|
As Effectronica pointed out, we know very little about what makes people commit truly despicable actions. Those who commit sex offenses against children (as opposed to merely being pedophiles who experience the desire to do so) are actually fairly well understood compared to spree and serial killers. It's their brain chemistry. Now there's a lot of pure barbarism contained in each of us that the right circumstances will bring out, look at IS or Abu Ghraib. But these forms of monstrosity seem understandable to us as well. Heck just look at the fantasies of butchering pedophiles espoused by some posters in this very forum; people are just itching to cast off their civilized veneer and pour blood all over themselves. So all those people, pedophiles, war criminals, tribalist killers etc. I can have empathy for, because it's possible for me to understand what has created them. But spree killers and corporate executives are ciphers to me; it's difficult to have empathy for them because it's hard to understand what drives them.
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:On the other hand, is killing or otherwise victimizing people wrong in the first place? There are so many of them; too many really. Obviously I don't want to be raped and/or murdered, but from an objective standpoint what's the net effect of, say, some random kid being violently and painfully killed? What's the environmental externality this potential person would have inflicted on the world? What would he really have accomplished in a lifetime of gorging on cheap calories, mindless consumerism and unfulfilling relationships? What if, god forbid, he or she should have children? And, in the long run, and with the impenetrable loneliness of the human condition, does it matter what pains or indignities this putative person suffered in his or her moments or hours of being dispatched? Not in any tangible sense. Maybe we should rethink the harm, or indeed the value of the "monsters, ax murders, and pedophiles" of society. Please report to your local Healing Center for healing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Are you suggesting I should be kept against my will in a state institution, without any evidence to suggest that this incarceration might benefit me or society in any way? I doubt you would suggest that I come into your basement to be restrained for years; that would make you a "monster." But you are unconcerned at the thought of the state taking an equivalent action. I don't require that the state control you, but if you don't see the inherent value in human life and quality of life then somebody needs to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:So would you say that the world would a priori be a better place with 12 billion people in it? 20 billion? 100 billion? Do you revel in how wonderfully more rich the world your life has become as the world welcomed 3 billion more people in the last 60 years? Is your life measurably or hell even intangibly improved by all this new value? The answer should be yes. If human life inherently has value this conclusion seems inevitable. No, I just find your reasoning spooky and devoid of certain essential qualities humans need to live together safely.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Wow, I really overestimated your understanding of the conversation. I thought you were trying to demonstrate diminishing marginal value, which was confusing because it supports my argument. The beauty of being a human being and not a government or a corporation is you get to appreciate the value of every individual human life as unique and beyond weighing. Why would you try to apply the blunt, savage motives of those entities to yourself? They have all the capacity for moral reasoning of a prokaryote.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Hey this is a much better response than most. There are many societies where murder has been considered a lawful act within social groups. Off the top of my head there are Germanic law's approach to lawful murder, a similar attitude among the New Guineans, and instances of same-group human sacrifice in America, SE Asia and the South Pacific that modern Americans would no doubt consider murder. The Bible certainly assigns monetary value to the lives of humans: wives, slaves, and unborn children, and treats murder in certain instances more like a tort than a felony. It depends on what you mean by murder and social group, of course. The example that's closest-to-home for Americans I think is the practice of lynching in the American South. We are better than those societies.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:0. Yeah but why apply the logic of governments to yourself, like some kind of...cape-wearing dictator who decides the value of everyone's life...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
On the one hand, it seems like we have all the people who share in the concept of human community and agree that all human life has inherent value, and on the other hand we have people who cannot see the value of anything unless it is assigned a value by those in power. I'm not sure if there is any thing else to communicate at this point, everyone has their positions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:No, this is flailing and it's pathetic. I'm really disappointed that when asked to defend the value of human life, this is what you come up with. What could be less consequential that the disappointment of a person who doesn't understand the inherent value of all human life?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 13:30
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Who are they, and what evidence do you have that they mean this when they say... that? I think it's pretty funny that you think you've tricked me into saying anything. I am "laughing out loud." I suppose that is an emotion, which is a good sign.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
I mean the inherent value is agreed upon, it is not a particle that we view on the subatomic level or something. I like my life; I like and value my family's life. Yes? I would prefer that none of them be ended. It's not a simplistic "modern obsession with rooting out hypocrisy" (paraphrasing arglebargle) to decide that since everybody without clinical depression feels that way about themselves, we should try to force ourselves to extend that empathy field outward as much as we can, for the sake of all humanity. Jesus Christ is that basic enough?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Private citizens murdering other people of their own volition is a bad idea. Whoa whoa whoa there! I think I need to take a look at your premises!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What does "shown compassion" mean? *moves arms like Klaus Nomi* Gosh, who could ever know that? What a complicated question!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Wild Horses posted:Repeat offender violent rapists and pedophiles are probably okay to have the death penalty for. Broken violent beings with impure thought. Cannot will not change. Who can defend them? OK Rohrschach.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Why? Fascists (the variety that sniff Pinochet's cape or others) believe suffering is purifying.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Sorry, I don't think anyone capable of murder is capable of reforming. Nicely done.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2015 19:22
|
|