[Nex]

So .. well. here you are.
What strange things will hide behind this topic you think?
well, here we go:

Imagine the following:
We all are raised with a sense of whats right and whats wrong. Most of the time it is accepted without a second thought that right is better than wrong. That "good" is better than "bad".

Now try to think what would happen if you could do what you want to do without [harmful] consequences to yourself (without being arrested for instance).
Do you think you would still stay on sociality's side of "good" or would your perception change?

[This message has been edited by Nex (edited October 13, 2000).]

[Affected]

I would do what I consider to be just. Fuck social rules.

[Flexible Elf]

Hedonistic societies have the same downfalls as a "just and moral" society. Famine, War, Jealousy, Hatred. So why not be hedonist?

-Flexible Elf

------------------
http://www.geocities.com/flexible_elf/Main.html

[Count Zero]

Because, Flexible Elf, someone's idea of hedonism might include the injury or suffering of others... Y'know, rape, murder, theft etc. All this warm and fuzzy stuff would be very, VERY popular once we remove a social/universal code for good/bad conduct.
Personally? I don't want to find out. It's nice to believe that I would not be affected, and I'd continue to respect the values set by my parents and society, but in actuality it wouldn't take long before I gave into my baser instincts. Somebody pisses me off = I brake their face, instead of smiling and taking it.
It'd fall to a Darwinistic struggle to survive sooner or later. Without the fear of punishment, people aren't very nice.

------------------
COUNT ZERO INTERRUPT-
On receiving an interrupt,
decrement the counter to zero.

[Nex]

I am pretty sure I would transform into a selfish tyrant - maybe even kill people sooner or later.
I guess that MY perception of whats good and whats evil would drastically change.
it would be like: "good" is whats good for ME or for ME and my friends.
Maybe this is dependant on character, maybe it is not.
Fact is that even in "smaller" things we can react very selfish and throw all virtues overboard when given a good opportunity.
Just imagine when you win a lot of money. At first you can say "I will never change because I just won 1,000.000$". But almost everyone changes when he actually has it.

It would be funny to see how much of the things we do are actually guided and altered by the social/religious/written laws and how much is really behind that all. How many decisions we make are actually our own decisions and not ones with preset opinions by traditional standards.

[This message has been edited by Nex (edited October 14, 2000).]

[Shadow]

HEHEH! For those who ponder of what shall happen, I urge you to go play some RPG/MMORPG's in PVP servers.

Eventually there will be a few groups formed that will fight to preserve justice, as most will kill and steal without thinking twice! Many will try to continue living their lives and avoid all that is bad, but many will die doing so!

I shall be the one fighting to preserve justice, or maybe start my own group... heh [Shizo] & [Shadow], forcing people to EAT GLU!!!!

-S

[kig]

I would.. sit home every day, all day. Just because i'm more interesting than what's outside.

[Nex]

yep, the thing with the online gaming was a good example. its not the whole real situation but its similar.

-

kig: "I would.. sit home every day, all day. Just because i'm more interesting than what's outside."

that made me curious.. why?

[Transcendence]

I think he meant that with the circumstances mentioned, your mind would work in an almost completely different way. Who needs all the chaos outside when you can have your own infinite chaos?

Something that popped into my head just then, remember Two-Face and his coin in Batman? I wonder if that would adapt to decision making..whether it's good or bad.

[This message has been edited by Transcendence (edited October 16, 2000).]

[Svanur]

Here in Iceland it's almost taken for granted that people beat each other to pulp each weekend and it ain't boxing. It's just the night life of Iceland. Everyone's drunk and wants to be a berserker.

[Nex]

so much for my plans to make a biking tour through iceland then.. heh

[Chris]

I think with no consequences on yourself, you would become greedy for power to establish consequences on others if they do something you don't like.

Let's say it is like a "Mad Max" situation, power came from fuel and food. She had it all, so she ruled everyone and if they didn't do what she liked, then there were consequences on them but not her.

With no rules, you would see who are the weak and who are the powerful in this world.

If we would stop rules and consequences tomorrow...well...then we would all die, cause of all this technology. and *cough* nukes *cough*

[Nex]

I meant it in a less physical way.
We all know these Mad Max kind of scenarios where all rules are broken down and everyone does whatever he wants. Then however slowly they begin to form a new form of structure and organisation (survival of the fittest/strongest).

I thought of it in a more psychological way.
How would the boarders between good and evil change when you could do whatever you want.
Would you push someone infront of a tram because you want to know what it looks like then? Would you transform into a kind of emotion/action vampire where you would want to experience all and everything that you were not allowed to before?

