Author
|
Topic: Degrees of evil (Read 4897 times) |
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
  
|
 |
Degrees of evil
« on: 2003-01-01 18:10:16 » |
 |
If we disapprove of someone's behavior we have a variety of labels to express our displeasure. Here are some adjectives I've ordered from least to most bad. Can you think of others? Did I get the order right?
sketchy
impolite
inconsiderate
annoying
rude
regrettable
lamentable
immoral
deplorable
unconscionable
depraved
reprehensible
evil
|
|
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.39
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #1 on: 2003-01-01 20:29:36 » |
|
...felonious, malevolent, malicious, mischieveous, spiteful, vicious, wicked...
I am not an english major, not even a native english speaker, so I cannot help much with the subtle differences.
Maybe there is a problem with ordering all the words just by relative strength because they refer to different attributes. For example, we could create a separate lists for behaviors which disrupt communication and another one for behaviors which promote something undesirable.
In the first list we would have words such as "impolite", "annoying", or "rude", which are communication-oriented. These behaviors can be used to provoke different degrees of annoyance in order to make a communication more informal or punchy, to cause alertness, to throw someone off guard, or simply to cut the communication.
In the second list, we could have words such as "evil", "immoral" or "harmful" (here is new one), which only loosely belong in a list of behaviors. Sometimes they are used loosely to describe a behavior which promotes something harmful or something considered evil in a given social context. Maybe the title of this thread should be something more strictly behavior-oriented.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #2 on: 2003-01-01 21:52:45 » |
|
Quote from: rhinoceros on 2003-01-01 20:29:36
In the first list we would have words such as "impolite", "annoying", or "rude", which are communication-oriented.
|
These words are not necessarily communication oriented. For example, smoking in a non-smoking area, going to the front of the line, taking more than your share, eating with your elbows on the table, belching (in some cultures), chewing with your mouth open, etc. could all be labelled with one of the above words.
The rest that you put in another category could be communication oriented. For example, slander, libel and shouting fire in a crowded theater are all worse than rude.
I don't see a separate category for communication.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #3 on: 2003-01-02 03:17:00 » |
|
I think the important thing to keep in mind remains that simply because we have decided that some behavior violates important norms, doesn't mean we lose our collective heads and fail to put this in some perspective. We can recognize a difference between reprehensible, and evil. We can recognize Kenneth Lay's behavior as reprehensible, whereas the human rights violation's of Saddam Hussein's two sons surely register in degrees of outright evil. "Reprehensible" would wrongly understate the problem.
-Jake
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #4 on: 2003-01-02 22:23:09 » |
|
Quote from: Jake Sapiens on 2003-01-02 03:17:00
We can recognize a difference between reprehensible, and evil. We can recognize Kenneth Lay's behavior as reprehensible, whereas the human rights violation's of Saddam Hussein's two sons surely register in degrees of outright evil. "Reprehensible" would wrongly understate the problem.
|
You haven't left any room at the extreme end for the architects of mass suffering, those who responsible for the murder of millions.
|
|
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.39
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #5 on: 2003-01-03 15:51:42 » |
|
What is the word for those who are responsible for the murder of millions? ... Would the word "monsters" do? I think this is the word used most of the time. But not quite. A monster can be "evil" in a particular context and "cute" in another one.
My point is that there can be no absolute ordering of the derogatory words. First you start a discussion which somehow defines a context and then you start flinging and receiving derogatory words as needed.
Even after the context has been defined, there is a game with using the words on different attributes. So, the same derogatory word may be used in either direction with different meanings. "You are that because..." -- "No, *you* are that because..."
Some of the derogatory words mentioned are meant to be used specifically for a given attribute of behavior, although language permits them to be used loosely in different ways. Other derogatory words are more multidimensional and refer to multiple attributes at the same time. Moreover, the meaning of a word drifts with time within a cultural background.
No, I don't think the derogatory words can be put on an absolute line without any regard to the context and the attributes they refer to.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #6 on: 2003-01-03 17:13:09 » |
|
True. Well said Rhino. I don't know if you have convinced me, but you you do inspire me to ask some interesting questions?
Which is more evil?
A serial killer who kills 50 people in his career, execution style?
A serial killer who tortures 10 people to death in his career?
A despot who orders the killing of thousands but participates directly in none of them?
A black market entrepreneur, whose business runs in the billions, but who freqently must kill competitors, rats, and "cheats" to maintain market share?
Aren't they all really just plain "evil" in their own various ways? Talking about the ways, numbers, and reasons only serves to add flavor and intensity. But still it seems simply wrong to not use the word "evil" in discussing them. We could say one seems smarter, and another stupider, but who really cares about the relative cerebral activity at work? I imagine if one wishes to determine how much law enforcement resources to alot to various perpetrators, these things might matter. But in terms of describing their relative "evilness" does it really make that much difference?
