What is the attraction of evil?
Does being evil just provide oppurtunities for advancement not possible within normal society - allowing the lowborn to become great leaders, princesses and tenth sons to break outside of roles they're forced into? Does it give even the rabble and hordes of followers a chance to be their own men and make names for themselves?
Is it just a method of obtaining power for those who desire that above all else? Magical artifacts, world domination, ancient knowledge long lost that perhaps should have remained lost?
Or is it just something that's purely moral - the reasons behind it vary as much as anything else, with the only caveat being that the methods have to be immoral or downright sadistic.
>>46201785
Evil is a point of view, anon.
That said, people who are typically attracted to "evil" things are people whose desire for personal gain outweighs their empathy for other people. They don't care about others, so they do whatever the hell they want because they look out for Numero Uno alone.
>>46201924
>Evil is a point of view, anon.
moral relativism equates to moral nihilism
>>46201971
Whatever, no one gives a shit.
>>46201971
Moral absolutism is only applicable in a non-secular universe. If there is no Cosmic Good or Cosmic Evil, then there isn't one singular definition of "good," or "evil," therefore the concept is fluid and relative.
Whether our universe is secular or not is an entirely different argument.
>>46201785
'evil' usualy implyes a dose of stupidity, blindness, neurosis, paranoia etc etc
>>46202001
>Moral absolutism is only applicable in a non-secular universe.
Not really.
Naturalists can be ethicists too.
The only people who think "good and evil are relative durr" are those who aren't actually thinking about the implications of what they're saying.
>>46201971
Your opinion equates to idiocy.
>>46202073
gee great counter-argument
I can tell you've spent a lot of time pondering these issues
>>46201785
What makes you think it's attractive?
It's a series of life choices just like everything else.
>>46202057
>those who aren't actually thinking about the implications of what they're saying
well, the implication is that 'good and evil' are relative sets of conceptual or semantic constructs contingent on beliefs, mentality, culture, ideology, personal bias and such, or rather that they are human notions that have no absolute correlation with reality, only accidental or specific applications depending on situation and context, and the perception and understanding of same
Evil appeals to losers who can't live out their fantasies in real life because they're nothing but low test neckbeard betas-
Oh wait, you mean IC.
>>46202057
I don't understand the implications you are speaking of. Surely one person's evil is another person's good. There are cultures that value child labor, but in America it is a horrible crime. I just can't see how there is any way to codify it.
>>46202213
That's because you assume that all cultures are on the same moral footing. That's a dangerous assumption.
>>46201785
You're thinking about it wrong, evil in itself isn't attractive, you need to look at specific examples and what people achieved through the actions that you deem evil, that's where you'll find the attraction.
Also, please don't shit up the board with babby's first philosophy class, at least discuss a relevant specific situation instead of inviting every edgelord and dork who wasted their school years on philosophy to have a giant slapfight.
>>46202150
>well, the implication is that 'good and evil' are relative sets of conceptual or semantic constructs contingent on beliefs, mentality, culture, ideology, personal bias and such, or rather that they are human notions that have no absolute correlation with reality, only accidental or specific applications depending on situation and context, and the perception and understanding of same
Which naturally leads to moral nihilism because, like, it's all relative, man.
If the perpetrator of a crime isn't doing anything wrong then retribution is unjust. There's no crime to begin with. Ethical standards are meaningless.
Which of course is nonsense and no society could function under such guidelines.
>>46201785
Doing what you know you ought not gives you a rush. Leave some teenagers alone in a house and tell them not to drink all the booze and you know what you'll come home to. Evil is like that on a much larger scale.
Alternatively, evil can just be the misguided efforts of the good intentioned. Misinterpreting the words of a deity, for example.
>>46202236
How so? I disagree with you, but I want to understand your opinion. I just don't think a 'correct' culture or morality can exist when those human-made concepts are essentially meaningless.
>>46202236
So is the assumption that there's one objective set of right and wrong that transcends circumstance and culture.
Without an impartial arbitrator that is not moored in human existence it all just boils down to "well I like A but I don't like B, so B is wrong"
>>46202259
Okay, so you've actually given us something to measure the validity of an action, whether or not it allows society to function.
But that still leaves room for everything from "gas the retards" to "harvest organs from minorities" without actually making society collapse, and arguably making it run smoother for the ones in power.
