I was sitting here at Radina's grading homework when some guys at the table next to me started to make fun of Batman. They were basically saying that the only reason Batman is a superhero is because he bought himself fancy toys. Now, I agree with this, and I usually agree that Superman is a better superhero than Batman (with the super powers vs. super money argument), but today I thought otherwise. Here's why:
Superheroes that have super powers have somewhat of a moral obligation to do good deeds. The thought is that people that are powerful should help those in need. And really that how it should be. Now let's look at Batman. He has no super powers, he only has gadgets. We might point this out and say that he is a failure as a superhero, however he does more than his fair share of conquering evil, so we know that he is effective as a superhero. Furthermore, Batman has no moral obligation to be a superhero, he is doing it out of the kindness of his heart. He is very rich and instead of spending that money on himself he uses it to help others. Albeit he probably wanted a reason to make a Batcave, and a Batmobile, but he did not have to be a superhero, he chose to be one. And doesn't that mean that Batman is really a better superhero than Superman?