Favorite Iteration of Son Goku

[ABED]

Metallic is that Arnold looking robot that is protecting one of the floors of Muscle Tower.

Wait, so he shows no mercy before, matures, learns from Freeza, and goes back to not showing mercy?

Freeza is a huge outlier and I think it's less about him showing remorse and him feeling like it was a waste of the strongest opponent he had ever faced. Remember when he told Kuririn why he wanted him to let Vegeta go? He said that he thought "what a waste".

I know who Metallic is, I was asking for the page. I went to check it out and you're right, but it's a different situation. He didn't really have a personal problem with him. We know what happens when kid Goku has a problem with someone, see the Piccolo Daimao arc.

Sure. Don't really see what's wrong with that interpretation. It's not necessarily character regression, if that's what you're implying.

Freeza isn't the only outlier. He shows mercy to Raditz, Nappa and the Ginyus whilst expressing that he never wants to see them again. You would have a point if it only happened with Freeza, but Freeza's just the more dramatized occasion because showing mercy to him is appropriate to his character arc after going Super Saiyan.

And yes, if what you are saying is true, then it would in fact be regression if he goes from not showing mercy to showing it, then learning from Freeza to not showing it again. What else would you call that? How does that in any way shape or form constitute an arc?

[Doctor.]

Metallic is that Arnold looking robot that is protecting one of the floors of Muscle Tower.

Wait, so he shows no mercy before, matures, learns from Freeza, and goes back to not showing mercy?

Freeza is a huge outlier and I think it's less about him showing remorse and him feeling like it was a waste of the strongest opponent he had ever faced. Remember when he told Kuririn why he wanted him to let Vegeta go? He said that he thought "what a waste".

I know who Metallic is, I was asking for the page. I went to check it out and you're right, but it's a different situation. He didn't really have a personal problem with him. We know what happens when kid Goku has a problem with someone, see the Piccolo Daimao arc.

Sure. Don't really see what's wrong with that interpretation. It's not necessarily character regression, if that's what you're implying.

Freeza isn't the only outlier. He shows mercy to Raditz, Nappa and the Ginyus whilst expressing that he never wants to see them again. You would have a point if it only happened with Freeza, but Freeza's just the more dramatized occasion because showing mercy to him is appropriate to his character arc after going Super Saiyan.

And yes, if what you are saying is true, then it would in fact be regression if he goes from not showing mercy to showing it, then learning from Freeza to not showing it again. What else would you call that? How does that in any way shape or form constitute an arc?

Just because he goes back to the same point he was doesn't mean it's regression, since it's not for the same reason. He didn't show mercy as a kid out of innocence or ignorance, later he doesn't show mercy because he learned some people won't take it or don't deserve it. If his reasons are different, then it's not character regression.

You could make the argument, as you have been, that it wasn't dramatized, so I'm reaching or it's just my headcanon. And I'd say it's valid. But however you want to look at it, there is some kind of change in his personality that you're refusing to acknowledge. Again, you only need to compare his attitude in the Piccolo Daimao arc to his attitude during the Freeza fight and see that they're totally different even though it's the same circumstances.

[ABED]

Just because he goes back to the same point he was doesn't mean it's regression, since it's not for the same reason. He didn't show mercy as a kid out of innocence or ignorance, later he doesn't show mercy because he learned some people won't take it or don't deserve it. If his reasons are different, then it's not character regression.

You could make the argument, as you have been, that it wasn't dramatized, so I'm reaching or it's just my headcanon. And I'd say it's valid. But however you want to look at it, there is some kind of change in his personality that you're refusing to acknowledge. Again, you only need to compare his attitude in the Piccolo Daimao arc to his attitude during the Freeza fight and see that they're totally different even though it's the same circumstances.

That's you guys trying to make it fit. Even if true and his reasons were different, that's still a regression. He's going back to a previous state. And shouldn't he have learned that some don't deserve or take mercy from Raditz?

The circumstances aren't the same. Tambouriine never asked for mercy or help. Goku was going to let Freeza die had he not asked.

[Doctor.]

That's you guys trying to make it fit. Even if true and his reasons were different, that's still a regression. He's going back to a previous state. And shouldn't he have learned that some don't deserve or take mercy from Raditz?

The circumstances aren't the same. Tambouriine never asked for mercy or help. Goku was going to let Freeza die had he not asked.

You can call it regression if you want. I'm not really making the argument of whether it's good or bad writing (even though I don't necessarily consider it bad writing, as I said), only that the change is there. Sure, shouldn't Vegeta have learned that Goku is better than him back in the Namek arc?

Goku gave Freeza a chance to leave before he ever asked for mercy or help, something he didn't do with Tambourine. He specifically told Freeza to "cower" somewhere and that he never wanted to see him again, so you can't make the argument that he only wants to fight him sometime in the future.