Love,
-Jake
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.39
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #7 on: 2003-01-03 18:51:32 » |
|
Good question
Don't forget to add a judge who sends lots of criminals to the electric chair.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #8 on: 2003-01-03 23:01:25 » |
|
Quote from: rhinoceros on 2003-01-03 15:51:42
No, I don't think the derogatory words can be put on an absolute line without any regard to the context and the attributes they refer to.
|
OK, maybe we need something like the Richter scale if we want to be more precise in how to describe degrees of evil.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #9 on: 2003-01-04 01:58:20 » |
|
Quote from: rhinoceros on 2003-01-03 18:51:32 Good question
Don't forget to add a judge who sends lots of criminals to the electric chair.
|
The preferred method of execution in the United States seems to be lethal injection - at least thats what Texas uses and we lead the pack. I guess in the case of the judge sending people to death, assuming we are talking about a lethal injection, I think it would depend on what kind of cases we were talking about. If a judge only sent people to death who had committed multiple murders and had been proven guilty through scientifically sound evidence like DNA . . . I might have a harder time thinking this Judge evil. Perhaps reprehensibe, but depending on the Judge's record, I could imagine a situation in which I failed to see the situation as evil. But then since I have been rasied in the US, I can imagine that I have been a bit hardened compared to some others. The Death Penalty is almost not a real political issue anymore in the US. We seem to really like our executions in addition to our guns here in the wild west. I sometimes wonder if the two aren't connected on some more-than likely religious level in this country.
Love,
-Jake
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.39
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #10 on: 2003-01-04 09:16:47 » |
|
Fair enough. Talking about a judge who sends lots of criminals to the electric chair, my point was that the number of deaths alone is an insufficient criterion because it is subject to different points of view regarding society, authority, and human life.
|
|
|
|
|
Ophis
Magister
Posts: 176
Reputation: 6.29
Rate Ophis
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #11 on: 2003-01-06 17:32:04 » |
|
The measurement of the degree of "evilness" needs to apply to a person and not to the act itself. The acts are merely pieces of evidence that can be use to help determine how evil the perpetrator is. The act is not evil, the perpetrator is.
Also to be taken as "evidence" would be the person's motive, the emotional and intellectual state of mind, the context in which the actions were performed, etc.
Thus the judgement of someone else's actions will always be subjective given that is isn't possible to objectively measure and quantify such things as someone's "state of mind".
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #12 on: 2003-01-06 17:58:21 » |
|
Quote from: Ophis on 2003-01-06 17:32:04
Also to be taken as "evidence" would be the person's motive, the emotional and intellectual state of mind, the context in which the actions were performed, etc.
Thus the judgement of someone else's actions will always be subjective given that is isn't possible to objectively measure and quantify such things as someone's "state of mind".
|
I realize that is how things are in modern legal systems, but I wonder it that is a good thing. Does it really matter what someone was thinking when they committed the act?
Say someone swerves into a bunch of cyclists, killing 4. Does it really matter whether they were a) on drugs, b) fatigued, c) not paying attention, d) angry at the cyclists, e) fulfilling their own plan to murder them, f) fulfilling a murder contract, etc? The damage done is the same. Why shouldn't the punishment correspond only to damage done?
|
|
|
|
|
Ophis
Magister
Posts: 176
Reputation: 6.29
Rate Ophis
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #13 on: 2003-01-06 18:44:16 » |
|
Quote from: David Lucifer on 2003-01-06 17:58:21
Say someone swerves into a bunch of cyclists, killing 4. Does it really matter whether they were a) on drugs, b) fatigued, c) not paying attention, d) angry at the cyclists, e) fulfilling their own plan to murder them, f) fulfilling a murder contract, etc? The damage done is the same. Why shouldn't the punishment correspond only to damage done?
|
I do not think that our drivers, in the various scenarios you mention, could all be qualified of being evil.
Punishment though, is a whole other story. The degree of "evilness" of our driver might be one of many elements of decision that can be used by an authority to determine a "proper" punishment.
This said, punishment itself is something that is used to further an authority's agenda.
For example, if a society is plagued by drugs, it is likely that the driver on drug will get a stiffer sentence. If a society is plaged by tired or angry people, then the punishment will likely reflect the woes of that society. In yet another society, it could just as well be concievable that no punishment is necessary in either cases.
As I see it, punishment is something that is used by an authority to warn the perpetrator (or other people who might hear of the incident) not to act in a certain way again.
If we change the word "punishment" for "compensation", then I agree with you that compensation should correspond to the damage done. Of course, we are now talking about responsibility. Responsibility can be assigned regardless of the fact that the event happened on purpose, or by accident, or that it was committed by an "evil" person.
If I cause you harm, I am responsible for that action. If I do not compensate you for the damage caused, then I am not taking responsibility for my actions. A society of irresponsible people would be likely to develop a system of authority that would punish irresponsibility in order to bring some form of order and cohesion in that society.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Degrees of evil
« Reply #14 on: 2003-01-09 12:18:45 » |
|
Quote from: Ophis on 2003-01-06 18:44:16
If we change the word "punishment" for "compensation", then I agree with you that compensation should correspond to the damage done. Of course, we are now talking about responsibility. Responsibility can be assigned regardless of the fact that the event happened on purpose, or by accident, or that it was committed by an "evil" person.
|
I'm curious about how compensation for crimes is handled now. I've heard in the news of sentences such as 10 years in prison and $100,000 paid to the family of the victim. Where does the money come from?
As you mentioned, one of the main reasons for punishment is deterrance. Why would society want to deter pre-meditated murder more than criminal negligence causing death? I concede the murderer seems intuitively more evil, but I don't think that should matter in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
