Evidence of true evil

I was listing to an interview with Robert Frisk on RTE radio, he was talking about the origins of isis : Anyway he talks about coming acreoss beheaded bodies in a morgue and then coming across a beheaded body with a dogs head sewn on to it is that evidence of true evil or maybe mental illness or evidence of nothing except savagery.

Not talking about a man with horns or evil in a religious sense and I don't mean any disrespect to any one with mental health issues.

endacl

No such think as evil. 'Evil' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

AnonoBoy

I was pretty sure this was going to be a thread about Louis Walsh.

Speedwell

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I was pretty sure this was going to be a thread about Louis Walsh.

I thought it was going to be a thread about Irish Water.

endacl

endacl wrote: »

No such think as evil. 'Evil' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

The problem with that is that society or who ever always wants to frame the answer in some value based way i.e its the fault of colonial societies in the west ect.

Why cant an individual act be examined in its entirety with out context.

AnonoBoy

Speedwell wrote: »

I thought it was going to be a thread about Irish Water.

That's True Incompetency you're thinking of!

Speedwell

mariaalice wrote: »

The problem with that is that society or who ever always wants to frame the answer in some value based way i.e its the fault of colonial societies in the west ect.

Why cant an individual act be examined in its entirety with out context.

Because the "entirety" includes context.

Speedwell

Speedwell wrote: »

Because the "entirety" includes context.

In a wider context yes, but beheading someone and sewing a dogs head on to a body should be examined as an act in and off its self first.

Speedwell

mariaalice wrote: »

In a wider seance yes, but beading someone and sowing a dogs head on to a body should be examined as an act in and off its self first.

The act does not exist in isolation. That's just not how it works. If you were to go to court for that act, they would be required to evaluate it in context.

smash

mariaalice wrote: »

In a wider context yes, but beading someone and sewing a dogs head on to a body should be examined as an act in and off its self first.

If someone is willing to behead another person then an act such as sowing a dogs head on to a body doesn't really surprise me. Both acts are psychotic.

endacl

mariaalice wrote: »

The problem with that is that society or who ever always wants to frame the answer in some value based way i.e its the fault of colonial societies in the west ect.

Why cant an individual act be examined in its entirety with out context.

Not at all. The colonial context provides a convenient framework. But asks the wrong question.

The individual act is what I was referring to.

K-9

endacl wrote: »

No such think as evil. 'Evil' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

While I'd agree to an extent the likes of Ted Bundy, Fred West, Shipman... Some of the stuff in the news is very difficult to explain, murdering children eg. While often there are mental health and up bringing issues, sometimes there just is evil.

ISIS and beheadings, probably. Sending 9 year old kids out as suicide bombs, definitely.

RGDATA!

mariaalice wrote: »

Why cant an individual act be examined in its entirety with out context.

You're not examining it in its entirety without looking at context. What does "pure evil" mean to you anyway?

smash

K-9 wrote: »

While I'd agree to an extent the likes of Ted Bundy, Fred West, Shipman... Some of the stuff in the news is very difficult to explain, murdering children eg. While often there are mental health and up bringing issues, sometimes there just is evil.

ISIS and beheadings, probably. Sending 9 year old kids out as suicide bombs, definitely.

I don't think it's comparable. You're listing people who killed for some form of pleasure whereas ISIS are killing for a cause they've made up in their own heads. They're for the most part uneducated, naive and brainwashed.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

mariaalice wrote: »

I was listing to an interview with Robert Frisk on RTE radio, he was talking about the origins of isis : Anyway he talks about coming acreoss beheaded bodies in a morgue and then coming across a beheaded body with a dogs head sewn on to it is that evidence of true evil or maybe mental illness or evidence of nothing except savagery.

Not talking about a man with horns or evil in a religious sense and I don't mean any disrespect to any one with mental health issues.

Sounds like something that actually happened in Game of Thrones.

AudreyHepburn

I would be very slow use mental illness as an excuse for the barbaric things Isis do.

For one thing it's unfair to those are genuinely mentally ill to lumped in with mad men who behead and blow people up because of some fanatical rubbish they've dreamed up.

Secondly it does seem to imply some of sort diminished responsibility for their crimes, in much the same way as pointing fingers at the poverty in these countries or the interference of Western powers does.

Isis, Isis, alone are responsible for their crimes, scapegoating and shifting responsibility for their horrific acts is just wrong.

K-9

smash wrote: »

I don't think it's comparable. You're listing people who killed for some form of pleasure whereas ISIS are killing for a cause they've made up in their own heads. They're for the most part uneducated, naive and brainwashed.

Yeah, I suppose sending out 9 year olds as suicide bombers is incomprehensible though.

smash

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

For one thing it's unfair to those are genuinely mentally ill to lumped in with mad men who behead and blow people up because of some fanatical rubbish they've dreamed up.

Not really. Mental illness covers a broad range of things. They're not all related but they're covered under the umbrella definition.

smash

K-9 wrote: »

Yeah, I suppose sending out 9 year olds as suicide bombers is incomprehensible though.