Evil is attractive because its usually quicker, simpler, and more immediately satisfying. You want something? Take it. People trying to stop you? Kill them. Over the long term its untendable because it destabilizes society - civilization being built on the Maxim "you don't be a dick I won't be a dick and we'll plant some crops and shit".
>>46202259
But ethical standards vary from culture to culture, and are more or less obeyed and accepted within that culture. The same 'crime' in one culture, or even subculture, could have very different - if any - punishment in another culture. There is no way to tell which is right because it is, like, all relative, man. In the grand scheme of things of course, smaller scales maybe not so much.
>>46202213
No schlomo that's not how it works
The cultures don't view it as right it's just that it's necessary
In the closest to evil cases we have Russia and its central Asian puppets where the police take kids out of school and force them to work cotton fields
That is evil
People dehumanise a section and then feel it's okay to treat them like shit - Hindus and untouchables, white baptists and nonwhites, Jews and any nonJew (the latest generation are all growing away from Europe so don't get the message about not being openly antichristian)
>>46202259
If the perpetrator of a crime isn't doing anything wrong when operating under the assumptions of moral nihilism, then retribution is not unjust, nor it it just, it's just an effect of a cause on a fundamental level.
No society may be able to function under moral nihilism, but that still doesn't equate to it being an incorrect assertion.
Guys, can we stop pretending for a second that good and evil are anything other than abstract concepts made up by humans that have no objective meaning? And while we're at it, can we all remember that it is might that ultimately makes right?
>>46202073
no man, that's sound reasoning.
If you think it is relative what is good or bad, then you deny the existance of good or bad being establishable constance, thus deny any basis for morality. You're then morally nihilistic. Doesn't mean that's bad (especially not from the point of view where 'bad' has been just negated), it just follows.
>>46202351
>might makes right
Pleb detected. Go grint in your hut savage, the people who built civilization are talking
>>46202319
Homosexuality - celebrated in some cultures, a capital crime punishable by death in others.
Theft in America - OK if you're rich and the scale is impossible to wrap your head around, potentially derails the entire course of your life if you're poor, colored, or both.
Sex with a twelve-year-old - cultural norm a few centuries ago, mass taboo now.
There really is no option BUT relativism.
>>46202328
That was just the quickest example I could think of.
And while I agree with you that that is evil, that is coming from a completely different viewpoint from them so it is evil to our standards. It is probably even evil to them. But there is no way for an action to be cosmically good or evil. And even if there was a way, there would be no kind of cosmic punishment *tips fedora*
What if we met an alien culture that enslaved their lower class and children and we're incredibly cruel and abusive to them. And they thought human's freedom and fairness was abhorrent. Who is correct? There is no way to tell.
>>46202370
What's that? I can't hear you over the sound of the lawmakers enforcing their laws.
So are the Afghans or pedos here morally justified in raping little kids because it's their culture? Are ISIS justified in suicide-bombing our airports because it's their culture? Were Treblinka, or the Rape of Nanking, justified because they were part of someone's culture that was clearly on the same moral level as ours and thus can't be criticized?
Is this the future you want?
>>46202259
thats like saying you need a deep understanding of hegelian metaphisics to organise trafic and write adequate trafic laws, or that custom taxes on importing fruit should depend on bioethics or something
the 'guidelines' in that sense are practical and based on simple logic, damage control, maintaining order, ethical or moral notions are secondary justifications or ideological confirmations of authority and whatnot
>>46202394
You're making the rookie mistake of mistaking nice for right. You're arguing with someone who's saying that morals are arbitrary, while you think that moral is everything that's friendly and neat.
In essence, niceness being important is just your opinion, and without a impartial judge like a god to say that thing X is for sure good and thing Y is for sure bad, all you're left with are opinions.
I agree with your opinion, because I think that peaceful and liberal societies are beneficial, but if someone honestly thinks that those things are shit and unimportant, there's no rulebook I can open and tell him that HAH, you're so wrong!
Philosophy is always, in the end, "that's like, your opinion, man".
>>46202394
From an objective standpoint, they're neither justified nor unjust in their actions. From the standpoint of collective Human psychology, these acts are to be considered evil and to face retribution.
Nobody here is arguing that they would follow moral relativism or nihilism to the logical conclusions (to do so would require a preference-less psyche, something Humans are incapable of achieving), but that doesn't change the merits of such views as theory.
>>46201924
>Evil is a point of view, anon.