[ABED]

That's you guys trying to make it fit. Even if true and his reasons were different, that's still a regression. He's going back to a previous state. And shouldn't he have learned that some don't deserve or take mercy from Raditz?

The circumstances aren't the same. Tambouriine never asked for mercy or help. Goku was going to let Freeza die had he not asked.

You can call it regression if you want. I'm not really making the argument of whether it's good or bad writing (even though I don't necessarily consider it bad writing, as I said), only that the change is there. Sure, shouldn't Vegeta have learned that Goku is better than him back in the Namek arc?

Goku gave Freeza a chance to leave before he ever asked for mercy or help, something he didn't do with Tambourine. He specifically told Freeza to "cower" somewhere and that he never wanted to see him again, so you can't make the argument that he only wants to fight him sometime in the future.

What do you consider bad writing?

Vegeta's lack of learning isn't a matter of ignorance. That's a matter of arrogance. It's an evasion on his part. Goku doesn't evade.

I didn't say he only wants to fight him in the future. So Toriyama's inconsistent and by proxy, so is Goku. That doesn't mean Goku as a character has changed.

[Doctor.]

That's you guys trying to make it fit. Even if true and his reasons were different, that's still a regression. He's going back to a previous state. And shouldn't he have learned that some don't deserve or take mercy from Raditz?

The circumstances aren't the same. Tambouriine never asked for mercy or help. Goku was going to let Freeza die had he not asked.

You can call it regression if you want. I'm not really making the argument of whether it's good or bad writing (even though I don't necessarily consider it bad writing, as I said), only that the change is there. Sure, shouldn't Vegeta have learned that Goku is better than him back in the Namek arc?

Goku gave Freeza a chance to leave before he ever asked for mercy or help, something he didn't do with Tambourine. He specifically told Freeza to "cower" somewhere and that he never wanted to see him again, so you can't make the argument that he only wants to fight him sometime in the future.

What do you consider bad writing?

Vegeta's lack of learning isn't a matter of ignorance. That's a matter of arrogance. It's an evasion on his part. Goku doesn't evade.

I didn't say he only wants to fight him in the future. So Toriyama's inconsistent and by proxy, so is Goku. That doesn't mean Goku as a character has changed.

That's a whole other, bigger, more complex debate that isn't very relevant here. Short answer, depends on the context.

Right, Goku learned or realized something, tried to stay true to that principle and then realized that what he learned perhaps wasn't for the best. What's the issue here?

It was an unconscious change, but a change nonetheless. Would you argue that Stewie Griffin didn't change and become mellower and less aggressive throughout the years? It probably wasn't a conscious writing decision on Seth MacFarlane's part but it gradually happened.

[ABED]

Right, Goku learned or realized something, tried to stay true to that principle and then realized that what he learned perhaps wasn't for the best. What's the issue here?

It was an unconscious change, but a change nonetheless. Would you argue that Stewie Griffin didn't change and become more mellow and less aggressive throughout the years? It probably wasn't a conscious writing decision on Seth Mcfarlane's part but it gradually happened.

But he's never SHOWN realizing or learning anything or struggling to stay true to the principle then learned that he was wrong. It's not dramatized, shown, or even talked about. THAT is the issue.

Stewie's change was conscious over the years. It was a running gag for a while but he decided to change things up. Besides, Family Guy isn't a serialized show. It's reset-TV. A better example would've been Kelly Kapoor's personality radically changing from the first to second season of The Office.

[Doctor.]

Right, Goku learned or realized something, tried to stay true to that principle and then realized that what he learned perhaps wasn't for the best. What's the issue here?

It was an unconscious change, but a change nonetheless. Would you argue that Stewie Griffin didn't change and become more mellow and less aggressive throughout the years? It probably wasn't a conscious writing decision on Seth Mcfarlane's part but it gradually happened.

But he's never SHOWN realizing or learning anything or struggling to stay true to the principle then learned that he was wrong. It's not dramatized, shown, or even talked about. THAT is the issue.

Stewie's change was conscious over the years. It was a running gag for a while but he decided to change things up. Besides, Family Guy isn't a serialized show. It's reset-TV. A better example would've been Kelly Kapoor's personality radically changing from the first to second season of The Office.

It's dramatized during the Freeza fight. He struggles between helping or killing Freeza. Isn't that enough?

[ABED]

His struggle in that moment, but the CHANGE isn't dramatized. What caused it? How can he struggle with a principle no one knows he has?

[Doctor.]

His struggle in that moment, but the CHANGE isn't dramatized. What caused it?

He matured. Him knowing how to distinguish girls and boys isn't dramatized. Him knowing how to use technology and drive a car isn't dramatized.

Do we need a big scene to explain how a child and an adult value life differently?

