Shang Tsung, the millennia-old sorcerer of Mortal Kombat, does not age because he does not allow himself to: every time his body begins to wither, he tears the soul from a rival and consumes it to grow young again. It is easy to see him as a devouring monster, a creature driven by a blind hunger. But look closely at how he operates and something else appears, more uncomfortable: a decision-maker. Shang Tsung does not steal souls at random or on impulse. He picks his prey for what they yield, prefers the scenarios that lower his danger, and acts only when the benefit exceeds the cost. For rational choice theory, that is precisely the portrait of the criminal: not a sick man nor an anomaly, but someone who lays out what he gains and what he risks, and acts when it is worth it.
// The theoryCrime as an account that comes out in your favor
The rational choice theory is the oldest and most influential idea in criminology. It was born in the Enlightenment with Cesare Beccaria, who in 1764 argued in On Crimes and Punishments that punishment deters when it is proportional, certain and swift, not when it is cruel; Jeremy Bentham gave it the utilitarian frame —human beings pursue pleasure and avoid pain—. A century later, the economist Gary Becker (1968) revived it by treating crime like any other activity with risks and returns, and Derek Cornish and Ronald Clarke (1986) refined it: there is no such thing as «the» criminal decision in the abstract, but concrete choices for each offense, each with its own logic of opportunity and effort. The equation is simple and brutal: if the reward exceeds the sum of effort and risk, one acts. Shang Tsung solves it again and again. A young, powerful soul returns more vitality to him than a weak one: it is a higher-yield target. A ritualized combat, with agreed-upon rules, lowers the probability that he himself ends up stripped: it is a lower-risk scenario. The sorcerer does not devour out of gluttony, he devours because it pays off.
Certainty, not harshness: why he chooses the tournament
A central finding of the theory is that the certainty of punishment deters more than its severity: what stops a decision-maker is not the abstract harshness of a penalty, but the real probability of being caught or defeated. Shang Tsung acts as if he knew that rule better than anyone. He could launch an open assault, but a frontal attack against a strong warrior is a poorly calibrated risk: he can lose, and to lose, for him, means the end. That is why he prefers the tournament, the deal, the trap wrapped in ceremony. Regulated combat lets him choose the moment, size up the rival, bet when the scales have already tipped. It is situational prevention in reverse: instead of raising the effort and the risk to curb crime, the sorcerer designs the scenario to lower them for himself. Every rule he imposes, every advantage he negotiates, every ambush he prepares, is a way of reducing the uncertainty of his calculation. He is no daredevil: he is a gambler who only sits down at the table when he already knows he holds the best hand.
Get the map of theories for free
Subscribe to the criminal archive —one case a week, no spam— and I'll send you The map of theories: the great currents of criminology on a single sheet.
// The subjectAn accountant of souls who discounts the future
What makes Shang Tsung such a clean case of rational choice is the consistency of his decisions. He serves Shao Kahn while the emperor is useful to him and conspires against him the moment the balance changes: loyalty, for the sorcerer, is another variable of the calculation, not a value. He steals youth because his horizon is very long and every soul is an investment that yields over time; in the terms of the economics of crime, Shang Tsung invests in an asset —time— that for almost anyone else would be unthinkable to accumulate. And yet, even he discounts the future when the prey at hand is juicy enough: if an extraordinary soul appears, he risks more than is prudent, seduced by the immediate reward. That nuance matters, because the theory does not describe a perfect accountant but a biased decision-maker: someone who does weigh costs and benefits, but with scales that greed miscalibrates. Shang Tsung is not a force of nature nor a man possessed by his hunger. He is an agent who chooses, and who answers for his choices precisely because he makes them with his eyes open.