No, it's really not. This is a philosophy that's been shoved down people's throats by Hollywood for decades now, but it still doesn't make a lick of sense. The argument is always some variation of "from my point of view, not murdering helpless children is evil!" Don't use violence except in self defense. Holy shit, it's that fucking easy.
I guess evil is not knowing when you're being violent. Bullies thinking it's just harmless banter, politicians thinking it's okay to twist a few arms if it achieves the greater good of passing some controversial bill (or keeping them in office so they feel could if they wanted to), CEOs thinking it's okay to use wage slavery because if it was really so bad all those workers would just quit and starve, etc.
>>46202394
Of course not. Those acts aren't up to the world's moral norm. Which is just as man made as any of theirs. I don't think relativism means that everything is okay. Of course, that's speaking from MY morals.
>>46202394
Just because I think morality is relative does not mean I wish to have other people's morals inflicted upon me.
And it also doesn't mean I'm a person who would stand idly by let such things happen just because there is a moral justification to the African raping kids or suicide bomber blowing up my train stations.
>>46202447
>I agree with your opinion, because I think that peaceful and liberal societies are beneficial, but if someone honestly thinks that those things are shit and unimportant, there's no rulebook I can open and tell him that HAH, you're so wrong!
So now you understand why we in liberal societies need large militaries and nuclear primacy, right? That it's not a matter of imperialist bullying, but a matter of existential survival, because there are a lot of people out there who do not give a fuck about playing nice and will gladly do horrible despicable things to us if we allow them to?
>>46202142
Because otherwise why would anyone willingly join an evil empire or form a death cult? Even Nazis felt they were just following orders or doing something horrible for the greater good of humanity. It doesn't just spring out of nowhere.
>>46201984
This where the thread should've ended. Instead, you fuckers had to go on with your pseudointellectual circlejerk. I cannot find words to describe how much I would love to see each and every one of you dragged into the street and shot.
>>46201785
It's pretty much your first paragraph. People become evil in the eyes of their peers because they want to be their own sovereign. They wish to be free of peer-pressure interference with their efforts to achieve their personal goals.
I currently find that it's not those with a sadistic vein who're the most evil, but those with such a singlemindedness to their goals that they are desensitized to the horrid consequences of their actions.
>>46202394
you people keep not getting it, like youre doing it on purpose
no one is justified in doing anything
dogs arent justified in biting someone no matter how much he got molested or neglected, a rhino is not justified in chewing some gazelle to death and spitting her out no matter how frustrated he was cause a female didnt let him screw her, a humanitarian worker isnt justified in feeding hungry kids no matter what emotional imperative he or she feels to do so
no one is justified in anything, neither is justification needed, neither is condemnation necesary, neither is there such a thing as a cause or action or position being 'legitimate', none of that is a operative factor, only actual relations, actual interactions, actual reasons for one action or another
>>46202512
Please let what you just said be hyperbole. If you seriously meant what you said, I worry for your mental health.
>>46202467
>Arguing that a philosophy doesn't make a lick of sense
>Suggesting another theory without backing it up in any objective way
Philosophical discussion isn't an invitation to state what you think and leave it there, it's the not-quite-science of logic, deduction, abduction and general speculations at insight to the nature of currently unquantifiable or subjective things.
>>46202492
>large militaries
Not necessarily. Just the capability and will to respond to existential threats with absolute annihilation. Sure, it's overkill, but you don't see any Carthaginian suicide bombers, do you?
>>46202512
Though I don't feel as strongly about it, this.
Why do you have to turn this into a huge discussion on morality? OP was obviously asking in the sense of a black and white morality fantasy universe, where evil is evil and good is good, and trying to figure out why evil would be evil.
>>46202557
To be fair, the only argument I can think of against using nukes against ISIS is that they're too spread out for a nuke to be cost-effective.
>>46202545
Look around this thread and ask yourself if I'm really the one who needs help.
>>46202580
If you'd like to see lives taken over a philosophical discussion on the internet that you don't appear to be enjoying? Yes, you are probably the worst case of instability in the thread that we can deduce from the information we have.
>>46202550
Relativism is literally Freudian-level bullshit. There's no way to argue against it because the response is always "and you're entitled to that opinion (but you're wrong)." It's a philosophy that exists so that people can repeat it without ever worrying about being wrong.
So no, I'm not going to argue my point. I'm just going to state that murdering babies is objectively wrong, and you can either disagree or we can have a legitimate philosophical discussion starting from there.