Of course it is. These guys don't discriminate, and that's the issue.

RGDATA!

RGDATA! wrote: »

You're not examining it in its entirety without looking at context. What does "pure evil" mean to you anyway?

I don't know. I but I did see an interesting documentary about Fred West not normally something I would watch.

The psychologist explained it like this: Fred West grew up in a situation where incest and bestiality were normalised and then he met his future wife who has a very distinct sexual and emotional disposition and it was the combination of both their personalities that lead to the behaviour. In other words if they had never met they might not have become killers.

kneemos

mariaalice wrote: »

The problem with that is that society or who ever always wants to frame the answer in some value based way i.e its the fault of colonial societies in the west ect.

Why cant an individual act be examined in its entirety with out context.

Beheading in some quarters is not seen as a particularly barbaric act,nor is skinning and hanging a still living dog.

Steppenwolfe

mariaalice wrote: »

I was listing to an interview with Robert Frisk on RTE radio, he was talking about the origins of isis : Anyway he talks about coming acreoss beheaded bodies in a morgue and then coming across a beheaded body with a dogs head sewn on to it is that evidence of true evil or maybe mental illness or evidence of nothing except savagery.

Not talking about a man with horns or evil in a religious sense and I don't mean any disrespect to any one with mental health issues.

What do you mean by true evil ? If you're not talking in a religious sense it means nothing.

Shenshen

If anyone's interested, a good read on the subject is Steven Pinker's "Better Angles of our Nature", where he's exploring violence in human history.

Two of his arguments stand out in particular:

1) If you build your life and identity on an unproveable idea, an idea that's insubstantial in nature, one you can't draw up any facts for, you will have a tendency to react more violently if you find that others reject that idea. Simply because that's the only way of action you have - you cannot argue for something you can't make others "see".
It's an effect that's been seen in any culture that was built on religion anywhere.

2) If you assume, based on your religion, that this life is nothing but a test and that death is a sort of rite of passage, life won't matter. Souls will.
You will be much more ready to inflict pain and suffering in life, if you assume it all to be nothing but an illusion of sorts. You might even convince yourself that you are doing good by saving souls - both by killing unbelievers before they can sin more, and by deterring people who share your faith from renouncing it.

everlast75

As Morrissey once sang... "is evil something you are, or something you do?"

KomradeBishop

The worst 'evils' are committed by those who are able to distance themselves from, and even politically legitimize, murderous acts - thus drawing-in entire countries/societies into the cumulatively 'evil' acts.

The many-orders-of-magnitude difference between the two, make them wholly incomparable - legitimized evils are vastly worse, and far more damaging to the entire world, than the actions of a single psychopath (no matter how deranged).

When we fail to recognize this ourselves and fail to act politically to stop it - failing our civic responsibilities - we're in on it too and share responsibility as well really.
Everyday normal people are perfectly capable of accepting/assenting-to all sorts of 'evils' - though that term is such a non-descriptive/emotive one, that it's not very useful.

Stigura

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Everyday normal people are perfectly capable of accepting/assenting-to all sorts of 'evils'

Browning and 101 would seem to support that

Of course, there'll be those in denial. Young Googleistas with dull axes :rolleyes:

darkpagandeath

Religious tomes are evil.... When will we got passed opinions from 2 thousand years ago ?

Stigura

Bible; 2000 years ago.

Koran; Not 1500 old.

Mein Kampf; Less than a century.

Some people just can't put a good book down

mariaalice

mariaalice wrote: »

The psychologist explained it like this: Fred West grew up in a situation where incest and bestiality were normalised and then he met his future wife who has a very distinct sexual and emotional disposition and it was the combination of both their personalities that lead to the behaviour. In other words if they had never met they might not have become killers.

But...he had killed before he met her...

Chain Smoker

sorry.

Colser

There were a few cases in the media very recently of what I would consider true evilness and related to adults (mainly parents)inflicting terrible pain and suffering on children.These werent a quick slap/beating in temper but long term unimaginable pain and torture. That to me is true evilness and I would have no problem seeing an eye for an eye kind of punishment being given to those responsible as they are the lowest form of life imo.

stoplooklisten

I hope the Animal Rights people are currently on their way to protest the morgue

esforum

Moors murderers were evil. Whatever defence is put up for her, theres none for him. I enjoyed watching his appeals to be allowed die get rejected, oh how I did

also a case in Spain, couple adopted a child, later got divorsed, the grandfather left everything to the child in his will, so the parents conspired to poison the child and claim the inheritence. poor little mite even told a teacher her parents were poisoning her.

Duggy747

The Toolbox Killers and The Toybox Killer would be up there in the league of true evil, their intentions to inflict as much horrifying pain as physically possible on innocent people and record themselves doing it puts them in an almost different dimension to others. They got joy out of physically and mentally breaking people.

The Toolbox Killers especially, people who were involved in that case weren't right for a long time with the chief investigator committing suicide over it. The transcript of the audio recording of what they did to their last victim is the stuff of nightmares.

