Evil: Is it learned or are some people naturaly born evil?

SparkyTech

What are your thoughts on evil and how it comes across in a person. Is evil learned by our surroundings/parent/family influences etc? Or is evil something some people are inherently born with (IE disposed to elements of a sadistic/demonic personality)?. If tales like Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm and all the Wars around this earth over centuries past are anything to go by, I think everyone has the potential for some evil within them, but (thankfully! ) most people will never become fully blown evil in their lifetime. :cool:

kfallon

Everybody has done something evil in their life, whether it's just tripping up a friend when a child or something of Hitler proportions!

Guill

Evil is caused by something missing in a person.

Agricola

Guill wrote: »

Evil is caused by something missing in a person.

Yeah, God. That's where we're goin wrong I tells ya. Theres no good God fearin folk left no more.

AhSureTisGrand

Nobody is born evil just as nobody is born good. Some people are born with a greater tendency to develop into what we would call evil

Mark200

It can be both something you're born with and in what environment you're brought up in. Different sizes of the different parts of your brain etc.

Tipsy McSwagger

Either,
1. Not enough love from their mother.
2. Too much love from their mother.

SeaFields

Wasnt there talk of an evil gene by scientists? They reckon people like ted bundy and the likes possessed it. Born evil.

B_Fanatic

Like most things the answers are not in the poll. If someone displays psychopathic behaviour I believe that there is something wrong with them mentally and they were born that way. Otherwise, if someone is just an evil asshole I think they developed that way during their childhood.

easyeason3

I think people are born evil. Plenty of people have had a crap start in life & turned out to be sucessful, normal humans. Circumstances play a part alright but it's like there's a chemical imbalance in an evil person to make them what they are.

prinz

Mostly learned/caused by other people and environment, but sometimes it's the result of chemical imbalances etc you are born with.

Kold

No such thing as absolute evil, just circumstance.

TheZohanS

SeaFields wrote: »

Wasnt there talk of an evil gene by scientists? They reckon people like ted bundy and the likes possessed it. Born evil.

Ted Bundy had serious momma issues, he grew up believing his grandparents were his parents and that his mother was his sister. It's alleged that his grandfather was actually his father.

Hitler had a similar messed up upbringing.

sonic85

this is how evil is truely formed:

The details of my life are quite inconsequential ... Very well, where do I begin? My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low-grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a 15-year-old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet.

My father would womanize; he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes, he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament ...

My childhood was typical: summers in Rangoon ... luge lessons ... In the spring, we'd make meat helmets ... When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds — pretty standard, really.

At the age of 12, I received my first scribe. At the age of 14, a Zoroastrian named Vilmer ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum — it's breathtaking ... I suggest you try it.

the result?



:pac:

Kya1976

I voted, can I have some apple pie now please?

ArseLtd

It's the ol' nature vs nurture. I would say more nature than nurture

flutterflye

My thoughts on evil = "Evil" doesn't exist.

People just like to simplify and compartmentalise everything into "good" and "bad" to reaffirm their world view, and live in the happy knowledge that if you do 'this', you are bad, and if you do 'that', you are good, thus restoring some sort of warped, yet comforting balance to the world as you like to see it from inside your head.

Why is that answer not in your poll?

cesc77

sonic85 wrote: »

this is how evil is truely formed:

The details of my life are quite inconsequential ... Very well, where do I begin? My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low-grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a 15-year-old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet.

My father would womanize; he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes, he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament ...

My childhood was typical: summers in Rangoon ... luge lessons ... In the spring, we'd make meat helmets ... When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds — pretty standard, really.

At the age of 12, I received my first scribe. At the age of 14, a Zoroastrian named Vilmer ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum — it's breathtaking ... I suggest you try it.

the result?



:pac:

Going to see crap blue links in my sleep now.Cheers:mad:

Danny Dwyer

No one is born evil yet it exists. I see it as a virus of the mind. As poeple go along they pick up doses of it. The vast, vast, vast majority keep shrugging the evil virus off, but the odd one becomes engulfed by it. You can even get clusters of it - for example 'head-the-balls' running around spewing their dogma looking to suck others into their vortex. On a personal level I try to avoid catching it at all costs.

sonic85

cesc77 wrote: »

Going to see crap blue links in my sleep now.Cheers:mad:

fixed! dont cry........