If you're trying to make the argument that Goku's decisions are arbitrary, sure, I think that's a valid enough interpretation. But not my own.

[ABED]

His struggle in that moment, but the CHANGE isn't dramatized. What caused it?

He matured. Him knowing how to distinguish girls and boys isn't dramatized. Him knowing how to use technology and drive a car isn't dramatized.

Do we need a big scene to explain how a child and an adult value life differently?

If you're trying to make the argument that Goku's decisions are arbitrary, sure, I think that's a valid enough interpretation. But not my own.

But he didn't mature. The implication from a previous post of his is that he didn't actually mature when he went from not showing mercy to showing mercy. It wasn't a deliberate conscious choice. He went from one state of ignorance to another and finally learned that lesson after Freeza.

I would need context for that middle question, but off the top of my head children and adults value life differently due to experiences and lessons learned.

[ulisa]

I would need context for that middle question, but off the top of my head children and adults value life differently due to experiences and lessons learned

Only partially. Children go through different levels of morality due to how their minds change through different developmental stages. A child who is 3 is going to process morality and choice differently than a child is 11 because, simply put, the younger child is incapable of processing on that higher level of thinking just yet. While lessons and experience do have an effect on you developing your own sense of morality, you can't force a young child to suddenly start thinking like a teenager because they physiologically are incapable of it.

The earliest stage Pre-conventional morality is basically "I behave a certain way to avoid consequences." There's a second level to that where "I'll do X and X in exchange for Y."

Second stage is Conventional Morality which is essentially people make decisions based on what they think will boost their relationships. You'll often hear this called the "good girl/good boy" stage because people make decisions based off what others people tell them/show them is right or acceptable. This is where a lot of different view points and experiences are usually presented but only the view points of those close to us are "right."

Post-Conventional is where people begin to make their own decisions on morality and develop their own ideals/thoughts on it as opposed to what others say or proclaim to be "right." You usually won't see Post-Conventional before age 20 and the other two stages range from age 2/3 to high school age so in that sense, I'd say Kid Goku definitely thinks differently than adult Goku because, well, the mind processes and interprets things differently.

[ABED]

I would need context for that middle question, but off the top of my head children and adults value life differently due to experiences and lessons learned

Only partially. Children go through different levels of morality due to how their minds change through different developmental stages. A child who is 3 is going to process morality and choice differently than a child is 11 because, simply put, the younger child is incapable of processing on that higher level of thinking just yet. While lessons and experience do have an effect on you developing your own sense of morality, you can't force a young child to suddenly start thinking like a teenager because they physiologically are incapable of it.

The earliest stage Pre-conventional morality is basically "I behave a certain way to avoid consequences." There's a second level to that where "I'll do X and X in exchange for Y."

Second stage is Conventional Morality which is essentially people make decisions based on what they think will boost their relationships. You'll often hear this called the "good girl/good boy" stage because people make decisions based off what others people tell them/show them is right or acceptable. This is where a lot of different view points and experiences are usually presented but only the view points of those close to us are "right."

Post-Conventional is where people begin to make their own decisions on morality and develop their own ideals/thoughts on it as opposed to what others say or proclaim to be "right." You usually won't see Post-Conventional before age 20 and the other two stages range from age 2/3 to high school age so in that sense, I'd say Kid Goku definitely thinks differently than adult Goku because, well, the mind processes and interprets things differently.

All interesting points, but not really applicable. We aren't talking about the difference between a 3 year old and an 11 year old. Goku is already 12 when we first meet him. He's 15 when he fights Piccolo Daimao. So you're lesson in biology doesn't really apply, not to mention - it's fiction, Goku's an alien, and Toriyama never goes that deep into that level of abstraction.

[GamerSkull]

For what it's worth... while "Red Ribbon Arc Goku" is my favorite iteration of the character, I will say that "Saiyan Arc Goku" was the best adult iteration.

[Spider-Man]

Saiyan arc and Boo arc are my favorite Iteration of the character,Super Goku is ok through he is a bit flanderized but he is still charming.

[RisanF]

For what it's worth... while "Red Ribbon Arc Goku" is my favorite iteration of the character, I will say that "Saiyan Arc Goku" was the best adult iteration.

I second this. Red Ribbon Arc is when Goku is at his most proactive, and the plot keeps him exploring, meeting new people, and interacting with the world. His understanding of the world is simple, but he still feels "human", someone who's doing the best he can in his own weird way. Also, RR Goku still has all his paraphernalia, like the Power Pole and Nimbus cloud.

As for Saiyan Saya Goku, when Goku asks Krillin to let Vegeta go, he's at least able to articulate his selfishness, that he knows it's wrong. From there, we start getting more into the whole "Goku is a fighting space alien" thing, and he kind of runs out of compelling stuff to do.