|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 5, 2020 19:06:25 GMT
Do you think this is true? I've wondered about this and admittingly tryanical dictators that slaughter their own people probably don't think they're doing anything evil so long as it's for what they consider the greater good. But what about serial killers/sadists that kill and torture people for enjoyment? (Ted Bundy, Zodiac Killer, Richard Ramirez)? Surely on some level they must know they're doing evil?
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Jun 5, 2020 19:27:08 GMT
No i don`t think that is true.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jun 5, 2020 19:34:23 GMT
It's the one thing Socrates got wrong. I've known plenty of people who do evil for the sake of just sadistic evil. Some will claim "greed" or other motives for their sadism, but it never fits.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 5, 2020 19:37:26 GMT
It's the one thing Socrates got wrong. I've known plenty of people who do evil for the sake of just sadistic evil. Some will claim "greed" or other motives for their sadism, but it never fits. "It's the one thing Socrates got wrong." Well that and the fact that he hated democracy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2020 20:01:56 GMT
Must have been drinking...
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jun 5, 2020 20:14:05 GMT
Do you think this is true? I've wondered about this and admittingly tryanical dictators that slaughter their own people probably don't think they're doing anything evil so long as it's for what they consider the greater good. But what about serial killers/sadists that kill and torture people for enjoyment? (Ted Bundy, Zodiac Killer, Richard Ramirez)? Surely on some level they must know they're doing evil? I have two quotations concerning that: "No man chooses evil because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks." Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley "The healthy man does not torture others. Generally it is the tortured who turn into torturers." Carl Jung I was a fan of the TV series, Criminal Minds, which is now in its final season. The earlier episodes were more thought provoking, and each episode started and ended with a quote like these. The entire point of the program was to encourage thought about how serial killers are made, whether from genetics, brain chemistry, psychology or environment. One of the characters mentioned that every serial killer/sadist was somewhere on the spectrum between those four things. It is claimed that sociopathy and psychopathy both involve the inability to feel empathy. Given that just one of several siblings turns out to be a monster, strongly suggests that there is some physiological difference. If all siblings were abused and all became violent, that suggests a psychological factor. Ultimately, I don't think any universal truth is possible, I think it depends on each individual's genetics and environment. Behavioral analysis is an interesting topic. Edit: Just came across another quote used on that program: "Monsters are real, and ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes, they win." Stephen King
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 5, 2020 20:33:10 GMT
I hate to disagree with the great Socrates, but yes, some men do evil and revel in it. However, IMO most of the evil done throughout history was done by men who thought they were doing good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2020 20:47:23 GMT
I agree with what he said in the sense that to "knowingly" commit evil means seeing clearly the truth of who one is, who others are, the purpose of life etc etc. Very few, if any, have this ability because, for the most part, we are all in a movie in our own little minds where our egos take centre stage and play the the lead part..even when we do good things.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 5, 2020 22:21:27 GMT
Do you think this is true? I've wondered about this and admittingly tryanical dictators that slaughter their own people probably don't think they're doing anything evil so long as it's for what they consider the greater good. But what about serial killers/sadists that kill and torture people for enjoyment? (Ted Bundy, Zodiac Killer, Richard Ramirez)? Surely on some level they must know they're doing evil? I think Socrates was mostly right. I think a vast amount of evil is just people who expect some sort of good or other to come from it, but their math is wrong. However I do believe that in rare cases people can actually relish their evil for the sake of evil.
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jun 5, 2020 23:16:27 GMT
Well...may be he meant that if someone does evil knowingly, then that person is not a man.
But I think what he probably meant was that most of or a lot of the time, people who seem to be doing evil are looking at the world through a different lens. They think what they are doing is justifiable. It was one of those pithy generalizations meant to lead people to think about people's motives and not just knee-jerk judge so quickly. You know the old admonition... 'before you criticize someone, walk a mile in his shoes' That way when you criticize him, your a mile away and you have his shoes.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 6, 2020 1:42:48 GMT
I'd say the vast majority of people who do evil either think they're doing good (dictators who have in mind "a greater good"), are simply blind to the evil they're doing in their pursuits (the uber-greedy), or are sociopaths who simply lack a conscience about good/evil in general, which fits certain serial killers. There are those that do, however, delight in doing evil knowing it's evil, probably because they get off on having that feeling of control/power that they often lack in real life, and sometimes it's a form of revenge against people/a society they feel they've been wronged by.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 4:47:48 GMT
I think the saying could also mean that people who do and have done evil have tried to justify their actions in some way and convince themselves that they’re doing it for a greater good. People like psychopaths may not have an understanding of what evil is to even know they do evil
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 6, 2020 6:38:31 GMT
It's worth noting that Socrates (or Plato since it's always hard to say how accurately the latter presents the former) argued for the following: a. Virtue is its own reward - indeed the highest reward b. People act out of what they perceive to be in their own interest
There are two reasons why people may act in an evil manner: 1. They mistake their action for good 2. They spurn goodness for other pursuits
In the first case, they lack the knowledge of what is good. In the second case, they lack the knowledge that goodness is the best pursuit. Therefore all evil acts are born out of ignorance. A truly knowledgeable person would never commit evil.