>>46202512
>>46202580
>I don't like this thread :(
Then go to a different thread, ya dunce.
>>46202576
Widespread targets that are not easily distinguished from the general public. Fallout. The global nuclear Mexican stand-off.
It's far better to identify them individually, kill them, their parents, their siblings, and all spouses and children, then hand their property over to their community. Cut it out, root and branch.
>>46202580
How many people have you killed for petty reasons already? Where did you bury the bodies?
>>46202576
There's also the part where they're not actually any worse than the US-backed governments in the areas where they operate. The only reason you have a problem with ISIS is because you've been told by news reporters that they're all literally Hitler and such.
>>46202557
And that really turned Rome into a healthy society didn't it? They ended up sucking cock of any successful general which lead to the end of the republic and the emperors who were 95% psychos
>>46202690
They all need to be nuked.
>>46202638
the only way you can argue against moral relativism is by positing some fundamental value, such as life for example, then saying that whatever is biocidal, wathever ends, fucks up or degenerates life is 'evil', what helps maintains and promotes life is 'good'
this however would make for some highly questionable ethical systems, things like say the value or meaning of freedom, equality and such concepts would be realy hard to define
same thing goes if you put another main signifier thing in place of 'life' like freedom, non suffering, happynes, order etc etc...
on the other hand you can observe the world as sets of forms and functions, and say that something is functional or disfunctional etc.. but again this has to be judged against some standard of value etc...
>>46202557
But now we're at the point where bad thoughts are considered an existential threat and need to be annihilated absolutely. You should look over the Snowden leaks again if it's been a while.
>>46202557
You don't see any roman nukes either.
>>46201785
>why are people evil?
Gee, I dunno! Why do people steal? Cheat? Murder?
>>46202677
>>46202605
You've never wished someone dead for having slighted you? My, what a wonderful bunch of hugboxes you've must've grown up in.
>>46202770
Because they think they can get away with it and it either gives them some tangible benefit or provides them some deranged pleasure?
>>46202771
There's a ridiculously high chance that this is bait but I'll bite. These hugboxes are referred to as "the vast majority."
Wishing to kill somebody, or having them killed, over a petty slight is pretty much objectively mental instability in terms of modern psychology. There is no way around this, regardless of one's victim or narcissistic complexes.
>>46201785
>>46202771
No, most people aren't violent, unstable people. It doesn't have a whole lot to do with where we grew up. If someone slighted me, I would hope for something to happen *to me* to make up for that slight. I wouldn't care what happened to the other guy because I'm not a spiteful little shit. If he had a history of mistreating me, I'd stop associating with him.
>>46202792
>deranged
how is a animal that enjoys dominance violence and such, deranged?
i mean it could be a question of degree but hurting and using others is a universaly pleasing thing among practicaly all living systems capable of such behavior
these things aent qustions of right and wrong, you dont build a roof or open a umbrela because rain is 'wrong' and the wather is 'being evil'
>>46202824
>thinking that there aren't people out there whose lives have no value
Yeah, you grew up in a hugbox alright.
>>46202771
We've gotten mad at people over small things, but we calmed down before we did anything stupid. Can you say the same?
>>46202836
Nice argumentation, I am utterly incapable of handling such baseless repetition in the face of abductively supported facts. Woe is me.
>>46202835
>hurting and using others is a universaly pleasing thing
You might want to get that checked.
>among practicaly all living systems capable of such behavior
How'd you figure? Did you ask a lion or something?
Animals kill to eat and to reduce competition. Sometimes they might bring an injured animal to train their young to hunt.
That's not hurting others for pleasure
>>46202915
thats like saying drinking water when youre thirsty isnt a pleasure, its just hidration
>>46202690
I draw the line at the destruction of irreplaceable cultural and historic sites and artifacts. Even Saddam didn't dynamite Ashur and Ur.
>>46202690 (You)
>implying that ISIS isn't US-backed as well
>>46202856
After having 3 kids, my parents decided to adopt some redneck kid. Big mistake. He lied to everyone (often for stupid reasons), stole from everyone and made a point of disrespecting us after we took him in. He cared only for himself, but was far too stupid to better himself in any way, even when my parents tried to help him. When I learned that he had crashed my mother's car when he took it for a joyride, I was disappointed to hear that he was still alive and perfectly unharmed. He's gone back to live among his birth family, and it's just as well. He was never going to amount to anything of worth anyways and now neither I nor my family have to put up with him.
