this CIARAN IS NEITHER BLACK OR WHITE
she's grey, in starwars, the epitome of black and white thinking.
its kinda wierd and also very cool to see a bad person do good things.
See, what I like about Ciaran is that she is definitely a bad person, but she is a smart bad person who places limits on herself rather than the sort of character who goes "well, I am profiting from a brutal and bloody war, I guess I should go commit genocide now", which is especially common in Star Wars.
fasquardon