Who do YOU think should protect the island? by A-Mo

Since season 1 we have wondered if certain people on the island are "good" or "bad" in some cosmic sense. A big philosophical issue is at work vis a vis choosing Jacob's replacement and i was thinking it confirms the LOST braintrust is not saying there is RIGHT and WRONG-- only that there is good (love, friendship, etc.) and evil (smoke monster).

This is amateur philosophy at best so someone can correct my technical points but the theme is what i'm getting at-- Jacob subscribed to what is roughly Kant's Categorical Imperative. There are basic moral rules and you follow them no matter what as if you would will them to be a universal law. NEVER KILL (no matter what) NEVER LIE (no matter what), etc. This is a good way to act but most people would say it is naive and ignores reason and leads to bad results often.

On the other side you have some other philosophers who argue to use reason in making moral judgments. These are roughly the "you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette" types. One example is J.S. Mill, the utilitarian (who followed JEREMY BENTHAM), who says that any action is moral if it benefits the most people or the greater good. This probably describes Jacob's brother AS WELL AS the mother (nice job by allison janney!). Nobody is saying they are "bad," i dont think that darlton/writers are saying that. They are possibly presenting 2 sides of the same coin and posing the question: what makes a person good or their actions good? And I think they will leave this up to the viewer to decide. Is it ALWAYS telling the truth or ALWAYS acting a certain way. Or is it ok to sort of use manipulation or do some bad things if it is a means to a good end. Is the mother bad because she kills claudia? she has good intentions and it is a means to an end. Jacob would say NO, she is not good bc/ murder is always wrong (given his violent side-- he would probably qualify this by saying "unless it is justified"). But the brother would probably do the same thing. The mother tells the brother he has talent, bc/ he knows how to get things done by playing people the right way and using his skills of manipulation.

SO- if it is a GOOD to protect the magical light source (when people go in it they tend to turn into giant evil smoke monsters-- so yes, we can all agree this is good), should someone like the brother who is cunning and plotting protect it (LIKE SAWYER) or someone who is pure and principled like Jacob (perhaps LIKE JACK or HURLEY). I think the mother would argue they are both "good" types but approach things differently. She first thinks the brother is right to protect the light source, yet later she seems to reverse course. I will be interested to see how this plays out. Perhaps she thinks jacob is less corruptible and therefore inherently more trustworthy (again, think jack or hurley) than the brother or someone who may be tempted to look out for himself (think sawyer) or is simply just less pure of heart.

On a side note-- Ultimately the brother himself is probably not EVIL as we were led to believe, he is just cunning and clever, perhaps manipulative, but ultimately perhaps good-- his soul BECOMES evil when it goes into the light and becomes the smoke monster.