How much stock you put in Socrates/Plato's view depends on how much you would agree that virtue is the highest self interest and that people are essentially self-serving. If you accept these premises then the rest of it follows.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jun 6, 2020 9:04:31 GMT
No, it's definitely not true (hell, you pretty much answered your own question with those who enjoy doing evil things like Ted Bundy etc as these types are thoroughly evil). God basically ingrains some basic level of right/wrong into everyone. sure, we all might get right/wrong a little distorted here and there (we are sinners after all) but when it comes to more obvious major things like murder/torture, it's clear cut evil and people can't deny this especially those who get off on doing evil things are just that much worse. so people who persist in this, willingly choose evil over good. "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man's most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths." - CCC #1776 source = www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm ; it's a section in The Catechism of the Catholic Church that covers 'moral conscience'.
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Jun 6, 2020 9:13:21 GMT
Well...may be he meant that if someone does evil knowingly, then that person is not a man.
That is possible, but he would still be wrong. An evil man is still a man.
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Jun 6, 2020 9:14:45 GMT
I'd say the vast majority of people who do evil either think they're doing good (dictators who have in mind "a greater good"), are simply blind to the evil they're doing in their pursuits (the uber-greedy), or are sociopaths who simply lack a conscience about good/evil in general, which fits certain serial killers. There are those that do, however, delight in doing evil knowing it's evil, probably because they get off on having that feeling of control/power that they often lack in real life, and sometimes it's a form of revenge against people/a society they feel they've been wronged by. Yeah that is probably true.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jun 6, 2020 10:57:55 GMT
“See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.” Colossians 2:8
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jun 6, 2020 11:50:37 GMT
Well...may be he meant that if someone does evil knowingly, then that person is not a man.
That is possible, but he would still be wrong. An evil man is still a man. I meant he might have meant it more like how one word can have different connotations as in "every man dies, but not every man really lives."
That statement by Wallace is clearly wrong...every man who is lives 'really' lives but the quote uses a different meaning on the world 'lives.' So might someone put a different meaning on the term 'man' and imply one who does evil on purpose isn't really a 'man.'
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 6, 2020 13:13:57 GMT
Do you think this is true? I've wondered about this and admittingly tryanical dictators that slaughter their own people probably don't think they're doing anything evil so long as it's for what they consider the greater good. But what about serial killers/sadists that kill and torture people for enjoyment? (Ted Bundy, Zodiac Killer, Richard Ramirez)? Surely on some level they must know they're doing evil? This brings to mind the example of the old M'naghten defence in English law that Where we can see the law at least assumes that there are times (most times in fact since the defence was only used now and again) when some one knowingly commits wrong. The "not guilty [only] by reason of insanity" idea would appear to contradict Socrates' idea. Of course one can argue that one must, by definition, be mad not to follow moral laws, but that is not something that would carry much weight in court and beg a whole host of other questions.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 6, 2020 19:43:42 GMT
Do you think this is true? I've wondered about this and admittingly tryanical dictators that slaughter their own people probably don't think they're doing anything evil so long as it's for what they consider the greater good. But what about serial killers/sadists that kill and torture people for enjoyment? (Ted Bundy, Zodiac Killer, Richard Ramirez)? Surely on some level they must know they're doing evil? This brings to mind the example of the old M'naghten defence in English law that Where we can see the law at least assumes that there are times (most times in fact since the defence was only used now and again) when some one knowingly commits wrong. The "not guilty [only] by reason of insanity" idea would appear to contradict Socrates' idea. Of course one can argue that one must, by definition, be mad not to follow moral laws, but that is not something that would carry much weight in court and beg a whole host of other questions. I believe the law strays beyond its abilities in judging mens rea. I believe it should constrain itself to judging actus reus. It should leave the rest to a god. I suppose when it becomes obvious that a person did or did not deliberate then adjustments to fines or sentences can be appropriate, but it might not always be obvious. In cases of "insanity" it can be rather difficult to see motivation. In such cases it might be wise to lock the door regardless.
|
|