NationStates

Giovenith wrote:

Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:
He was also a vegetarian and environmentalist. Yet he ordered the death of 11 million people all the same, as well as started a global war that lead to the deaths of 70-85 million people total. All of which, in his mind, was acceptable. He tried to justify his evil actions by insisting to others and to himself that they were necessary.

Evil doesn't always wear a goatee.

Nope.


Sometimes it has a stupid little mustache.

Now don't forget totally bald headed dudes.

Rojava Free State wrote:

Ayytaly wrote:No such thing as evil. "Evil" is just a way to negatively describe Mankind's inherent primal instincts, which They suppress out of peer pressure.

I mean its probably good we suppress them or many of us would be murder victims.

All part of the grand scheme of nature itself.

Jerzylvania wrote:

Ifreann wrote:When you write Himmler off as just evil then you give up any opportunity to achieve a real understanding of why he behaved the way he did. If you think you have the answer, "He was evil", then you stop looking. Likewise Fred Rogers. And if we have no real understanding of whence goodness, then how are we to ever encourage goodness, to bring it out, to create it where previously it did not exist?

Oh please. You write off Mike Bloomberg as supporting evil on another thread a couple times. Maybe measure him by the same standards, huh?

Using mean words to describe Bloomberg doesn't mean I think he's evil. Stop being so sensitive when people talk shit about your favourite billionaire.

Ifreann wrote:

Jerzylvania wrote:
Oh please. You write off Mike Bloomberg as supporting evil on another thread a couple times. Maybe measure him by the same standards, huh?

Using mean words to describe Bloomberg doesn't mean I think he's evil. Stop being so sensitive when people talk shit about your favourite billionaire.

Someone actually likes Michael Bloomberg?

Ayytaly wrote:

Rojava Free State wrote:
I mean its probably good we suppress them or many of us would be murder victims.

All part of the grand scheme of nature itself.

My grand scheme involves not dying so...

Rojava Free State wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Using mean words to describe Bloomberg doesn't mean I think he's evil. Stop being so sensitive when people talk shit about your favourite billionaire.

Someone actually likes Michael Bloomberg?

If they're paid enough.

Ifreann wrote:

Jerzylvania wrote:
Oh please. You write off Mike Bloomberg as supporting evil on another thread a couple times. Maybe measure him by the same standards, huh?

Using mean words to describe Bloomberg doesn't mean I think he's evil. Stop being so sensitive when people talk shit about your favourite billionaire.

Mean words add up to mean sentences and hateful screeds. Your are skilled, no doubt. Not my favorite billionaire. Where did you pull that from? That overactive imagination?

Well what is 'evil'? What counts as being evil varies from person to person and is down to individual.

In my opinion, nobody is born good or bad, rather everyone is just...born, really.

I was born to be wild.

(if this joke was already used, I will be sad)

Godular wrote:I was born to be wild.

(if this joke was already used, I will be sad)

*thinks fondly of Steppenwolf*

Yes.

Rost Dreadnorramus wrote:Yes.

How though? How can one be evil when they have done nothing evil? I mean I dislike babies as much as the next guy but calling them evil is quite the stretch.

People are born with the need for love and affection,but also born with the need for power and wealth.
So people are born with both good,and bad needs.
Life can turn a good person evil - In times of great difficulty and desperation,Trauma too.

No one is born evil, it all depends on what that person went through in life for example: Person A grows up in a wealthy family with good education, but then something negative happens in their life and turns towards crime while Person B grows up in a poor family with poor education, but might still have a good life once they are adults.

While this isn't always the case experince can have a effect on rather a person goes down a good path or a bad path.

They are born selfish.

All sentient beings suffer. Suffering is caused by desire; running from that which one dislikes as well as chasing after that which one likes. To the extent humans are ruled by ignorance, anger and greed, suffering exists; to the extent they practice wisdom, kindness and compassion, harmony exists. "Evil" or "good," while not particularly helpful concepts, coexist in each of us. (Hat tip: Siddhartha Gautama.)

Jerzylvania wrote:

Godular wrote:I was born to be wild.

(if this joke was already used, I will be sad)

*thinks fondly of Steppenwolf*

He's a true nature's child.

It's my personal belief that if life has the potential to redeem you and make you whole or good-- it has the same potential to throw circumstances to corrupt you. I do believe in the Savior's potential to heal us through the power of repentance, and all things may be forgiven with genuine change and effort. We often times must remind ourselves that it is not our job to declare what good and evil actually is-- or judge people for such things. Morality is skewed from person to person, and to me there is only one being free from such imperfection whose job it is to be justice.

