The Marshal obviously isn't concerned with the torturing, she's concerned about what happens if someone uses Hoolay to experiment.
The writers on the other hand don't treat what happens to Hoolay as normal punishment. They straight up call it torture. My point is the writers clearly make a distinction between regular criminal punishment and torture. They're just don't seem to be ethically opposed to torture... The writers are clearly of the belief torturing a good guy is bad, but torturing bad guys is fine.
Dan Heng did end up getting to pay for Dan Feng's crimes though, legally.
He did, sure. But he seems to be of the opinion that he still remains responsible, the debt to society not fully repaired (or maybe debt to Jing Yuan, but Jing Yuan basically = Luofu's well being anyway, so it's more or less thr same).
But I'm still of the opinion Dan Heng was tortured unjustly and the story never should have back tracked on that. This is the re-contextualizing for the sake of plot drama that bad writers do.
Because he seems to think it will be different for him than how we see it work on Dan Heng through his first person POV lore background sections.
I don't think Dan Heng thinks the effects differ enough to matter. And Dan Heng's opinion on the matter informs us on how he sees himself and his relation with Dan Feng. But yeah, from an ethical clarification perspective and drawing a distinction between Dan Heng's situation vs Taoran's situation, that would at least give the writer's an out.
no subject
The Marshal obviously isn't concerned with the torturing, she's concerned about what happens if someone uses Hoolay to experiment.
The writers on the other hand don't treat what happens to Hoolay as normal punishment. They straight up call it torture. My point is the writers clearly make a distinction between regular criminal punishment and torture. They're just don't seem to be ethically opposed to torture... The writers are clearly of the belief torturing a good guy is bad, but torturing bad guys is fine.
He did, sure. But he seems to be of the opinion that he still remains responsible, the debt to society not fully repaired (or maybe debt to Jing Yuan, but Jing Yuan basically = Luofu's well being anyway, so it's more or less thr same).
But I'm still of the opinion Dan Heng was tortured unjustly and the story never should have back tracked on that. This is the re-contextualizing for the sake of plot drama that bad writers do.
I don't think Dan Heng thinks the effects differ enough to matter. And Dan Heng's opinion on the matter informs us on how he sees himself and his relation with Dan Feng. But yeah, from an ethical clarification perspective and drawing a distinction between Dan Heng's situation vs Taoran's situation, that would at least give the writer's an out.
But the writing sucks, so they don't bother.