As children we’re fed a steady diet of comic books (and now, movies based off of them) in which brave heros save the planet from evil people. It’s become practically conventional wisdom that such stories wrongly make the line between good and evil too clear — the world is more nuanced than that, we’re told — but this isn’t actually the problem with these stories. The problem is that the villains know they’re evil.
And people really grow up thinking things work this way: evil people intentionally do evil things. But this just doesn’t happen. Nobody thinks they’re doing evil — maybe because it’s just impossible to be intentionally evil, maybe because it’s easier and more effective to convince yourself you’re good — but every major villain had some justification to explain why what they were doing was good. Everybody thinks they’re good.
And if that’s the case, then intentionality doesn’t really matter. It’s no defense to say (to take a recently famous example) that New York bankers were just doing their jobs, convinced that they were helping the poor or something, because everybody thinks they’re just doing their jobs; Eichmann thought he was just doing his job.
And if that normal guy could do it, so could we. And while we could argue who’s worse — them or us — it’s a pointless game since its our actions that we’re responsible for. And looking around, there’s no shortage of monstrous crimes that we’ve committed.
So the next time you mention one to someone and they reply “yes, but we did with a good intent” explain to them that’s no defense; the only people who don’t are characters in comic books.
HI Aaron
Did you read as well how Hannah Arendt came to understand that it was the shallowness of his thinking that made it possible for Eichmann to go about his work as a murderer.
People without the time to think in depth can become dangerous people, much more able to think in the way that suspends there being a difference between right and wrong.
Have you ever noticed it will be a person up to no good who retorts: “You think too much” ?
posted by Kathryn Pollard
on August 17, 2005 #
You pathetic shit.
you … reddit.
you have nobody to tell truth to you. heh.
I read MIL-SPEC for fun.
you profit from ignorance
I get poor cuz everybody’s choosin’ to kiss your dumb ass.
Get right. Good for all of us.
shithead
posted by ben
on September 4, 2006 #
I found this a long time ago. I had to ‘think too much’ to hear the author:
SWhy do you make this so bloody difficult…what happened to “customer aervice” . Why is this so awful confusing?
Why can’t i just give you my problem and have you tell me the solution? Whhy is this such an awful thing to even attempt..you wondewr wnhhy peple do crazy shit..u are the reason! you wonder why the world has a crazy section for non-geek people ..It’s becayuse you want it this way,……….you are the reason for othe madness in this very dark world tyou habve created.I hate this . once agaioin I will guive you my reports and not hear back from you ..it’
s the game you invented and you control, isn’\t it….long on talk .very little for what is promised..I sdon’t understand how to do this thing ..you have made it complicated..why?
posted by Demetri
on March 26, 2007 #
Demetri is an IDIOT
posted by Sohail
on May 4, 2007 #
You’re an idiot. People may indeed be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil, but they are intentionally ignorant of this fact.
You should go into the very worst neighbourhood of town. And you may get attacked. Your attacker knows he’s evil. And he’s 99.9% sure doing it for that new plasma tv, not for saving his daughter from cancer or something like that.
People may or may not be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil. But they have all the tools to find out. Especially the “do not kill” and the “treat your neighbour as you would want him to treat you” laws (that christianity accepts and islam rejects) will make you understand whether you’re doing the right thing or not.
Yes we have limited information on the world. That doesn’t mean we can’t have at least pareto-efficiency in our morality towards eachother. That does require a few things, like being at least partially religious (and religious as in Jew Christian or Buddhist, especially not Hindu, Muslim or Shinto).
So I respectfully (but completely) disagree. You can know perfectly well if you’re being moral or not. Yes you cannot know the implications of your actions. But you can be “pareto” moral. And that’s already enough morality to create a very good society.
And btw I’ve never commited any horrible crime, so stop blaming me for any of those things. Maybe some ancient family members of me have. Yes maybe I even still profit by their crimes. I do not pretend to have the right to judge them, nor do I accept any shred of responsability for their actions. I have personally commited wrongs, and even crimes, and I’ll accept responsability for them, and try to fix them where possible, but you can, again respectfully, fuck off when you try to blame me (individually or collectively) for stuff like the crusades or WOII or black slavery or …
And don’t kid yourself : those people knew very well that what they did was wrong. That’s what makes it a crime.
posted by Tom
on May 8, 2007 #
How You can say it “People may or may not be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil. But they have all the tools to find out. Especially the “do not kill” and the “treat your neighbour as you would want him to treat you” laws (that christianity accepts and islam rejects) will make you understand whether you’re doing the right thing or not.
Yes we have limited information on the world. That doesn’t mean we can’t have at least pareto-efficiency in our morality towards eachother. That does require a few things, like being at least partially religious (and religious as in Jew Christian or Buddhist, especially not Hindu, Muslim or Shinto).
So I respectfully (but completely) disagree. You can know perfectly well if you’re being moral or not. Yes you cannot know the implications of your actions. But you can be “pareto” moral. And that’s already enough morality to create a very good society. ” I don’t undestand.
posted by John
on June 21, 2007 #
There’s a perfectly simple and direct test for evil.
If a person is utterly convinced of the correctness of his/her position and refuses to even contemplate that they might perhaps be in error — if they never step back to question themselves and re-check the belief structures for inconsistency (or become blind to or ignore inconsistencies when pointed out), then they are following the path of evil.