Einhard

I don't think there is such a thing as evil. Rather, it's a social construct, re-enforced by religion, and designed to characterise things that we have traditionally failed to understand, or just failed to want to understand. It's far more simple, for example, to state that Hitler was evil. It's more likely that he had seriously mental issues; that he suffered some form of sociopathy- that kind of thing. We love placing things that cause us difficulties into neat little boxes, and then forgetting about them, and the concept of evil is just one such box. Thus, Hitler is evil. End of. Nothing to see here folks. Indeed, to suggest that he wasn't evil, that he suffered from some form of malady, is to raise the ire of many, who would accuse one of portraying Hitler as a form of victim.

The problem though, is that we can't deal with the terrible deeds committed by people unless we know what motivates them, where there capacity for terrible crimes stems from. Unless we study and come to grips with these things, we can never hope to remedy them.

Einhard

easyeason3 wrote: »

I think people are born evil. Plenty of people have had a crap start in life & turned out to be sucessful, normal humans. Circumstances play a part alright but it's like there's a chemical imbalance in an evil person to make them what they are.

If that's the case though, can an "evil" person be blamed for their "evil" deeds, anymore than a blue eyed person can be censured for their eyes?

pragmatic1

I'd say a tiny minority are born without empathy. Depending on circumstance, this can lead them to commit acts that can only be described as evil.

easyeason3

Einhard wrote: »

If that's the case though, can an "evil" person be blamed for their "evil" deeds, anymore than a blue eyed person can be censured for their eyes?

Yes they can be blamed because an evil person does evil things. The colour of their eyes has nothing to do with it.

FUNKY LOVER

Einhard wrote: »

If that's the case though, can an "evil" person be blamed for their "evil" deeds, anymore than a blue eyed person can be censured for their eyes?

I always wondered this,can a person be blamed for their evil deeds if its the way they were born?

Giselle

An article on Baron Cohen, and his attempt to have evil redefined as a lack of empathy. Interesting stuff.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/why-a-lack-of-empathy-is-the-root-of-all-evil-2262371.html

Empathy, like height, is a continuous variable, but for convenience, Baron-Cohen splits the continuum into six degrees – seven if you count zero empathy. Answering the empathy quotient (EQ) questionnaire, developed by Baron-Cohen and colleagues, will put you somewhere on the empathy bell curve. People with zero degrees of empathy will be at one end of the bell curve and those with six degrees of empathy at the other end.

Baron-Cohen provides vignettes of what a typical person with x-degrees of empathy would be like. We're told, for example, that a person with level two empathy (quite low) "blunders through life, saying all the wrong things (eg, 'You've put on weight!') or doing the wrong things (eg, invading another person's 'personal space')."

Being at the far ends of the bell curve (extremely high or extremely low empathy scores) is not necessarily pathological. It is possible to have zero degrees of empathy and not be a murderer, torturer or rapist, although you're unlikely to be any of these things if you are at the other end of the empathy spectrum – level six empathy.

"You could imagine someone who has low empathy yet somehow carves out a lifestyle for themselves where it doesn't impact on other people and it doesn't interfere with their everyday life," says Baron-Cohen.

Einhard

easyeason3 wrote: »

Yes they can be blamed because an evil person does evil things. The colour of their eyes has nothing to do with it.

If they are born evil, and therefore pre-destined to do evil things, how can they be blamed for it? They'd have no more control over that side of their being, as you or I have over the colour of our eyes.

Einhard

Giselle wrote: »

An article on Baron Cohen, and his attempt to have evil redefined as a lack of empathy. Interesting stuff.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/why-a-lack-of-empathy-is-the-root-of-all-evil-2262371.html

Damn, for a moment there, I thought it was gonna be Borat's perspective on evil!:pac:

Giselle

Einhard wrote: »

Damn, for a moment there, I thought it was gonna be Borat's perspective on evil!:pac:

I think its his uncle or cousin actually.:)

God...

Agricola wrote: »

Yeah, God. That's where we're goin wrong I tells ya. Theres no good God fearin folk left no more.

Leave me out of this!!!

DexyDrain

People are born evil. That includes all of us. Most of us are evil to flies and spiders, ants and the like. The question isn't really 'are we evil?', the real question is who or what do we regard as having interests and rights equivalent to our own?

A nazi death squad leader may be a warm and loving father, very moral and altruistic in the community and a lover of the arts. Those outside his circle of empathy are just pestilence, be it human, animal, plant or insect.

Peter Singer wrote a great book called 'The Expanding Circle' and describes humans as having an adjustable 'slider' of empathy that allows us, through positive interaction or changing social norms, to expand our circle of empathy outside the universal default of family and friends. First it was the band or village, then the tribe, the state, trading partners of the state and eventually to all of mankind, closely related and vulnerable species of the animal kingdom etc.

