[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Sauce

I read from this that evil is the natural state for an Orc, something that is an essential part of the Orc's nature and which the Orc itself is unable to change. Accordingly, I would instead say that they have limited free will. Their choices will always be limited by their natural impulse to evil.

I think it's a troubling thought that a living thing would constantly be driven by natural impulses to evil. Although the difference is small, and the concept isn't any happier, I'd rather think that orcs were incapable of doing good. They were created that way, and evil was a consequence of their actions, not the reason.

Originally Posted by Sauce

Indeed, they seem to be regarded by those on the side of good as being naturally evil and incapable of redemption or repentance, whether or not this is the case.

I've been wondering if the whole 'pure evilness' is mostly just the point of view of the free races of the Middle-earth. Since they are the ones who have done all the writing (Bilbo wrote the Hobbit etc.) we get a rather limited view of orcs. Surely orcs considered Men and Elves to be pretty wicked, too. Weren't they able to do good deeds even among their own kin? The Letters probably give a more unbiased picture of the orcs, but since I don't have them, I can't tell.

However, I can't help feeling that there is something vaguely similar to the fact that a certain instinct makes dogs usually chase cats and yet you can't say that one of them is really evil. They are animals, yes, but it's not easy to put out an old hatred between two races even if neither of them remembers where it all started. Besides, orcs are slaves commanded by higher individuals. You either obey or die, and I think surviving is a much stronger instinct than seeking for justice.

That leads me to another question. Did orcs realize that there could have been something better - did they long for 'a change for goodness'? I'm sure they didn't actually like all the whipping and hard work, but were they able to imagine a better life (I haven't found the quote Hookbill mentioned either), and I mean more than thoughs like "no whipping" and "a long nap"? If they didn't realize their glum situation, and the horridness of their deeds, how could they have done anything good to improve it...

Originally Posted by Hookbill

I would guess that it is plausible, then, that the Orcs could be 'cured' of their violent ways if given the opportunity.

I think cured or even 'cured' might be a bit too optimistic. I'm inclined to think that orcs could have learned to hold back/ control their evilness (much like in the examples of lion cubs) or even taught what is regarded as good behaviour, but they would have done it because someone superior told them to. If the orcs lacked the ability to comprehend other people, goodness could have never become a natural part of them.

A good orc obeyed orders, but was he able to independently think what would cause pleasure to another individual? It's the conscience and the ability to empathize that separates the humankind from animals. Conscience is something that you don't even have to teach for a kid, it comes naturally. If the orcs didn't have it, I'd say that they were indeed lesser beings than people, thus unable to do good at their own initiative and enjoy it (if orcs even could feel plain happiness instead of victorious exultation after a battle, for example).

Originally Posted by Lommy

Hmm... Didn't Tolkien say in the Letters that orcs represent all that is bad in human race? And said some people to be the orcs of modern days? I think - though a bit irrelevant matter - might point to some orcish free will.

Tolkien believed that humans have free will, right? Then (in my logic) also those Tolkien's "modern orcs" (= badly behaving humans) have free will and why should they be compared to orcs if orcs haven't some sort of free will? If orcs were bound to do the "evil" deeds they did how could they be compared to humans who have free will?

I take it that badly behaving people are being compared to orcs just because in the eyes of "decent" people, orcs generally behave badly. I don't think the matter of free will has necessarily much to do with this - I mean, you can compare a human being to a tomato if he looks red, but it doesn't mean that he'd be a vegetable. I can't believe that Tolkien would have meant that some people actually are descendants of orcs (I don't think you even meant that), but if that's the case, the answer must be that orcs could be raised to have some sense of right and wrong (and thus the ability to do good) since that's natural to all people.