"We should not be discouraged or depressed by our shortcomings. No one is without weakness. As part of the divine plan, we are tested to see whether we master weakness or let weakness master us. Proper diagnosis is essential to proper treatment. The Lord gave us this remarkable assurance: "Because thou hast seen thy weakness thou shalt be made strong" (Ether 12:37). But wishing for strength won't make us strong. It takes faith and work to shore up a weakened cord of integrity."

- Prophet Russell M. Nelson of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

No, human nature is not evil, just corrupted.

People are born neither good nor evil. We are born wild. A child born has in it no more of a concept of morality than a cat, dog or sheep. It is only through training that we are conditioned to behave in a way considered moral. And through philosophy that we invent morality as an excuse to explain away our conditioning so that we do not have to face the fact we are trained just as any other beast.

Our quaint customs, be they the observance of property, religion, not murdering one another or anything else someone somewhere considers to be "good" is no different than a dog rolling over on command. We just don't want to accept this fact and thus morality is born.

I am going to just get straight to the point here. To put it simply, no, you aren't "born evil". There is no gene which determines a person's morality at birth, and no such gene has been recognized in the scientific literature either. People are shaped by the environment around them, and the way they were raised by their parents. Depending on what values they were taught, and what situation they find themselves in life, their morality can shift significantly. Of course, whether a person commits a crime or a morally wrong act is ultimately their choice to make, but said choice is not caused by their genetic code. The only thing influencing a person's morality is their environment, their life situation, and personal values.

My students actually are working on a paper about this.

It is true that some people are born with brain structures that predispose them to violent/amoral behavior. Their PET brain scans usually show underdevelopment of the prefrontal cortex, which means that impulsiveness is more likely as their decision making is impaired. That impairment in judgment also makes them more likely not to consider consequences and engage in more risky behavior.

However, if a person with this PET scan for murderers/criminals is raised in a good environment -- involved parents, no food or shelter insecurity, good education, comfortable socioeconomic status, safe neighborhood -- the person may well develop into a functioning member of society -- a social sociopath, so to speak. They might be vengeful and plan to get even with someone whom they feel has wronged them even if they must patiently bide their time to get them, and may develop romantic feelings towards others.

But if they are raised in abusive environments, in poverty, with ill-nutrition, frequent evictions, physical, verbal, sexual or emotional abuse, then the likelihood of them becoming a murderer becomes a great deal more likely.

For anyone wondering if it is nature or nurture that makes someone evil, the answer is "Yes." Or more accurately, "Both, to one degree or another."

Katganistan wrote:My students actually are working on a paper about this.

It is true that some people are born with brain structures that predispose them to violent/amoral behavior. Their PET brain scans usually show underdevelopment of the prefrontal cortex, which means that impulsiveness is more likely as their decision making is impaired. That impairment in judgment also makes them more likely not to consider consequences and engage in more risky behavior.

However, if a person with this PET scan for murderers/criminals is raised in a good environment -- involved parents, no food or shelter insecurity, good education, comfortable socioeconomic status, safe neighborhood -- the person may well develop into a functioning member of society -- a social sociopath, so to speak. They might be vengeful and plan to get even with someone whom they feel has wronged them even if they must patiently bide their time to get them, and may develop romantic feelings towards others.

But if they are raised in abusive environments, in poverty, with ill-nutrition, frequent evictions, physical, verbal, sexual or emotional abuse, then the likelihood of them becoming a murderer becomes a great deal more likely.

For anyone wondering if it is nature or nurture that makes someone evil, the answer is "Yes." Or more accurately, "Both, to one degree or another."

A teenager also has a insufficiently developed prefrontal cortex, though of course, it doesn't mean they are "evil". They simply are more likely to engage in foolish or reckless behavior, and the vast majority of them do not suffer from psychopathy/sociopathy. The difference between teenagers and those born with this anomaly is that teenagers eventually fully develop their prefrontal cortex by the age of 25, while those born with the anomaly have it for life.

But in the end, a good environment and reinforcement of positive morals, coupled with a stable prosperous family and proper treatment, would effectively prevent anyone born with this anomaly from becoming a "monster", just like you said.

Rost Dreadnorramus wrote:Yes.

How? What makes someone automatically evil without having done anything in the first place?

Andsed wrote:How though? How can one be evil when they have done nothing evil? I mean I dislike babies as much as the next guy but calling them evil is quite the stretch.

It might be something to do with original sin, a concept I've always disagreed with.

Nuroblav wrote:

Rost Dreadnorramus wrote:Yes.

How? What makes someone automatically evil without having done anything in the first place?

Andsed wrote:How though? How can one be evil when they have done nothing evil? I mean I dislike babies as much as the next guy but calling them evil is quite the stretch.

It might be something to do with original sin, a concept I've always disagreed with.

I've always found the idea of Original Sin to be a particularly odious one. One cannot be guilty of a crime commited by someone else, before you were even born. That's about as unfair as it is possible for something to be.