Or to say it in another way..

WHAT is EVIL?
How would you define it now.. and how then?

[lotor]

Does this include the belief in God. Because I believe in God and I know that if the government didn't punish me that I would still have to face God for the crimes I'd commited.

Its kind of like if you see someone drop some money on the ground. Do you A: pick it up cause you could use it, or B: Give it back to the person it belongs to.

This is a good senario because it is not against the law to pick up money that you found so knowbody will look down on you for it. But you know that if you were that person you would want someone to give it back to you.

If there is an all knowing Creator than you should give the money back to the person. But if only you know then whou cares if you keep it.

I think that my belief in God keeps me from doing a lot more nasty things then my knowledge that the government will punish me.

[shahar2k]

Nex, that's a very good question, which I'm sure you aren't the first to ask, here's my interpertation, in a way, people as a whole form a sort of mesh, which you see as people outside yourself, however, what makes this mesh into a society is that EVERY one of those people has an ability called empathy, it means we are able to look at a person and say "what if we were in the same situation" that is what makes people care about others, and that is allso what makes people learn, because if we weren't able to see from the perspective of another, science (the study of avrage perception) would have no meaning, since the whole world would exist to us from one perspective.
so in a way, Evil is the inability to see the world from somone else's perspective, if you could go up to a person, shoot them in the knee, hear them scream in pain, and colapse to the ground, without being consequences, it would mean you aren't able to understand what that person sees in his world.

infact, I learned in psychology that people who have had little social contact in a chritical age (1 or 2 years) lack the ability to empathize with others, (certain abused children) are quite literaly are capable of living in thier own world without ever looking at others as a diffrent perspective, all they see is what they do, and not it's affects, thus they are unable to feel guilt, or shame.

many societies have recognized this ability in people, most monotheistic religions have the "golden rule" which applies directly to this principle.

so basically, Evil is the lack of ability to empathize with others.

[Count Zero]

Bottom line, if rules were removed, the majority of people would stoop to social Darwinism. I have no doubt of that. The "fear" of God mentioned by lotor is not present strongly enough in most people...
And as for empathy? It goes a long way, but it can be worn down by the actions of others. If I am wronged by another, I lack feeling for them and cannot (or do not feel the need to) understand and empathize. I do not care about their perspective, because it is my perspective that has been violated and it has priority. Revenge ensues.
And I don't feel that I am alone in this...


------------------
COUNT ZERO INTERRUPT-
On receiving an interrupt,
decrement the counter to zero.

[Transcendent]

I can't resist a good philosophical debate ...

Let's look at this in the a two contexts, if humans were animals, and if humans were not.

If humans were animals, then evil would be the act of the ego/superego conflicting with the biological 'ID', sustention and procreation. (With reference to Freud's theory of consciousness). Evil is, thus, no more than programming that went wrong ... If your CPU accidentally formatted your drive, would you consider your computer would evil ? No. It didn't have a choice. There are exceptions, though ... homosexuality, contraception, etc, are socially accepted. This theory is, thus, fallible.

On the other hand, if humans had a soul, then evil has a whole different meaning. Free will, in all it's obscurity, holds us responsible for our actions. Evil is, thus, conflicting with the rules God set for us. God cannot do evil, because he cannot set rules for himself. God committed murder when people touched his covenant, and tortured his creations so mercilessly to test their faith. Evil ? In a human's perspective, yes. But it's not at all. On the other hand, a deed which one does which benefits others cannot necessarily be good. Jesus' crucifixion was considered "evil", yet it had allowed us to communicate directly with God. And evil, again, cannot be explained.

Food for thought ... ?

[shahar2k]

Count Zero: you are talking about the blocking of empathy conciously, I'm talking about the actual concept of empthy, as the very ability to "put yourself in somone's shoes"
Basically, while you don't act on what you feel for a person (and you do feel conciously or not) true evil shoes itself in people who literaly CAN'T feel for a person, and there is psychological evidence that children who aren't cared for at a chritical age, will not gain that ability.

Transendance: by saying "if humans were animals," you mean that they are no diffrent from other animals except for their evolutionary stage (complexity for you creationists...)?

Evil to humans is an abused term, and not an absolute at that, you may say that all that does not kill us makes us stronger, and that way anything short of our own death isn't evil.... but then, wouldn't our own death strengthening others?
the true concept of Evil is hard to derive.
Each person has their own personal theory, I think I stated mine, and it has withstood mosts tests.... in my mind, feel fre to chalange it, though, that's the best thing about philosophy

[This message has been edited by shahar2k (edited November 03, 2000).]

