Guilt and Morality in Breaking Bad

Photo by James Toose on Unsplash

I recently finished watching Breaking Bad, and the show is nothing short of intense. It is so layered, I am still figuring out how each moment contributes to the narrative at large. One perspective I find quite polarizing is the double standard people place on Walter White and Jesse Pinkman's morality.

A common argument is that Jesse is morally "better" than Walter because he feels guilt. Jesse constantly reflects on his actions. He even accepts that he is the "bad guy." But despite knowing the damage he causes, he continues making the same decisions. He keeps cooking meth. He stays in the same environment. He continues putting both himself and the people around him at risk. Feeling guilty never actually stopped him.

Walter is nothing short of evil and selfish. But the outcome we see is only possible because of his partnership with Jesse. Walter is simply more capable. He is smarter, more manipulative, and able to execute his plans. Jesse depends on Walter throughout much of the series. Walter's actions may have caused greater damage, but Jesse continued enabling them.

I think this perspective exists outside of Breaking Bad too. We often judge people more by how guilty they feel than by what they continue choosing to do. Guilt is important. It shows that someone understands right from wrong. But eventually, actions have to matter more than thoughts. If someone repeatedly chooses the same path, knowing the consequences, does feeling bad really make them a better person?

Why Pokémon Endures

Pokemon Center Hiroshima, Japan

During my recent trip to Japan, I was reminded of just how massive Pokémon has become. Everywhere I went, there were Pokémon Centers, advertisements, merchandise, and stores filled with people searching for cards and collectibles. It made me wonder: what is it about Pokémon that has allowed it to become the highest-grossing media franchise in the world?

After learning a little about the history of Pokémon and its conception, the puzzle pieces start to fit.

Satoshi Tajiri, the founder of Pokémon, was inspired by his childhood hobby of collecting insects in jars. That feeling would later translate into the collection aspect of Pokémon, where trainers fill their Pokédex by obtaining different species. What sets Pokémon apart, though, is the branding they built around it. The designs are simple enough to be cute, powerful, funny, or cool while remaining instantly recognizable. That simplicity opens the franchise to a much wider audience. Other creature-collecting games often rely on intricate, almost anthropomorphic designs. While they can certainly look impressive, they are also harder to adapt into animation and merchandise. Many people who consider themselves Pokémon fans have never even played a Pokémon game, yet still grew up loving the anime.

Looking back, I think that same simplicity is what drew me to Pokémon in the first place. I regularly read National Geographic books and spent a lot of time drawing Pokémon. Somehow, the two complemented each other. One encouraged me to appreciate the natural world, while the other encouraged me to recreate it through art. I don't think I realized it at the time, but both quietly shaped my interest in science.

A valuable takeaway here is that sometimes, less is more. When I began working on research in high school, I imagined it as this long, rigorous process where every concept would be incredibly complex. In reality, many of the ideas reflected what I had already learned in class. For my study on crude oil biodegradation, with the help of the lab and my mentors, we simply compared oil degradation between fungi, bacteria, and a negative control, then measured the change in oil. That was most of the project.

Simplicity is key, and complexity is often an illusion.