I was watching The Talons of Weng-Chiang for the first time the other day (sensational of course), and I was struck by how out of character some of the Doctor's actions were. Not only was he taking around a violent tribe-woman who seemed to enjoy killing people with knives, and not seeming to care about it, but there's also the scene in Episode 4 where he escapes from a prison cell by gassing the guards.

Of course, Colin Baker was hardly a pacifist either, looking at Vengeance on Varos's infamous acid bath scene, as well as the scene near the beginning where he shoots a guard before he even knows what's going on! And then we have the scene in The Two Doctors when he kills his pursuer by pressing cyanide into his face, before making a quip about it (and, from what I've heard, Tom kills someone in a similar way in The Brain of Morbius).

And, of course, who can forget how Hartnell tried to kill a wounded caveman because he thought he would slow them down?

These are all certainly a far cry from the bloke who locks his clone in a parallel world for killing an army of all-powerful, unremittingly evil Daleks!

I know Pertwee often came to blows with the Brigadier for his violent approach to things, but other than this, I can't think of any episodes I've seen where this moral side of the Doctor has been given priority. So how important do you think this side of the Doctor is to the character?

I think the Doctor's pacifism has been questionable and inconsistent for years. I think on a whole though he is against destroying another race, even when they are a threat. However, he has used violence to get out of a situation. Let's face it in recent stories he's done similar. In Family of Blood he causes the Family's ship to explode, but he didn't know for sure they would follow him out of it. He then traps them in various ways for enternity. Not exactly and act of mercy. In School Reunion he knows very well that blowing up the school will kill the Kryllatanes

He locked his clone in a parallel universe to get shut of a bunny boiler to be fair. He clocked that straight away and just waited for an excuse.

Its a hard one this.
There has always been more of a pacifist streak in the Doctor than your average hero but it is widely contradicted in the show especially in the Tom Baker years. We kind of looked on the Doctor as a pacifist despite all the evidence that showed he clearly wasn't most of the time.
When Eric Saward took over as script editor he started thinking he was Rambo or something.

Know I am all for Pacifist's, like to think I am one myself. But his actions in journey's end offering to give Davros a lift was pushing it all a bit far. Crying over the Master as well, fair enough he has known him for Thousands of years but the Man had just murdered millions of people.

The Doctor needs to be able to stand up for himself but he also needs not to go too far down that path where he is causing genocide every week.
Its a contradiction of course, but aren't most people a contradiction of beliefs and ideals anyway. I think the Doctor in his hearts wants to be seen as a pacifist but he realised a long time ago that he cannot do what he does (save the universe) and not have blood on his hands.

basically he is as inconsistent as any of us and his morals change depending on he situation again like most of us. However I do think in his hearts he longs to have a life were he is a pacifist, but equally I think he knows that isn't really possible.

At the end of "Evolution of the Daleks" he refuses to destroy Dalek Caan, as he does not want to see another genocide (after the Cult of Skaro had killed all their human hybrids earlier). Big mistake! But while I think the Doctor is against violence as a whole (he refuses to let Jack - "Don't you dare!" - shoot their pursuers in "Utopia")the lengths he will go to, or not, to solve a problem with non-violent means is simply down to the writer of the episode(s) in question.

I think what you've described here is what RTD dealt with in Boom Town (the very underrated episode), where the Doctor's "Magaret Slitheen you are a horrible Murderer, who deserves to be punished!" attitude is highly challenged, and shows how contradictory he really is! And I think your right that the Doctor's morals do change depending on the situations.....

He certainly looked like he was enjoying himself killing those Racnos things in The Runaway Bride

The show has run for 30 series now, over a period of 45 years, with many different writers and producers. Is it really a surprise that the Doctor isn't entirely consistent?

I think one of the most annoying things about Boom Town is that RTD sets up a moral dilemma and then completely dodges it with a "dea ex machina" solution.

That's because of the mood he was in. He was grieving for losing Rose, so he needed someone (aka Donna) to stop him.

I understand why you see it like that, but for me the ending had two purposes....

1. (This is in hindsight) The very obvious reason....to introduce a device as such that was going to be used again for the finale
And
2. (this was during the first time I saw it, and still think is the case) Like I said before that the Doctor does change his morals depending on the situations, but one of the things that was brought up in the episode was who is the Doctor to decide who should live and who shouldn't, and as much as the Doctor does go around having to make such awful decisions, I think he would rather not, at least thats how it always seems whether he decides to punish or not, he still hates the responsibilty, and he seemed so glad at the end of BT....I know some may say that this is a cop out, but after seeing him shout "for once everybody lives" in the Doctor Dances, you know how happy he is not to have carry out his first decision to get Margaret punished....like Taren said before, he is a contradictory character like ourselves....What Soldier enjoys the killings, but they know they have to kill, but if there was another chioce, many would prefer that than to kill even the worst person on earth


Thats how I saw it anyway

Just like to point out that the same theme was demonstrated in a different and much more potent and thought-stirring way in the even more underrated Voyage of the Damned.

I think pacifism is probably the wrong word. I think its easier to argue that the Doctor is against killing and especially against premeditated violence rather than against mitigated violence (after all, he does know Venusian karate!!!).

That acid bath thing is probably, imo, the most inconsistent bit of characterisation ever in the show. Otherwise, i think generally it is possible to explain away his actions as predicated on reactionary behaviour to a threat, and he still lives in a Darwinian reality of survival of the fittest.

However, I think its fair to say that each generation doctor has a slightly different level of "pacifism", usually based on that particular Doctor's capacity to rationalise his actions away. Thus, I can see William Hartnell's cantankerous doctor rationalising attempting to kill the old woman because to not do so would jeopadise more lives.... whereas other doctor's may have a higher threshold for taking such action.

Colin Baker's doctor was obviously predicated on instability and emotional dominance, and had the lowest threshold for violence because he had the lowest ability to rationalise his way through things. That's how I see it.

I certainly don't feel that the doctor is adverse to punching, or other acts of "petty" violence, but I do think Colin Baker's incarnation went a little too far and stepped to far out from the basis of the Doctor's characterisation.

But He Said To Rose "I Was Like That Before I Met You. You Changed Me" So he Was Before He Met Rose But I Think Rose Made Him Stop Somehow. Oh Yeah in The Dalek Episode He Was About To Shoot It. And Then Rose Stopped Him

I think he meant that he was like that between the Time War and the first series. Nothing to do with the other eight Doctors, really.

like he says in the Christmas Invasion "i dont give second chances, thats the kind of man i am" he let the Sycorax leave Earth unharmed but when the Sycorax attacked hom from behind he took action