Still think every human life has a value?
>>46202941
Some people don't enjoy that, its just a thing they have to do. Not everything is for feeling good.
>>46203039
Not that guy, but I'm having a hard time finding any value in yours, or your that of your family over that redneck at the moment. Your assessment of value is based on deeply personal anecdotes, probably basically related to what you estimate to be the social good, maybe with some halfassed universal good via god stuff. I'm not saying his life has inherent value, just that yours doesn't either, and can be easily brought up to the chopping block.
>>46203039
lol
Firs of all adoption is a tricky and not easy thing.
One asshole and one car crash devalue all human life and and the one in the hugbox is the other guy?
I shall woe with that guy too.
>mecum omnes plangite!
>>46202999
>Torture and murder all the people you want, but don't your dare hurt those rocks!
>>46203020
Sure, in the sense that we sell them guns for cheap and give them free advertising so we can claim they're the evilest motherfuckers on the planet and justify spending another million billion dollars fighting them.
>>46203039
>Still think every human life has a value?
I'm beginning to think yours doesn't. Clearly your parents weren't up to the challenge of raising one child, much less a second that had a rough start.
>>46203131
He stole from us so often and for so little reason that we all had to put locks on our doors. He told lies that anyone with 5 functioning brain cells could see through. He broke the TV once just because he saw others enjoying themselves with it. Whenever someone had a birthday, he got pissy because someone was getting presents and it wasn't him. He also got pissy on Christmas and his own birthday because he had unrealistic expectations about what others should be giving him. My parents were supportive, but he still made a point of not coming home for dinner, rarely called home to say he'd be doing so and never asked for permission to hang out with friends after school. My parents paid good money for tutoring, but he still couldn't make it through the 11th grade. He was objectively human garbage.
>maybe with some halfassed universal good via god stuff
Nope, atheist.
>>46203327
So... what about any of that makes you and your family not human garbage?
>>46201785
You're way too absolute in your view of good and evil for any discussion to be useful.
>>46203372
Respectable jobs and educations, zero criminal charges other than one speeding ticket, the practice of basic decency and manners, honesty....you know, the works.
>>46203427
So you're saying that because you're morally pure, you can kill the impure and still be moral. I get it.
>>46203039
>>46203327
you sound like white trash with highly ego-driven thought that will never contribute any helpful ideas to any community
I've never wished someone dead for having slighted me. The part of my life where they slight me is probably my fault anyway for being incautious; lesson learned. I have, however, wished people dead for being useless shitheels
>>46203427
oh, you're "respectable", surely you have earned your place in the annals of history
judgmental prick
>>46201785
Assume that we're talking about someone who is mentally healthy. Most people WANT things, but our empathy, social nature, and fear of punishment stop us from acting in unacceptable ways. We want social power, money, possessions, political goals, sex, and so on. This isn't evil. When people put themselves ahead of others to gain these things, then this amorality that makes it evil.
So, the allure of evil is that you are getting what you want, in ways which are faster and easier, since you're willing to do things that others are not. You are willing to kill, steal, and dehumanize others for gain.
Look at rioters in first world countries for example, for something silly like a sporting event -- most of these people are pretty normal in their daily lives, but in a charged environment surrounded by equally agitated peers, a number of people revert to looting and property damage, since it seems like those restrictions are lifted away. They feel safe in doing harm to others. Take someone who abuses a child -- he or she probably feels safe from reprisal since a child is less physically and mentally mature. Take a soldier preying upon an unarmed population unable to resist. Take gangs which cultivate a heavy 'us versus them' mentality. And so on.
Of course, there are many shades of evil. Many people are opportunistic, like the rioters mentioned before. Others feel outcast and no real responsibility to feel kindness to others. Some others openly exploit people in ways which can be considered cruel. Lots of routes and justifications to an end.
>>46203455
>implying I've ever killed anyone
Nice projection, anon. I've only said I'd like to see others die, not that I was willing to take any action to that end.
>>46203416
If instead of 'evil' it was 'serving the dark lord' or 'becoming a lich,' would that change anything?
>>46203327
So, if your parents were displeased with his behavior, why didn't they teach him to to behave differently?
>>46203472
Ohhhhh, so you're saying you're morally pure and would like to maintain that by having some else kill the person you don't like. Nice one.
