Should the Dragon Balls have been used to resurrect people?

[MarCas92]

Death is a natural part of life. However, these characters have discovered a power to let them right what they believe to be wrongs. If you believe yourself to have a moral obligation to resurrect those who were killed, why stop there? Shouldn't you want to fix ALL wrongs in the world? Are there any moral dilemmas when bringing people back from the dead even if that death was unjust?

[Dragon Phantom]

Well going with GT, no you shouldn't. As those wishes causes Minus energy to corrupt the Dragon Balls. But without including Dragon Ball GT there is no problem with it and there's no need to fix all of the worlds problem because in Dragon Ball global warming isn't a known problem and the main problem is the selfishness of the humans. The only real danger to the entire planet would be aliens, but with humans, the Great Saiyaman or Police Kuririn can handle them with ease. So there is practically no need to wish for world peace when you easily create it yourself. Though there can be a problem with reviving people if they're just gonna ruin the peace, which is why in the Majin Boo arc Goku specifically asks for good people to be revived. (Then again the Pilaf gang, Ginyu, and those robbers were revived so maybe the wish had a few flaws)

[Kamiccolo9]

I have an issue with Goku and co. playing God in general. Going by the old Kaioshin's statements in the Buu Arc, using the Dragon Balls already goes against the natural order, and bringing people back to life, doubly so.

And then, they've also got the Dragon Balls as a catch-all for any mistakes they make. Does morality even exist when you can just wish your errors away? Does anyone really have the right to rip someone's soul out of the afterlife? Is that not just as wrong as killing them in the first place?

So no. I don't think they should have been used to resurrect people, from a philosophical standpoint, at least.

Plotwise, it cheapens death, and, especially after the Freeza arc, just destroys the tension of the story, because there are two sets of magical cure-alls, and the main characters are more than willing to use them.

Personally, I think the Dragon Balls should have just had the same restrictions as Genie in Aladdin. That way, limits would have been specified, and you can still have tension along with your magical wish-granting MacGuffin.

[B]

I don't think there was any real problem with it, morally. Vegeta or Freeza or Cell didn't go up to each individual victim and ask them if they were ready to die, and without that, lives were taken against their will. Toriyama plays with this idea very slightly in the Buu arc when Piccolo just kind of "lets" Buu kill everybody because they have the Dragon Balls, and that seems cold, but in that situation nothing else could really be done.

[Lord Beerus]

The Dragon Ball should resurrect people, because hey, they are magic, and once you introduce the concept of magic all bets are off. There are literally no limitations with the plot device introduced if it's based on magic. But honestly, I don't think they should. As Kamiccolo9 point out, it's a MacGuffin that effectively cheapens the idea of death and reduces the level of tension from, "Will they live or die?", to, "Will they be resurrected in time?".

[TheXenoverse]

Well just imagine how dark the series would be without revival of characters in the series : Goku would have had to deal with loosing his best friend and mentor because of his weakness/recklessness at the age of 15 and then only a few years later would have the rest of his allies, family and friends killed by his own people and perhaps if they get that far his own brother.

But I know where you're coming from, in hypothetical manner, I just don't know how it would work.

[B]

The Dragon Ball should resurrect people, because hey, the are magic, and once you introduce the concept of magic all bets are off. The are literally no limitation with the plot device introduced if it's based on magic. But honestly, I don't think they should. As Kamiccolo9 point out, it's a MacGuffin that effectively cheapens the idea of death and reduces the level of tension from, "Will they live or die?", to, "Will they be resurrected in time?".

So the question is "was it a very good story idea?" versus "was it morally right?"

Toriyama notably never wanted to get too deep with his stories, but I'm sure there's enough material for some dark fanfiction where the world has to make sense of dead people coming back to life with no idea why(Buu is the only case where everyone forgot what happened, so you have all those Vegeta/Nappa/Cell deaths). In that scenario, maybe you can start arguing the morality of it, but in Toriyama's popcorn-movie Dragon Ball? Death is bad and living is good, plain and simple.

Interesting for-instance: Person is killed by Cell, and is brought back to life with the DBs. Shenlong can't grant the same wish twice, though, and this person is then killed again by Buu. The wish to resurrect the people killed by Buu is made, but this person doesn't come back. Finally, you have the wish where everyone forgets Buu existed. So essentially, the dead person's family forgets that their relative was killed and he is assumed to be a missing person. Maybe they remember he was killed by Cell and came back, regarding it as some type of miracle, but now he's gone and they can only guess what happened. This is completely out of Toriyama's ballpark, though.

[Dr. Casey]

Arguments about death being a part of life or revivals going against the natural order have always seemed like pretty empty reasonings to me unless there's some kind of tangible harm pointed out. To me, the ability to relieve so much suffering more than balances out whatever abstract philosophical musings claim it to be a bad idea.

And, from an in-universe perspective, Kami's the one who created the Dragon Balls, so the fact that he gave Shenlong the ability to revive people implicitly states that he believes it to be okay, so all the revivals in the series are God-approved.

[Wizard Sesame]

I don't really have a problem with the Dragon Balls resurrecting people so long as the death is caused by a villain that came solely because of the Z Fighters and/or is preternatural. Since the balls cannot resurrect people that die naturally, Bora really is the only one that I think should have stayed dead: he died by a human's hand. Humans do bad things, it's a part of life.

In terms of out of story, I really think the Dragon Balls on Namek should have only been allowed to resurrect people once, giving humanity only two chances at coming back. That is what I think really took the tension out of the story.

