it's not "evil" imo, it's a pointless word now, we know really there is no real objective right or wrong, people have urges and they are predominantly unconscious remnants of our long evolutionary development, there are many variations on how we express and fulfill these urges but they are imo merely evolutionary traits; learnt over millenia to ensure success as a baby making machine dependent on hunting monster animals in the forests, mountains, savannah and oceans of the world.

If you think of the timescale of how long we've lived in Agricultural communities, leading to cities and how specialized life, our behaviours have become, we are far removed from the evolutionary challenges that formed us over millenia, and many of the beneficial adaptations for survival on earth as a hunter have become unconscious or manifested through sports, wars etc to make life in a farm possible, that's why the farmers made up good and evil, evil literally means transgression, ie breaking the "rules"

Then there are those that suffer abuse as a child (physical, mental, emotional) and continue the cycle by repeating those acts against others as an adult. Which in my opinion, their history does not excuse their behavior because they of all people know and understand the hurt that comes from that intimately having been through it themselves.

And yet still, there are ones that have a great childhood, grow up, get in a bad relationship of some kind, suffer, then turn around and do the same shit to other people. Again, history cannot excuse their behavior.

I just don't agree with your point of view, Gue.

There are parameters of 'right' & 'wrong' and acceptable, and fair etc. Most people know what they are and will normally try to abide by them.

Some people don't care about them because of the trauma they've had inflicted on them.

I think others simply choose to behave in a despicable way because of the thrill it gives them to hurt others. They're the ones I'd call evil. They must know how wrong their actions are, and that's what turns them on.

'Evil's' not a pointless word imo, any more than 'good' is.

Seeing as we've strayed from the topic (which is most unlike the sz)

the sort of thing being discussed here about people who really don't give a fig for the effect of their actions on others falls under the banner of psycopathy-the total absence of empathy.
Some may be born psychos, some may be created. Their actions i think may be fairly described as evil. Not sure it necessarily makes they themselves evil. Very fekked up yes...

dubmeup wrote:
It's on topic, Dubs...
dubmeup wrote:
It's just that some people will view others' wrong doing as the product of mental illness (hence diminished responsibility) whereas I see the root of their actions as something else, and judge them to be entirely responsible for it.

Guevarista wrote:
But there is an intersubjective one.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity

I am sure I don't have to give you a crash course in Kant, do I?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_Imperative

Haha yeah i guess i did kind of open the door to discussing lack of empathy in the op, though i was hoping to discuss actual empathy...note to self, remember this is the sz

I agree that there are certainly those who know full well what they are doing when they hurt others. Its impossible for them to have empathy though isn't it? Unless perhaps they think being hurt is great...that lack of empathy and the actions perpetrated due to it classifies them as psychopathic in my mind. That's not to say i think they are absolved of responsibility.
I do however think that an evolved society populated by people with empathy should be able to spot the signs early and take constructive steps to encourage those with little or no empathy to 'feel' for others before bad shit happens.
This is something we largely don't do. We shun people, isolate them and give them more reason to wander down the psycho path...

dubmeup wrote:
I get what you're saying there dub. Today's society though...well, a lot of people have difficulty even talking to each other, neighbours I mean. No one seems to know each other, or acknowledge each others existence much.

I like the idea of nipping dark behaviour in the bud though. "Dark behaviour"?

Aye, in britain i'd call it the post thatcher society. nuclear families, look after number one, beware of others, climb over them if you have to...self self bloody self...
in total contrast to the britain i was raised in where community meant community.
community isnt totally dead but its certainly in intensive care...

They've done an incredible job haven't they dub? You know me, I know little about politics and tend not to get involved in all that crap, but I can see the fruits of their labour. Divide and rule.

Society, not just in Britain, but all over the world, could be wonderful. The whole thing could work beautifully.

Anyway, now we really are straying off topic I think or maybe not

Tiz a society founded on a lack of empathy so i reckon we are on topic....

dubmeup wrote: That ^

Care and compassion are now viewed as luxury commodities which we can no longer afford.
We are so much poorer without those 'civilising' traits though.

mikey mikey wrote: I've never read Kant, I see what you're saying, intersubjectivity appears to me to be a description of the social behaviours we have adopted during our evolutionary Journey, I'd still say it's nothing to do with "Right or Wrong" in any moralistic sense.

edit: Healthy-unhealthy are better terms there are behaviours that are healthy to the organism, mankind/society and behaviours that are unhealthy, if someone is acting unhealthily you use empathy and investigate their symptoms try to treat the causes, if someone is acting "bad" we assume authority tell them off and smack their bum, lock them away etc.

Guevarista wrote:
That sounds good on paper.

But what if you arrived home one day and someone was acting "unhealthy" towards your wife or daugher? You find your wife being raped and beaten, what are you going to do? My point is, it's all well and good getting to the bottom of someone's "symptoms" when their behaviour hasn't affected you personally.

"Oh, it seems you've raped and murdered my wife...pray tell what is the problem my friend?". Are you going to call the emergency Unhealthy Behaviour Team?

Maybe I'm not getting it, or getting mixed up Perhaps I'm unevolved.

It's a nice idea though, not sure if it would work in reality.

What if it's you, Gue. What if 2 men drug you and rape you, for example. Men who you don't believe have been abused, and who have a fairly privileged life-style. Let's say you're young, and not in your home town.Would your primary concern then be that they should be dealt with with great empathy, and excuses found for their depravity? Really?

Gilly what would be your response, it's a ridiculous question really.

Irre:yeah that's a symptom of something larger, obviously you treat the symptom immediately according to the Hippocratic maxim "first do no [more] harm".

But your example kind of proves my point no?

What would you do, turn evil for a minute judge and execute him then turn back to good as if nothing happened?

Guevarista wrote:
I beg to differ. It's a highly relevant question, and you're just dodging it.

And no, when it happened to me, I wanted to gut them. However, according to some of the opinions here, that was very unempathetic of me.

Well it kind of confirms the point I'm making that there is no objective good or bad, right or wrong, it depends on experiences, your reaction is fair enough.
If there are people in this thread saying that, judging your impulsive reaction to an attack negatively, based on a sense of morality removed from the reality of your experience they're being very un-empathetic.

Guevarista wrote:
Yet you're missing the point I've been making all along, which is that, although I'm all for kindness and empathy as a norm, there are some people whose actions lead me to believe they're undeserving of these blessings, despite all the bleeding hearts who try to insist otherwise.

I thought the point you've been making all along was that some people are evil and can never be understood or shown empaty by you?
What is the root of your impulse to gut another human being and watch their entrails seep from their stomach?