>>46203490
They tried, tried and tried again with the patience of saints. He was just too stupid.
>>46203472
>Nice projection, anon.
Are you implying that he's a murderer or do you just not know what projection means?
>>46202267
>Leave some teenagers alone in a house and tell them not to drink all the booze and you know what you'll come home to.
Only if you're a shitty parent.
>>46203509
So why is it his fault that your parents failed to teach him properly?
>>46203509
Did you ever try, or did your instant dislike of him sabotage every effort your parents made?
>>46203539
"Fault" has nothing to do with it. He's just garbage. He came into our home garbage, and left garbage.
>>46203166
More "I can't control what you do to each other and what you tolerate being done to you, but I can damn sure try to ensure you don't fuck it up for the rest of us."
>>46203472
>I'd like to see others die, not that I was willing to take any action to that end
so you're a pussy who gossips about how terrible other people are with no intention of ever putting any money where that mouth is
got it
>>46203553
>He's just garbage. He came into our home garbage, and left garbage.
sounds like the self-righteous excuses of someone who failed as a brother and whose parents failed at parenting
>>46203558
More like
>I hate sandniggers and I'd wish they'd all just kill each other and leave all that rich sandnigger culture for the real people
>>46203553
But what makes you not garbage? You already admitted to wanting him dead, but being too much of a coward or unwilling to kill him yourself, while being interested in getting someone else to do it for you. Seems pretty garbage.
>>46203575
>so you're a pussy who gossips about how terrible other people are with no intention of ever putting any money where that mouth is
got it
I haven't met anyone who was worth going to jail yet.
>sounds like the self-righteous excuses of someone who failed as a brother and whose parents failed at parenting
Please, tell me about all the terrible children you've made into upstanding citizens with your stupendous parenting skills.
>>46201785
As a good man, you spend every day working for some rich bastard you can't do anything to, making a tiny fragment of the worth of your work and wishing you could be spending all those hours of consciousness and vitality doing literally anything else, with your only light at the end of the tunnel being some day you'll be too used up for them to keep milking you.
Evil lets you rob a rich man, seduce his wife and kill him if he complains.
>>46203553
>My parents tried
>They didn't succeed
Sorry, remind me how that isn't the definition of failure? I'm not saying your parents are bad people because they couldn't handle him. Hell, I know how hard parenting is even with well-trained kids. What I'm saying is that he's the victim of this story, not the antagonist.
>>46203680
>Good implies knowingly consenting to oppression
That's not how this works at all, anon.
>>46203744
Seems to be that. Look at all the morally acceptable ways of not consenting. They get a little lip service and a few pity trophies thrown around, then those who have find a slightly different way to spin "you belong to us and we'll throw you a scrap every once in a while" and people just quietly bend over again until the enough people whine and it all starts over.
>>46203658
>I haven't met anyone who was worth going to jail yet.
If you're using that essentially self-centered ethos to guide your actions, why do you continue the pretense of having moral high ground?
>Please, tell me about all the terrible children you've made into upstanding citizens with your stupendous parenting skills.
I'm too young for that, and I freely acknowledge that right now I probably would not rise to the challenge. But if I've learned anything from my time wrangling tards it's that "this is impossible, they're just too stupid and violent" is universally an excuse for incompetence. If the current approach isn't working, try a different one, and keep trying until you have enough understanding to achieve qualified success.
Although I suppose given how often you resort to blocky, thought-terminating ideas like "respectable", "terrible", and "upstanding citizens" you and yours lacked the mental faculties to do anything but fail
>>46203591
>implying implied implications
Personally, I'd prefer they get over their shit and go back to the "wellspring of science and art" bit they had going for a while. That said, it took Christendom five centuries to get from where Islam is right now to where it is today. I'm not expecting miracles.
>>46203799
>morally acceptable
There's your problem. Someone has managed to indoctrinate you with the belief that standing up for your rights is immoral. This actually seems to be a common theme, especially in the lower and middle ranks of the business world (obviously the majority of the upper ranks aren't particularly concerned with the morality of what they do)
>>46203811
>But if I've learned anything from my time wrangling tards it's that "this is impossible, they're just too stupid and violent" is universally an excuse for incompetence.
Oh, my, you're adorable. I bet you think we should "rehabilitate" serial killers and serial rapists too.
