User blog comment:DYBAD/Character Sheet/@comment-24810520-20150720081438/@comment-4867780-20150720222815

It mostly depends on our understanding of "human", wich is a subject of its own.

If we're talking about the psychology, his humanity is only partial, for while his persona is directly based on his first human reference, his unique nature and capabilities change the perspective considerably (kinda like Dr Manhattan without the lonely brooding).

If we're talking about the morality, his humanity is again only partial, for the concept relies largely on each person's individual situation.

For example, we consider humans as important because we are humans, and thus what threatens humans in general threatens us in particular. Most of us don't care nearly as much about about animals, because what happens to them has usually little to no consequence for us, so there is no need for concern.

What we call "morality" is ultimately just the amalgamation of personal interests into a coherent whole, each individual members merely serving their own through adhesion to a codified line of conduct (what is deemed "moral" in their society).

So the "morality" of humans is highly relative, and pretty much just rationalized selfishness, whose legitimacy depends entirely on the approval of the system.

In this, Lawrence is very much human, simply serving his own best interests in the most balanced ways possible, materialized by the famous Golden Rule, also known as "Ethic of Reciprocity" (favors for favors / nothing for nothing).

How many humans would be so cooperative and respectful if they were in his place ? Not many to be sure, which paradoxically makes him more human than most humans.