[Count Zero]

shahar2k, but is that then true evil? You see, if the person is UNABLE to feel for another person, doesn't he or she basically get absolved of responsibility? If a child is beaten on by their parents or inflicted to whatever is necessary to create this lack of empathy, wouldn't the parent be the one to blame? I feel that when a person consciously disregards empathy, that is in some way even worse than a person with no concept of empathy. I doubt anyone is born with a "cold heart"... It is inflicted on them by external factors (possibly in addition to internal ones?).
Which is worse, choosing evil over good, or not realizing there's a choice?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of these people who say that when someone snaps, it's everyone elses fault but the culprits. BUT, it is also too easy and convenient to just say "oh, he's crazy and evil, that's why he did these horrible things" and leaving it at that. Humans are too complex beings to be categorized in to good and bad.

Let's keep up the discussion.

PS. Besides, people without (as in completely lacking) empathy (I hope, I wish and I pray) are a minority...


------------------
COUNT ZERO INTERRUPT-
On receiving an interrupt,
decrement the counter to zero.

[Nex]

So far i found shahar2k's definition of evil being very solid ... I find it hard to say something against it.

but .. was for instance Adolf Hitler evil?

I guess you would say so, but on the other hand he would have never been able to fool a whole nation and corrupt their senses if he had not been able to feel their desires and use them in his plots.

Manipulatiuon of others is only possible if you are able to think like they think and feel like they feel. No?

[This message has been edited by Nex (edited November 04, 2000).]

[shahar2k]

I don't know, I mean what I said about actual psychological cases who can't empathise, one of these is a man who married, had children, and then killed his whole family, after being caught he said that he had no regrets, I believe it's one of the case studies used.
thing is, people like that, can go out into the world, see how it works, without ever having to see WHY it works they look at people and ask themselves "if I do this, how do they respond" so in that case, Hitler could have understood people like we understand ants, and his will for controll, combined with any means to really understand what he was causing, let him play with the ants.... although I'm not sure about his lack of empathy, I mean he did kill himself in the end... I would say he was Evil.... and insane.

[DeadlySCSI]

Don't forget though that Hitler was driven by the anger of Germany losing the first world war. He was the only solider who DIDN'T play in the football game on Christmas Day. Most people do stupid things which hurt others because they get really angry and then they blame other people. Same with if you're controlled more than you need to be, you get angry and you rebel. If there were no rules then that factor disappears. Doesn't it? If your parents teach you Morals and if they teach you to be nice then you'll end up as a nice person. Unless you get into a group which doesn't give a monkey's about anyone else. You can't take away the rules in this society because it would go wrong. If you start affresh and just teach every child that stealing is wrong then you won't get anyone stealing because everyone has the same set of Morals... Why kill people anyway? Your not going to spontaniously kill people because there is no law are you? What's the point? Your concience will get you in the end.

Oh, and the world also needs to be totally fair for it to work. The Human Beast is too selfish for that to happen.

But anyway, no rules will only work if we all just get along... and some people think it's far more fun not to.

[Nex]

DeadlySCSI: The question was less a political one but rather a psychological/philosphical one.

I know that a society without rules does not exists. There are ALWAYS rules you have to follow. what i meant was:

Is mankind inheritely "evil" (or whatever word you want to use instead of that) and only kept like it is now because of laws and rules?

Isn't being selfish a definition of evil?

When a higher being took a random human being out of the masses and gave it the powers to do whatever it wants to do.. would it grow into an evil tyrant in time?
Wouldn't this person become a judge and executor in one person?

Do we have the tendency to be evil (and I don't mean evil in a way that we want to take over the world or something, i mean it in a way that you sometimes might wish someone dead who was rude to you etc.)

If everytime that you wished someone would not exist he would die or disappear - how many people would you have "killed" by now?

This is the kind of direction I was heading to.
Will you turn (back?) into an evil person when you have the power to do whatever you want to do without any bad consequences to you?

