Major Spoilers Podcast

As part of the Major Spoilers 2nd Birthday Celebration, Major Spoilers presents some of the “lost” conversations that you’ve never heard before.

10 days of daily podcasts that you’ve been asking for!

Recorded on Earth-25:
Stephen asks the philosophical question, “Is it ethical to tweak someone’s mind for the better?” Is Zatanna unethical for mind-wiping villains? What about Professor X? Is it wrong or okay to alter someone’s perceptions? The panel discuss the issue in this, the shortest Major Spoilers Podcast.

Warning: Some explicit content


Direct Download

Subscribe via iTunes

RSS Feed

Podcast Alley

Contact us at

Music from this episode comes from Ookla the Mok. You can visit them on the web at and purchase their music at the iTunes Music Store.

A big Thank You goes out to everyone who downloads, subscribes, listens, and supports this show. We really appreciate you taking the time to listen to our ramblings each week. Tell your friends about the podcast, get them to subscribe and, be sure to visit the Major Spoilers site and forums.

Don’t forget to provide your feedback on the big question asked in the show!


About Author

Stephen Schleicher began his career writing for the Digital Media Online community of sites, including Digital Producer and Creative Mac covering all aspects of the digital content creation industry. He then moved on to consumer technology, and began the Coolness Roundup podcast. A writing fool, Stephen has freelanced for Sci-Fi Channel's Technology Blog, and Gizmodo. Still longing for the good ol' days, Stephen launched Major Spoilers in July 2006, because he is a glutton for punishment. You can follow him on Twitter @MajorSpoilers and tell him your darkest secrets...


  1. Great discussion! The basic tenets of that discussion mirror alot of what we’re talking about in my Ethical & Legal Environment of Public Administration class this semester – whether results-based administration of government is ethical and constitutional if it produces positive results (ends justifying the means) or if the sanctity of constitutional democracy and the preservation of constitutional rights is paramount over any achieved or possible result.

    Yes, dry. The comic discussion was much more entertaining.

  2. Were I the teacher, I would. Unfortunately, I’m just a student, and a “distance-learning” student at that.

    You guys brought up some great points, though – at what juncture does adherence to either philosphy constitute a detriment to one portion of society over another, as opposed to the pragmatic application of both philosphies? Is there even a “pragmatic application” of either philosophy? Yes, Batman could save more people by killing the Joker, but then he becomes that which he has fought so long against and becomes part of “the problem”. So which is more “ethical/moral” – sacrificing the potential lives that the Joker will undoubtedly take if he continues to live in order to rise above those that you seek to stop/not become part of the problem, or saving those lives but destroying yourself/becoming no better than the moster in the end? As Matthew said, its a very slippery slope – the question becomes whether sacrificing ethics for the greater good is really a benefit to “the greater good” just because more people benefit from it.

    Enough of the deep stuff, I’m going back to reading Shadow Hunter now.

Leave A Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.