Steppenwolfe

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

What do you mean by true evil ? If you're not talking in a religious sense it means nothing.

Society existed before humans has speech and had speech before writing, so writing is only naming something already in culture, in other words religious belief did not invent evil. Religion named and framed it in a particular way.

Little CuChulainn

endacl wrote: »

No such think as evil. 'Evil' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

I disagree. I've met people who I would consider to be evil. i don't think labelling them as such abdicates responsibility, it merely indicates their potential level of depravity and lack of conscience.

esforum

esforum wrote: »

Moors murderers were evil. Whatever defence is put up for her, theres none for him. I enjoyed watching his appeals to be allowed die get rejected, oh how I did

also a case in Spain, couple adopted a child, later got divorsed, the grandfather left everything to the child in his will, so the parents conspired to poison the child and claim the inheritence. poor little mite even told a teacher her parents were poisoning her.

The Moors Murders were fairly shocking.

The Spanish one was Asunta Basterra.

======================================

I should warn people that the following links make for pretty disturbing reading
=======================================


One that was gruesome was the murder of Suzanne Capper.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Suzanne_Capper

It is incredible to think people can become so desensitised, so inhumane, as to participate or stand by.

Or the murder of Kelly Ann Bates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kelly_Anne_Bates

K-9

Shankill Butchers probably the closest to home. Sectarian yeah but I think that was convenient cover for what they did.

Ronald Wilson Reagan

Satan isn't such a bad guy, real good at wupping up some southern hospitality and also a long-time member of the GOP.

Steppenwolfe

mariaalice wrote: »

Society existed before humans has speech and had speech before writing, so writing is only naming something already in culture, in other words religious belief did not invent evil. Religion named and framed it in a particular way.

You're missing my point. I'm saying evil does not exist, true or otherwise.

Steppenwolfe

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

You're missing my point. I'm saying evil does not exist, true or otherwise.

Your user name is interesting.

KomradeBishop

A system which allows the murdering of innocent civilians with such callous abandon as this, and which is legitimized enough to have everyday people turn a blind eye to and defend it, is likely one of present times greatest 'evils' - if that word carries any meaning:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list-this-is-what-it-feels-like-to-be-hunted-by-drones-a6980141.html

Little CuChulainn

KomradeBishop wrote: »

A system which allows the murdering of innocent civilians with such callous abandon as this, and which is legitimized enough to have everyday people turn a blind eye to and defend it, is likely one of present times greatest 'evils' - if that word carries any meaning:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list-this-is-what-it-feels-like-to-be-hunted-by-drones-a6980141.html

That article leaves a little out. The fourth strike that targeted the elders appears to be after they announced a jihad against the US and Pakistan and admitted they allowed their youths to commit suicide bombings.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/134864/north-waziristan-tribes-declare-war-against-us/

Malik Jalal Sarhadi Qatkhel, head of the North Waziristan Peace Committee, told reporters at the Peshawar Press Club that the tribes would wage a jihad against the US as well as Pakistanis who are helping them carry out the Predator drone strikes. He said that they had allowed their youths to carry out suicide attacks against the Americans.

Although I do agree that any policy that ignores collateral damage cannot be justified except in the most extreme of circumstances.

KomradeBishop

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That article leaves a little out. The fourth strike that targeted the elders appears to be after they announced a jihad against the US and Pakistan and admitted they allowed their youths to commit suicide bombings.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/134864/north-waziristan-tribes-declare-war-against-us/



Although I do agree that any policy that ignores collateral damage cannot be justified except in the most extreme of circumstances.

Except that was after their communities had been bombed and their friends/relatives murdered numerous times (when they had done nothing wrong, this is before their statements) - why is it legitimate for the US to just terrorise and murder them from the skies, and not legitimate for them to fight back?

maudgonner

esforum wrote: »

Moors murderers were evil. Whatever defence is put up for her, theres none for him. I enjoyed watching his appeals to be allowed die get rejected, oh how I did

My sister worked with a woman who had previously been a prison officer in Holloway. She said that there was only one prisoner she had worked with who she would describe as evil - Hindley. She never agreed that Brady had been the one in control, always maintained that Hindley was calculating and deliberate in every move she made.

Galwayguy35

Some people are just born bad to the bone, they've always existed and always will.

FURET

endacl wrote: »

No such think as evil. 'Evil' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

No such thing as good. 'Good' abdicates a responsibility to explain.

Shurimgreat

It goes to show that religion and morality are completely separate things. You can be very religious, pious, pray 5 times a day, do all the fasting and yet mass murder in the name of your religion. There is no attempt to rationalise when religion dominates your thinking. If your God said it was the right thing to do and you believe strongly enough, you are going to do it.

Capt'n Midnight

Good vs Evil is something the Zoastorians have been believing for the last three thousand years.

But in most cases it just boils down to

I've had my fun, and that's all that matters.
- Father Fintan Stack