[B]

Since the balls cannot resurrect people that die naturally, Bora really is the only one that I think should have stayed dead: he died by a human's hand. Humans do bad things, it's a part of life.

What is the difference between being murdered by an alien and being murdered by an assassin? There's nothing natural about murder; it's an on-going human flaw.

The only leeway I see is accidental losses of life, of which Dragon Ball has very few, if any. Most of those guys meant to kill the people they killed.

[TheUltimateVegito]

I pass it up between beyond the Dragon Ball's powers or not being able to turn everyone good or the Z-Fighter's not wanting to be control freaks.

I picked the former, considering Kami's history and how it probably would make him want to wish everyone good. And plus, any moral dilemma concerning wishing people back is minute at best in the grand scheme of things, since they only wish people who were killed unjustly by villains. Not to mention the inability to resurrect those who die of natural causes.

All in all, the Dragon Balls adds to the storytelling rather than detracting from it. Like I've said before, it may not be the deathiest death of all of deathdoom but it doesn't matter. The characters did gain from the Dragon Balls existence in the long one, their developments and storyline wouldn't have been as great if the Dragon Balls couldn't wish people back i.e Krillin's deaths, Piccolo's death, Vegeta's deaths, Goku's deaths, Bora's death, the entire Namek saga. Great stories don't need death, so I don't see it as a negative at all. Darkness be damned. I still felt very impacted by the character's deaths because of what it meant for the characters and storyline, not just because of the deaths themselves. Some of these death simply wouldn't have been as great if they just died because their deaths helped them develop. You also have to consider have much people cherish the things they have in life.

Death has its own unique flavour in Dragon Ball, you either like it or you don't. But in my opinion, they added to the great plot.

[Wizard Sesame]

What is the difference between being murdered by an alien and being murdered by an assassin? There's nothing natural about murder; it's an on-going human flaw.

Well, Bora was killed, not murdered. He was defending what he perceived as an invasion of his homeland/repaying his debt to Goku, he could have walked away and Tao most likely would have let him live. That could just be the lawyer in me, however.

If Freeza came and killed a lot of humans looking for Goku, would that change your opinion on the matter? Freeza wouldn't have known a lick about Earth and would have never shown up if not for Goku's presence, which is a bit different than Tao killing Bora in my opinion. Not that I think I'm swaying your opinion, obviously It's morals and ethics, people have different views on things, but that's my view: humans being killed on Earth by other humans? An occurring part of life; a crappy part of life, but an occurring one. An alien killing a human because of something outside of that human's control? A little out there in my opinion.

[rereboy]

Death is a natural part of life. However, these characters have discovered a power to let them right what they believe to be wrongs. If you believe yourself to have a moral obligation to resurrect those who were killed, why stop there? Shouldn't you want to fix ALL wrongs in the world? Are there any moral dilemmas when bringing people back from the dead even if that death was unjust?

The "natural" argument doesn't hold up. It was natural for men to live in caves, hunt and eat flesh raw. Cooking stuff, building stuff, and so on, are already against the "natural" way.

What matters is simply the consequences of actions. If people never died, the planet would soon become unlivable. Now, that's an argument against resurrecting everybody.

As for resurrecting certain people and not others, well, honestly, I don't see how that's so different from people giving presents to the people they care about and not others (even if they could). There is nothing wrong in caring more about your friends and family than random people.

But, of course, they could have significantly improved the world using the Dragon Ball and they should have done so, if this wasn't simply a shonen. For example, they could wish for all people born in the future to be good people, forever (assuming the dragon could grant something like that). Or that only good people managed to become powerful leaders in the future, and that bad people always failed in their attempts. A lot of possibilities to improve and secure the future.

[buutenks]

Ofc,any person if would have the chance to bring back people he cares about he would.Plus if the db wouldnt have been used to ress people it would have become devoid of life thanks to buu.

There is a timeline where the db were never used to ress many people,namely in future trunks' timeline.And I'm sure its so awesome being there...not really.

Plus all humans who were ressed,were killed by beings of unnatural strength or not from earth or ancient beings of destruction.

[Bulma's Foot Masseur]

I always felt bad for the obligatory clinically-depressed earthling who wanted to die and could never stay dead.

[oreos-splash]

i dont have a problem with it. The Z Fighters only really use the dragon balls when a problem arises they themselves can not fix. They do not try to play God and fix every little problem in the planet like the economy or a bad break up between couples. they use the Dragon Balls to ressurect people they could not save which is perfectly fine. besides that, they don't try to use Dragon Balls for any other selfish method.

they essentially do what heroes do for years, save people by asking for nothing in return or trying to fix something that has nothing to do with them. They only use the dragonballs if it's their own fault they couldn't stop a problem that is a natural or horrible.

but again, because they're such good people, I can see Goku using the dragonballs to revive a little boy's dog that he happens to come across, because he's such a kind person, and he doesn't think about morality, or balance of nature, he just thinks about doing good because that's just who he is. if it was anyone else like Tien or Vegeta, they probably wouldn't have tried to use it, but who knows.

to me personally I'm fine with that, because it's not supposed to be such a morbid dark story like psycho pass, but fun and light with a few dark elements

[TheZFighter]

i dont have a problem with it. The Z Fighters only really use the dragon balls when a problem arises they themselves can not fix. They do not try to play God and fix every little problem in the planet like the economy or a bad break up between couples. they use the Dragon Balls to ressurect people they could not save which is perfectly fine. besides that, they don't try to use Dragon Balls for any other selfish method.

Why didn't Yamcha think of that!?