>>46203901
I've done better than that. I've helped rehabilitate actual retards. Downs syndrome, Angelmanns, cerebal palsy, ADHD, the works. Every single child I've worked with has grown into an outstanding citizen.
So what excuse will you pull out next?
>>46203680
>All rich people are evil
The logic of the sociopath. Anyone better than you is an evil monster, everyone below you is a pathetic wretch.
>>46204377
>I've done better than that. I've helped rehabilitate actual retards. Downs syndrome, Angelmanns, cerebal palsy, ADHD, the works. Every single child I've worked with has grown into an outstanding citizen.
>>46203901
>He's literally going full Sociopath.
let me guess, you think they should be killed.
>>46204418
>He thinks mentally addled people are naturally angry autists.
Just because you're some normie hating faggot from /r9k/ doesn't mean everyone is.
>>46204443
Don't lie to me, boy. You've never rehabilitated anyone in your entire life. Drug addicts get rehabilitated; people with mental issues get conditioned. It's blatantly obvious that you're making things up to try to win an internet argument. Why? I don't know. I have completely destroyed your little pseudointellectual circlejerk, so I don't see why you continue thrashing about.
>>46204555
I'm not even that guy, but could you come off as any more of a pretentious fedora tipper? You won no argument at all, all you did is smash your opinion against another opinion and think your hyper-stunted social views are victorious.
You want to actually have a discussion, stop trying to dismiss others with every word as if it somehow holds weight.
>>46204597
>You want to actually have a discussion
I don't. My goal was to kill the thread, and I succeeded at that.
>>46204555
>Addiction
>Not a mental issue
What?
>>46204617
Not really, from the looks of it people just called you out as the stunted little autist you are anon.
You call that killing the thread?
Know whats more interesting? Why you're here in this thread raging against a discussion on the internet.
This thread looks pretty lively, don't y'all think?
>>46204617
>My goal was to detail a thread about morality by talking about what an awful person I am
Well, I suppose you succeeded, but now this is a thread about all the ways in which you are fucked up and should see a professional. So don't be offended when we follow the path you railroaded us into.
>>46201785
>What is the attraction of evil?
for players? 90% of the time It's either an excuse to disruptive to the campaign, or to fulfill their power/revenge fantasies, or to do both at the same time.
from a character perspective, childhood trauma, spoiled upbringing, and emotionally toxic environments make up the majority of reasons a character might become evil, though there are still cases where someone is just a terrible person, there was never any good in them from day 1.then again, my idea of evil is someone with a desire to bring physical and/or emotional harm to others for their own personal satisfaction, rather than for any higher ideals, a simply selfish person is not good, but not necessarily evil either, it's only when their actions actively (be it directly or indirectly) cause harm or misery to another that they cross over that threshold into being evil, I have no idea if that parallels what it actually reads in the PHB, I usually skip over that section
>>46201785
OP kind of answered their own questions.
Yes, I guess.
Also, >>46202467
>"Evil is the little voice in the back of your mind that tells you that everything you do is okay," for reasons.
>>46201971
>>46202259
>>46202328
>>46202057
>>46202213
>>46202351
>>46202364
>>46202394
>>46202001
>>46201924
>Moral Relativism
Just because morality is relative, does not mean it is not also absolute.
North and South can be relative, as in the LGS is north of my house and south of my friend's, but there are also absolutes.
Simply because an individual can't imagine the existence of the North Pole or what it's like, doesn't mean the North Pole can't exist.
If there were no absolute morality, then moral relativity would equate to moral nihilism.
However, as nobody has proved the idea that there is no act imaginable that everyone would believe is evil or good, moral relativism remains just an idea.
If there is one act so evil that everyone, ever, would believe it is evil, then evil exists, the spectrum of good and evil exists, and we are just arguing where things lie on it.
Until we disproved that such an act could exist, then moral relativism is just an idea.
I believe the North Pole exists, but two guys in a room without a compass are gonna argue over who's the southerner.
Also, embracing moral relativism/nihilism works against the principles of society and civilization, which can be problematic.
>>46202529
This is the smartest description of the opinion of moral relativism/nihilism in the thread.
>>46201785
In the Star Wars route the Dark Side is the quick and easy route to power whereas the Light Side is the slower, much more difficult and much less tempting solution. I'd say evil is overall attractive if you want to get result fast (after all, patience is a virtue so impatience is a vice). You could work hard and get something by your own efforts, or you could shank a nigger and take his stuff. This is also why I think sexy magical realm succubi make perfect sense: they're not the kind of material you have an awkward flirty fase with followed by handholding and getting married and starting a family. You fuck them silly while skipping all the "boring" parts that are fundamental for the stability of a civilization.