[shahar2k]

hmm, just came back from a "what is god, and what defines the universe" discussion with my friend in a philosophical mood

the discussion was made more interesting because he is a devout christian and I'm a devout doubtist, meaning that while I am technicaly jewish, I inheritantly believe in what I have proven to myself, and nothing more. (and I don't like the concept of god)

well I'm gonna try and defend my position with how Empathy goies into this,
if indeed you were all powerfull and all knowing so on (see Twilight zone movie ) what would eventually end up happening is that you would lose touch with what it is to be human, I mean if you can kill by wish, can you understand how people can live without that ability? it even exists today, can we, the people of the internet age, even understand how people in africa live on a dollar a day? and would us giving them money only to be used for computers and internet be considered Evil? maybe it's because we see the normal tiny things of life as things which are universal, and thus ignored by our consideration for what they really "NEED" in their lives
anyways what I'm saying is, that any thing that seperates you drastically from most people around you would impare your ability to understand their position and their point of view. thus if you were given controll over them, you would become an unfit dictator rather than an enlightened ruler, because you would not be able to realise what they would gain/lose by any of your actions.
the prerequisite to that being that you did not have any way to put yourself in their position, for example: Immortality.

[Affected]

There's a paradox in your question, Nex... Without rules, there can be no evil: an evil person is one who does what is generally considered to be wrong. If not hing is wrong, there is no evil.

------------------
Affected

Democracy is a lie

http://affected.xs.mw

[Chris]

Man, Hitler, God, Religion on the discussion of evil..how interesting eh.

shahar2k I was going to mention Twilight zone, I am surprised no one did earlier hehe.

The environment is what distinguishes right from wrong. Simple as that. We are not born knowing right from wrong, nor we are not born with a conscious either. That first time were you hear that little voice in your head that says NO I don't want to do this, is something that has been taught to you not to do, either be it by parents, school, etc.

Pain is the first conflict of conscious. The spanking or belt environment. Next is loneliness, grounded, then boredom is another conflict on decisions. These are taken as childhood, which were most development on conscious is taught. When adulthood comes, government is a big conflict, the punishment with loneliness and boredom in jail, prison, etc. Then there is Religion of course.

Religion, which started as a conflict to keep peasants from stealing, kings threatening advisors not to steal their gold or they would be punished by him and god in the afterlife, far worse then the kings punishment "so the kings said"

I don't think we are evil by nature. I don't think we are good either, I think we are neither. What are we by nature? We want to do the most convenient thing that is Easiest to live. Living is what human nature is. Doing evil things is EASIER to handle then not. For example killing someone. Is it easier to live by taking insults by a person or killing him and not worrying about him for the rest of your life? Which decision would make your life easier? Either it be evil or not it would be killing him and not worrying about him anymore.

If someone wasn't TAUGHT that this is wrong, then it wouldn't be evil to him, just a way of life. "He annoys me so I will kill him", no hesitation.

[Transcendent]

Valid points, agreed. However, we fail to delve into the roots of the actual question - what is evil. All empathy does is prevent us to be evil, but what would we consider "bad" and "good", in the other's shoes ?

Killing is considered evil. Common sense ? Yes. But why ? Empathy only answers part of the question. If I were to prevent myself from making judgments due to "human experience", let's look at the scene again. Why is inflicting death on another evil ? To that question we cannot find an answer. And why ? Because, as I have mentioned earlier, it's programming, divine or genetic, in our bodies.

If I were to steal, the former would suffer, but the latter would not. Before the hypothetical "evil event" occurred, the reverse is true. Isn't that an equilibrium ? Neither person is more happy or sad. It may be considered "selfish", but watching this from a vantage point makes it neither good nor evil.

And it occurred to me that there was another member in this forum known as "Transcendence", bearing much similarity to my "Transcendent" nick. Do not confuse the two of us. I make a fool of myself during debates like this ...

[Chris]

Why do we think killing is evil? Cause we are taught that it is evil, through our environment (religion, government, parents, peers, anything, etc.)

Evil is a made up word to signify something that is wrong in our society and way of life. We tell people evil is not the way to live happy cause no one likes murderers that kill our family members. We like to be happy, it feels better inside and around us, evil makes us feel bad and we get angry, and being angry takes more out of us, so hense evil is bad...so society tells us it is wrong.

[Chris]

Ok and to signify "Would you be evil if you had almighty powers"

Yes we would. Like I said before, being evil is living easier and not as hard. It is hard to live with a roommate that doesn't clean up, if you could kill him w/o consequences you would (if you had no concept of evil). Because living w/o him is easier then living with him.

I mean look at God. He is a very evil concept in deed, as well as satan. God is in a way that if you don't believe in him you don't go to heaven. So he is being a racist (by definition, he is) and that is considered evil in our society. So religion is also evil. That is a fact based on our society!

[Chris]

I'm sorry, not a racist...what is the word I am looking for here...difference in belief and character...race is difference in physical characteristics...Can't think of the word though.