OddballGentleman

I’m pretty sure you actually have it right. The point of this show is to challenge our underlying assumptions about ethics. Kogami is out for revenge, and to many he seems justified because Makishima killed his friend in cold blood and completely did not regret it. Most of us would agree that Makishima was wrong to do this, but a deeper look suggests that maybe Makishima is justified in his killings because of the result he is trying to achieve, the liberation of society from Sybil. Although, whether that is a desirable result is also up for debate.
I do agree that it would have been nice to have Kogami stand for a little more than revenge in the end of the season 1, but I’m not sure it would have worked any other way. That was Kogami’s role, and while it is a little unsatisfying, it maintains the thematic integrity of the show.

Thank you for your comments! I think one of the reasons I really liked this story as a dystopia is because of its consistency in how dispassionate the Sybil System is. It is a system that does not care about the individuals but cares a lot about society as a whole. There is a lack of animosity in system that I appreciate.

Thank you for your comments.
To explain my connection of Kogami with Hammurabi’s Code, which I maybe didn’t articulate quite as I intended: Kogami personally rejects Sybil’s utilitarian justice in the context of his own actions. Basically, he decides that those rules do not apply to him. However, I would agree that he does not desire or advocate for Hammurabi’s ideals of justice in society, which is why he continues to act as an enforcer. He makes no rebellion against the system when it comes to others; when it is him, though, he ignores it.

He wouldn’t be a worthwhile villain if you didn’t. Although, if you approve of his methods, then that might be cause for concern.

Personally, my favourite is the opening to Steins;Gate. However, I think Future Diary and Pumpkin Scissors deserve a mention for their openings.

It is similar to 1984, but I think there’s one pretty clear difference; in Psycho-Pass, there is genuine moral ambiguity around the justification of the system, because the vast majority is happy under it, whereas the society of 1984 is clearly just selfish and terrible. Psycho-Pass raises questions while 1984 just makes a point.

I think the show suffers from being too technical, in that each of the characters is first and foremost a literary device, and only secondarily a character. In order for each character to have the most effect as a device, their characters were maybe simplified and made more generic than is really good. However, if one can look past that by focusing on the society and the philosophical issues, I think it’s not a huge problem.
I totally agree about Makishima though. That guy really makes the show.

I’ve never seen minority report, but considering how often the two are compared, I believe that they are reasonably similar in certain respects.