Shang Tsung
// The crackExplaining the calculation does not absolve the sorcerer
The crack in applying rational choice to Shang Tsung is twofold, and it is worth naming. The first temptation is to use the theory as an alibi: if the sorcerer «only» maximizes his interest, if he does nothing more than solve an equation anyone would solve, isn't his crime reduced to a problem of incentives, almost neutral? No. Classical theory is, of all the criminological ones, the one that most respects individual responsibility: it describes the offender as someone who decides, not as a sick man dragged along nor a puppet of his circumstances. Saying that Shang Tsung calculates does not excuse him; it points at him. Every soul he consumes is a choice he could have not made, a real body he reduces to fuel for his own vanity. Explaining the logic of the crime is not signing its pardon.
The second crack is the opposite one, and it is the one the theory itself acknowledges as its limit: not all crime is calculation. The bounded rationality of Herbert Simon reminds us that no one decides with complete information or in cold blood, and that many crimes are expressive —rage, panic, impulse— and answer to no account. Shang Tsung is the villain who best fits the model, but even in him what the model does not cover peeks through: the cruelty he savors, the pleasure of humiliating the rival before defeating him, the arrogance that sometimes clouds his good judgment. The calculation explains why he steals souls; it does not exhaust why he enjoys doing it. The honest reading holds both things: Shang Tsung decides, and that is why he is fully responsible; and his decision is never as pure as he would like to believe.
When crime pays, change the payoff
Shang Tsung matters because he teaches what is practical about rational choice. If crime is a decision, one can influence it: not by appealing to the conscience of someone who has none, but by changing the scenario so that the account stops coming out in his favor. Against a cold decision-maker, hardening distant threats does not work —he discounts the future and bets on the reward of now—; what works is raising the certainty that he will lose, closing off the easy opportunities, withdrawing the advantages he negotiates for himself. That is the uncomfortable lesson of this theory: much of crime is not fought by moralizing at the criminal, but by redesigning the board where he makes his calculations. Shang Tsung loses not when someone convinces him that stealing souls is wrong —he already knows that and does not care—, but when a rival appears who changes his equation and turns his next move into a bad deal. There, and only there, the sorcerer stops.
Three key takeaways
- Shang Tsung embodies rational choice (Beccaria, Bentham, Becker, Cornish and Clarke): the theft of souls as a calculated decision —reward minus effort and risk— and not as a disease or an outburst.
- He prefers the agreed-upon tournament to open assault because it lowers his risk: he applies, to his own benefit, the principle that the certainty of failure deters more than its harshness. He picks targets by their yield and discounts the future when the prey tempts him.
- Explaining is not excusing. That Shang Tsung calculates does not neutralize him: classical theory is the one that holds the decision-maker most responsible. And its limit —Simon— reminds us that not even he is pure calculation: the cruelty he enjoys overflows the equation.
Sources · further reading
- Beccaria, C. (1764). De los delitos y las penas.
- Becker, G. S. (1968). «Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach». Journal of Political Economy, 76(2).
- Cornish, D. B. & Clarke, R. V. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal. Springer-Verlag.
- Nagin, D. S. (2013). «Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century». Crime and Justice, 42.
Case-file questionsFrequently asked questions
¿Quién es Shang Tsung?
Shang Tsung es un villano de Mortal Kombat, analizado en KRIMINIS con la lente de la criminología. He does not kill out of rage or pleasure.
¿Por qué Shang Tsung se convierte en villano?
Shang Tsung and rational choice theory: stealing souls is neither a vice nor a madness, but a cold transaction that maximizes power and minimizes risk. Crime as a spreadsheet.
¿Qué teoría criminológica explica a Shang Tsung?
El caso de Shang Tsung se analiza desde la Elección racional. Rational choice theory (Beccaria, Bentham, Becker, Cornish and Clarke) understands crime as a decision: a calculation of reward, effort and risk that anyone could make. Shang Tsung, the Mortal Kombat sorcerer who devours souls to prolong his life and increase his power, embodies that logic with a rare clarity: every theft is a weighed transaction, he chooses his victims by their yield, he prefers the agreed-upon tournament to open assault because it lowers his risk, and he acts only when the scales tip in his favor. Crime as a calculated decision, not as a disease.