On the other hand, some people are born seemingly with no capacity for empathy at all. This does not automatically make people evil, many on the autistic spectrum do not feel what would technically be called empathy, but are usually highly moral and loyal all the same. They may not have the feel for empathy, but they can figure out the sentiment.

Then there are others who are born lacking not only empathy, but also any sense of loyalty or morality. They can be evil and dangerous, but sometimes they are just pitifully self destructive, causing more harm to themselves than others.

I think the last category can be like the wolves among the sheep, manipulating the variable scale of empathy in the community to exclude disfavoured groups. Then it becomes hard to tell who is born evil and who has become enmeshed in the idea that certain people are subhuman. It's frighteningly common for this to happen all to easily when communities are under stress or fear.

PK2008

Its a choice

Ben Hadad

Jeez, hate to be the one to break it to you but there is no such thing as evil. Now maybe I might get in trouble with your parents here but I thought most grown up people were able to see that there is no such thing as the tooth fairy, santa and Slash. Just like there is no such thing as "good" either.

There is a reason for absolutely everything. Terms such as good and evil are only used by retards who are too lazy to actually try to find out what motivates and causes someone to act a certain way.

flutterflye

Einhard wrote: »

I don't think there is such a thing as evil. Rather, it's a social construct, re-enforced by religion, and designed to characterise things that we have traditionally failed to understand, or just failed to want to understand. It's far more simple, for example, to state that Hitler was evil. It's more likely that he had seriously mental issues; that he suffered some form of sociopathy- that kind of thing. We love placing things that cause us difficulties into neat little boxes, and then forgetting about them, and the concept of evil is just one such box. Thus, Hitler is evil. End of. Nothing to see here folks. Indeed, to suggest that he wasn't evil, that he suffered from some form of malady, is to raise the ire of many, who would accuse one of portraying Hitler as a form of victim.

The problem though, is that we can't deal with the terrible deeds committed by people unless we know what motivates them, where there capacity for terrible crimes stems from. Unless we study and come to grips with these things, we can never hope to remedy them.

Exactly

Einhard wrote: »

Damn, for a moment there, I thought it was gonna be Borat's perspective on evil!

Simon is far more interesting than his cousin, in my opinion - Incredibly intelligent family as a whole though.

Giselle wrote: »

An article on Baron Cohen, and his attempt to have evil redefined as a lack of empathy. Interesting stuff.

Yes. Very interesting indeed.
I have thought for a while now, that in many respects, there are very similar traits in common between autism and psychopathy.

DexyDrain

Einhard wrote: »

If they are born evil, and therefore pre-destined to do evil things, how can they be blamed for it? They'd have no more control over that side of their being, as you or I have over the colour of our eyes.

Because they don't have empathy does not mean they are stupid. Unless they are brain dead they can weigh up the pros and cons of each action. If we punish psychopaths they will take note and calculate that killing auntie Breda for her plasma TV is not a good option if there is a good chance they could be sitting in a small concrete box for many years, sans TV.

Lacking empathy does not mean people do not respond to incentives and disincentives, we can indeed blame 'evil' people for choosing to disregard the disincentives we sign in to law instead of choosing to operate within these laws.

B_Fanatic

Without turning this into a sexuality/pedophilia thread I'd just like to ask, Is it wrong that I secretly don't hate pedophiles? I'm disgusted by them but I pity them more than anything else. I mean look at the countries who use chemical castration. I've seen 0% reoffending rates. That leads me to believe that it is about as much in their control as it is for anybody.

(I just thought of a really horrible example but I'm going to say it anyway: )

In fact, I believe that if the entire world was sexually attracted to children but it was to hold the same social status as it holds now on the subject a large percentage of the world (0% - 20% or maybe even more?) would offend if placed in a situation that genuine pedophiles are. Does that not mean that the people who lack the control (the offenders) to not inflict harm on people are as 'bad' (I feel like a tool putting bad in inverted commas in this scenario but that's only because society says I should look like a tool for it) as pedophiles? And that they're just fortunate enough to not be born/brought up in a environment that incubates sexual tendencies towards children?

I in no way endorse pedophilia and even before I press the post button I'm regretting it, but if people take the time to read what I posted (Provided it's understandable) and respond reasonably and coherently (Whether to agree or logically tell me where I'm wrong) It will have been a success. I feel this has to be said.