As for the afterlife, we must get rid of the binary idea that good is rewarded and evil punished. Those with a certain alignment go to a certain afterlife. Of course for a highwayman this is literally going to hell, but what about some great orcish warlord who slaughtered millions? To him, the Chaotic Evil afterlife is an endless moshpit where he gets killed, resurrected, gets killed again, resurrected once more et cetera ad infinitum. He might even climb up the ranks as some great demon. Going to the CE afterlife is the absolute best possible scenario for him.
Same for Lawful Evil. Some random henchman will still be a random henchman in the afterlife (which means not a lot really changes for him) whereas some great conqueror will end up becoming a great general in the army of devils. Again, best case scenario for him (barring leading a devil rebellion and becoming the ruler of the LE afterlife, which I imagine tends to happen a lot).
In the D&D universe there's no real downside to being evil. Not even the "the Dark Side is tempting, but in the end the Light Side is stronger" stuff from Star Wars, there's literally no downside! And that's what makes those who actually choose to be good all the more impressive.
>>46204807
>there is no act imaginable that everyone would believe is evil
How about dismembering people for fun? Or do crazy people get a vote in our absolute morals?
>>46204871
Not evil.
>>46204871
>Cannibalistic societies
>Not enjoying the Joy of Cooking
There was a reason I didn't try to provide an example of the absolute evil act.
>Or do crazy people get a vote in our absolute morals?
Fair question.
I'd say "crazy" people don't count as they are not capable of discerning reality properly.
But that raises the question of defining a universal definition of "crazy".
>>46201984
Undertoasted bread
>>46205281
Toast toast toast toast toast.
>>46201924
Expressing alignment as two sliding scales of desire for personal gain and empathy for others would be a much more effective alignment system, wow.
A character with low empathy and high desire for personal gain would commit acts likely to be considered to be evil, and a character with high empathy and low desire for personal gain would commit acts likely to be considered good. Characters with high desire for personal gain and high empathy would be one flavor of neutral, with low desire for personal gain and low empathy being another.
I don't know about law or chaos, though.
>>46204807
You act like we can prove what objective reality is. All we know of reality is what we perceive it to be.
Evil is putting yourself above others. Getting ahead without regard to other people.Basically making yourself number one.
See a starving beggar asking for food? Fuck them, they don't deserve what's rightfully yours.
Some guy hitting on the girl you got the hots for? Go teach him a lesson, or tell the girl he's got super aids or some shit.
Guy at work on track to get the promotion you want? Frame him for stealing from the boss. Ruin his chances of getting that promotion.
Evil is just being a selfish fuck and doing whatever necessary to get what you want. You don't have to be full on murderer to be evil. Hell, it might not be in your best interest to be like such, as it may end up harming your chances of getting ahead if a higher authority or greater power gets involved to keep you down. You just have to be willing to be a douchebag and not care to fuck over other people to get what you want.
>>46202328
There is no definition of evil anon, evil does not exist. Nothing has objective value, not even human life, and everything has subjective definition. Nothing is righteousness, there is nothing that makes Nazis evil or doctors fighting Ebola good. Only your subjective perception spawned by the culture you were born in, and the perceptions of all the other individuals that surround you that coalesce into a gestalt morality.
But that isn't an objective definition, for there is none. Human life has no true value, and there is nothing wrong with ending it or saving it. What matter is how the people around you and witness to your actions perceive it. You could argue that the majority sets something close to an objective definition by force of arms, but even they do not matter outside of our small bubble.
>>46202394
It's not our future anon, it's the truth. ISIS is not evil. Nor were the Nazis. Nor was the British Empire or Soviet Russia. Because there is no true evil. Only what you think there is.
>>46206005
Everyone's evil, silly. There's just varying degrees and amounts. Helping Germany out of the Great Depression? Good. Letting millions starve? Bad.
>>46207797
You imply letting people starve is bad, but there is no objective good or ill. As I said, nothing is objectively right or wrong. Nobody is good, nobody is evil. There are only opposing ideologies whose righteousness is equally nonexistent.
>>46208150
Why is this a matter of ideology? Not everything has a deep and complex meaning behind it. Sometimes people will be dicks.
