The nature of evil.
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 6:55 pm
I beleive the nature of evil is the lack of empathy. That is, every other feeling, greed, anger, vengeance is secondary to the lack of empathy towards other people.
nah, empathy is what makes evil fun.Kracus wrote:I beleive the nature of evil is the lack of empathy. That is, every other feeling, greed, anger, vengeance is secondary to the lack of empathy towards other people.
:icon29:Freakaloin wrote:fuck u...
Well it depends on the situation. A Masochist that sodomizes a victim that does not wish to be sodomized does not emphasize with his victim. He does it to fulfill somekind of desire ignoring those of his victims. Therfore the masochist is devoid of empathy for his victim.tnf wrote:And what if you are a masochist? That would change how you empathized with people...
Ok retard... I want clarification on this one. Are you insinuating that religion is the basis of evil, IE: you need to beleive in religions to have morals? Cause if it is it's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say.Foo wrote:So you're the guy that passionately argues against the existence of deities, yet still beleives in the notion of evil?
Right, yeah. That's not in any way fucking stupid.
What makes one morality superior to another, then? Lack of empathy is what I am guessing you will say, but if you actually view other races and/or religions as inherently inferior or 'less human' than people won't have empathy for them anyhow.Kracus wrote:Ok retard... I want clarification on this one. Are you insinuating that religion is the basis of evil, IE: you need to beleive in religions to have morals? Cause if it is it's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say.Foo wrote:So you're the guy that passionately argues against the existence of deities, yet still beleives in the notion of evil?
Right, yeah. That's not in any way fucking stupid.
You should read C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity" - not because I think you should take up the religion, but because he makes an interesting argument about the whole "what makes one morality 'better' than another" issue. Its covered in the first few chapters, and is a very short read.Kracus wrote:Ok retard... I want clarification on this one. Are you insinuating that religion is the basis of evil, IE: you need to beleive in religions to have morals? Cause if it is it's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say.Foo wrote:So you're the guy that passionately argues against the existence of deities, yet still beleives in the notion of evil?
Right, yeah. That's not in any way fucking stupid.
I am going to archive this comment and burn it to CD to show my kids and grandkids.Duhard wrote:tnf owned this thread
Not on purpose, otherwise they aren't emphatic. I can see your reasoning from perhaps a mercy killing but even then it still wouldn't apply. See in a mercy killing the killer is so empathetic to the victims plea, which is of course that they WISH to die, that they kill them. Hardly a crime in my honest opinion except for those too slow to be able to reason such a situation through. Like for someone that isn't terminaly ill, or braindead. Obviously no matter how much they want to die they have a chance at a better life should you leave them alive.tnf wrote:What makes one morality superior to another, then? Lack of empathy is what I am guessing you will say, but if you actually view other races and/or religions as inherently inferior or 'less human' than people won't have empathy for them anyhow.Kracus wrote:Ok retard... I want clarification on this one. Are you insinuating that religion is the basis of evil, IE: you need to beleive in religions to have morals? Cause if it is it's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say.Foo wrote:So you're the guy that passionately argues against the existence of deities, yet still beleives in the notion of evil?
Right, yeah. That's not in any way fucking stupid.
I am thinking that you are basically trying to state that the crux of a 'good' morality is simply empathy, but people can be empathetic and still do horrible things.
you're oversimplifying(spelling?!) a bit too much ey, ruling off everything as an empathy issue just doesn't cut it.Kracus wrote: Not on purpose, otherwise they aren't emphatic. I can see your reasoning from perhaps a mercy killing but even then it still wouldn't apply. See in a mercy killing the killer is so empathetic to the victims plea, which is of course that they WISH to die, that they kill them. Hardly a crime in my honest opinion except for those too slow to be able to reason such a situation through. Like for someone that isn't terminaly ill, or braindead. Obviously no matter how much they want to die they have a chance at a better life should you leave them alive.
But that wasn't my original point. My original point was that a lack of empathy is the basis of all that is evil. Every evil act that is ever commited is because that person is not empathetic to the others feelings. Murder in self defense is not a crime for example.
tnf wrote:I am going to archive this comment and burn it to CD to show my kids and grandkids.Duhard wrote:tnf owned this thread