B_Fanatic

DexyDrain wrote: »

Because they don't have empathy does not mean they are stupid. Unless they are brain dead they can weigh up the pros and cons of each action. If we punish psychopaths they will take note and calculate that killing auntie Breda for her plasma TV is not a good option if there is a good chance they could be sitting in a small concrete box for many years, sans TV.

Lacking empathy does not mean people do not respond to incentives and disincentives, we can indeed blame 'evil' people for choosing to disregard the disincentives we sign in to law instead of choosing to operate within these laws.

Do you ever wonder why a lot psychopaths make it to adulthood? It's probably because the comply with these disincentives until one day the pros of doing something outweigh the cons or they are just having a bad day.

Also your post states that convicted psychopaths are stupid, not evil.... Which I agree with to some extent. (Obviously not actually stupid, but just make a stupid decision.)

DexyDrain

flutterflye wrote: »

Yes. Very interesting indeed.
I have thought for a while now, that in many respects, there are very similar traits in common between autism and psychopathy.

At first glance, maybe. However there is a very, very big difference between the two. Autism is characterised mostly by a profound social naivety as well as impairment in empathy. They just don't know how people 'work' inside their heads. Lower functioning, non-verbal autistic people see people as objects with no internal states. People with Asperger's syndrome do show an interest in discovering what these internal states might be, and often do want to be socially active, but find it very difficult to work out the intentions and emotions of others.

Psychopaths often are often extremely socially intelligent, they know exactly how to manipulate people and predict what they might do or respond to. This is the polar opposite of problem people with autism have. So while there is a problem with empathy in both groups, psychopaths or sociopaths seem to have fully functional modelling of other minds while those with autism do not.

I hope no one comes away from this discussion thinking people with autism are possibly dangerous and callous, that is very far from the real issue of callous manipulation and exploitative intent, which people with autism very rarely have.

Sad Professor

You can't be born evil because there is no evil. Just like there's no objective morality. Evil is just a word to describe certain human actions and has been defined and redefined many times.

Nevertheless, I think it's a useful word to have and perhaps the only way to describe some of the things that human beings are capable of. It's difficult to read about the horrors of the Holocaust and not use the word evil. Personally I would define it very much terms of choice, but that assumes that human beings have free will. Violence, murder, taking pleasure in another's suffering - maybe these things are just part of human nature which hundreds of thousands of years of evolution has still failed to weed out.

frisbeeface

OP you should read The Lucifer Effect. It's a really interesting book about exactly what you're asking.

flutterflye

DexyDrain wrote: »

At first glance, maybe. However there is a very, very big difference between the two. Autism is characterised mostly by a profound social naivety as well as impairment in empathy. They just don't know how people 'work' inside their heads. Lower functioning, non-verbal autistic people see people as objects with no internal states. People with Asperger's syndrome do show an interest in discovering what these internal states might be, and often do want to be socially active, but find it very difficult to work out the intentions and emotions of others.

Psychopaths often are often extremely socially intelligent, they know exactly how to manipulate people and predict what they might do or respond to. This is the polar opposite of problem people with autism have. So while there is a problem with empathy in both groups, psychopaths or sociopaths seem to have fully functional modelling of other minds while those with autism do not.

I hope no one comes away from this discussion thinking people with autism are possibly dangerous and callous, that is very far from the real issue of callous manipulation and exploitative intent, which people with autism very rarely have.

My son has autism.

So I obviously don't believe that people with autism are all going to bury unsuspecting granny's in their back garden just because they have difficulties with empathy and regulating emotions.
I mean they might, but equally so could any random person on the street.

I was basing my point on extensive reading, and personal experience with my son with autism, and a close family member, and also an old friend, who both display psychopathic tendencies.

While both conditions display many common traits, they are also differ greatly.

That is not to say that autism is 'good' and psychopathy is 'bad' either though.

There is no good or bad, and certainly no evil.

It all just 'is'.

Tags are just added based on what your particular culture believes, or innate instinct perceives at this particular moment.

pragmatic1

DexyDrain wrote: »

At first glance, maybe. However there is a very, very big difference between the two. Autism is characterised mostly by a profound social naivety as well as impairment in empathy. They just don't know how people 'work' inside their heads. Lower functioning, non-verbal autistic people see people as objects with no internal states. People with Asperger's syndrome do show an interest in discovering what these internal states might be, and often do want to be socially active, but find it very difficult to work out the intentions and emotions of others.

Psychopaths often are often extremely socially intelligent, they know exactly how to manipulate people and predict what they might do or respond to. This is the polar opposite of problem people with autism have. So while there is a problem with empathy in both groups, psychopaths or sociopaths seem to have fully functional modelling of other minds while those with autism do not.

I hope no one comes away from this discussion thinking people with autism are possibly dangerous and callous, that is very far from the real issue of callous manipulation and exploitative intent, which people with autism very rarely have.

Another thing. Autistic people dont necessarily lack empathy and they dont derive pleasure from hurting others.

B_Fanatic

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Another thing. Autistic people dont necessarily lack empathy and they dont derive pleasure from hurting others.

I don't think psychopaths do either... Do they?

Dudess

Einhard wrote: »

If they are born evil, and therefore pre-destined to do evil things, how can they be blamed for it? They'd have no more control over that side of their being, as you or I have over the colour of our eyes.

But they have the option to not do them - having the tendency doesn't necessarily mean not being able to control acting upon it.

B_Fanatic wrote: »

Is it wrong that I secretly don't hate pedophiles?

Those who haven't abused children - no.

I pity them more than anything else.

I totally feel sorry for someone coming to terms with the realisation that they find children sexually desirable and don't want to feel this way and would never touch a child. That must be a miserable position to be in.
No sympathy whatsoever for a paedophile who abuses though.

Btw, views on paedophilia are what I thought of when I saw this thread - as it is a perfect example of something that many folks just like to package as "evil" and not actually consider researching in order to shed light on it/prevent it.

flutterflye

B_Fanatic wrote: »

I don't think psychopaths do either... Do they?

They usually don't 'lack' empathy entirely, no.

But they generally would derive pleasure from other's pain.

pragmatic1

flutterflye wrote: »

There is no good or bad, and certainly no evil.

It all just 'is'.

Tags are just added based on what your particular culture believes, or innate instinct perceives at this particular moment.

Really dont like this "There is no good and bad" argument. There obviously is. Humans and society wouldnt have got this far if we couldnt differentiate between the two. While not universal, things like rape, murder and torture are seen as destructive and wrong by most people and cultures. On the other side, things like loyalty, kindness and mercy are seen as admirable qualities. And by the time a person reaches early childhood, most not only know, but can feel the difference between the two.

pragmatic1

B_Fanatic wrote: »

I don't think psychopaths do either... Do they?

Think thats the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath. A sociopath just lacks empathy, a psychopath not only lacks empathy but gets off on causing harm.

Saila

interesting lecture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMoZ3ThW6x0

YFlyer

TheZohan wrote: »

Ted Bundy had serious momma issues, he grew up believing his grandparents were his parents and that his mother was his sister. It's alleged that his grandfather was actually his father.

Hitler had a similar messed up upbringing.

Why would that be so bad?


Ok I see the grandfather/father part.

flutterflye

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Really dont like this "There is no good and bad" argument. There obviously is. Humans and society wouldnt have got this far if we couldnt differentiate between the two. While not universal, things like rape, murder and torture are seen as destructive and wrong by most people and cultures. On the other side, things like loyalty, kindness and mercy are seen as admirable qualities. And by the time a person reaches early childhood, most not only know, but can feel the difference between the two.

Good and bad change as often as the wind.

Good or bad is circumstantial and situational.

Right, wrong, good, bad - all just unwritten social laws.

We could all be 100% adamant that A is good and Z is bad.
You would be put on a pedestal for A,
and sent to the gallows for Z.
But life happens, things change, and just as though you never actually notice a child growing until they're grown,
poof, suddenly A is now the mother of all evils,
and Z can get you through the pearly gates of heaven.

How come good and bad changes depending massively on place, time, status and so on?

How come if you have sex with an 8 year old you are an evil pedophile?

Why is that 'wrong'?

Is it wrong?

What makes you so sure?

Some parts of the world say it's perfectly okay.

pragmatic1

flutterflye wrote: »

Good and bad change as often as the wind.

Good or bad is circumstantial and situational.

Right, wrong, good, bad - all just unwritten social laws.

We could all be 100% adamant that A is good and Z is bad.
You would be put on a pedestal for A,
and sent to the gallows for Z.
But life happens, things change, and just as though you never actually notice a child growing until they're grown,
poof, suddenly A is now the mother of all evils,
and Z can get you through the pearly gates of heaven.

How come good and bad changes depending massively on place, time, status and so on?

How come if you have sex with an 8 year old you are an evil pedophile?

Why is that 'wrong'?

Is it wrong?

What makes you so sure?

Some parts of the world say it's perfectly okay.

Because its what society and ethics is based on. The golden rule. If most people see extreme violence being used against someone, it causes a very visceral feeling. Its not a learned reaction, its innate.