Self-doubt is a necessary condition for Good.
posted by constantnormal
on August 5, 2007 #
The idea of evil is a concept that is socially generated. I think that all of the people as well as the writer are forgetting that. Nazi Germany (a very tired excuse, but it is the only one that comes to mind) was a society in which anti Semitism was used to explain the economic hardships that occurred with the shift of state from agrarian to capitalist. It was a tool used by the members of the elite to maintain their power over the ‘masses.’ This was happening at the same time that say, France was post revolution and bursting with ideas of individual liberty and many of the ideals that are seen as essential to the notions of liberty we consider as something of a backbone to our democracy.
Are you telling me that a German knew that they were doing the wrong thing when they voted in Hitler on his policy to annihiliate the Jews? How could they? The Church, the state and almost the entirety of academics were telling them (and had told their forebears for centuries) that the Jews were the cause of their problems. What mind can stand up to that kind of persistent barrage of information? As for God, the church themselves backed the racists pretty much as soon as they realised the power of this type of politics.
We believe what we believe because at the moment we have grown up with certain sentiments. Do not imagine that we have in any way any different understanding of life. We believe what we are told, just as they did. Stop separating yourselves from the people that you believe to be ‘evil,’ because we understand life just as they did. You are no ‘better’ then them, no one person is ‘better’ than another. You just have a different understanding of life. I would suggest that everyone dismount their very high horses, and examine their own beliefs, taking into account where they emerged from.
posted by Blask
on November 18, 2007 #
I agree with this for the most part. I don’t think there is any way to label good and evil. Each and every person has a different view on what is right and wrong. I think there are people who intentionally do “bad” things because they LIKE doing it, but I think there are also people who do bad things because they think it is the right thing to do. Now, it may or may not be, but that just depends on the person analyzing it. There’s no way to label right and wrong, considering there is literally two sides to every argument and action. Interesting thoughts though; I don’t understand why people are attacking them so much.
posted by Ashley
on January 27, 2008 #
@Constantnormal:
So no evil act has ever been committed by someone who was only mostly sure it was the right thing to do? Self-doubt is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one.
(And actually it’s probably possible to live a life without evil or doubt, provided that you really never do anything of note)
(Also, people without doubt can sometimes achieve marvels. There will be suffering with those marvels, but that’s not to say we’d judge those lives evil in every instance).
posted by Devin
on July 11, 2008 #
You can also send comments by email.
Comments
HI Aaron
Did you read as well how Hannah Arendt came to understand that it was the shallowness of his thinking that made it possible for Eichmann to go about his work as a murderer.
People without the time to think in depth can become dangerous people, much more able to think in the way that suspends there being a difference between right and wrong.
Have you ever noticed it will be a person up to no good who retorts: “You think too much” ?
posted by Kathryn Pollard on August 17, 2005 #
You pathetic shit.
you … reddit.
you have nobody to tell truth to you. heh.
I read MIL-SPEC for fun.
you profit from ignorance
I get poor cuz everybody’s choosin’ to kiss your dumb ass.
Get right. Good for all of us.
shithead
posted by ben on September 4, 2006 #
I found this a long time ago. I had to ‘think too much’ to hear the author:
SWhy do you make this so bloody difficult…what happened to “customer aervice” . Why is this so awful confusing? Why can’t i just give you my problem and have you tell me the solution? Whhy is this such an awful thing to even attempt..you wondewr wnhhy peple do crazy shit..u are the reason! you wonder why the world has a crazy section for non-geek people ..It’s becayuse you want it this way,……….you are the reason for othe madness in this very dark world tyou habve created.I hate this . once agaioin I will guive you my reports and not hear back from you ..it’ s the game you invented and you control, isn’\t it….long on talk .very little for what is promised..I sdon’t understand how to do this thing ..you have made it complicated..why?
posted by Demetri on March 26, 2007 #
Demetri is an IDIOT
posted by Sohail on May 4, 2007 #
You’re an idiot. People may indeed be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil, but they are intentionally ignorant of this fact.
You should go into the very worst neighbourhood of town. And you may get attacked. Your attacker knows he’s evil. And he’s 99.9% sure doing it for that new plasma tv, not for saving his daughter from cancer or something like that.
People may or may not be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil. But they have all the tools to find out. Especially the “do not kill” and the “treat your neighbour as you would want him to treat you” laws (that christianity accepts and islam rejects) will make you understand whether you’re doing the right thing or not.
Yes we have limited information on the world. That doesn’t mean we can’t have at least pareto-efficiency in our morality towards eachother. That does require a few things, like being at least partially religious (and religious as in Jew Christian or Buddhist, especially not Hindu, Muslim or Shinto).
So I respectfully (but completely) disagree. You can know perfectly well if you’re being moral or not. Yes you cannot know the implications of your actions. But you can be “pareto” moral. And that’s already enough morality to create a very good society.
And btw I’ve never commited any horrible crime, so stop blaming me for any of those things. Maybe some ancient family members of me have. Yes maybe I even still profit by their crimes. I do not pretend to have the right to judge them, nor do I accept any shred of responsability for their actions. I have personally commited wrongs, and even crimes, and I’ll accept responsability for them, and try to fix them where possible, but you can, again respectfully, fuck off when you try to blame me (individually or collectively) for stuff like the crusades or WOII or black slavery or …
And don’t kid yourself : those people knew very well that what they did was wrong. That’s what makes it a crime.
posted by Tom on May 8, 2007 #
How You can say it “People may or may not be ignorant of the fact that they’re evil. But they have all the tools to find out. Especially the “do not kill” and the “treat your neighbour as you would want him to treat you” laws (that christianity accepts and islam rejects) will make you understand whether you’re doing the right thing or not.
Yes we have limited information on the world. That doesn’t mean we can’t have at least pareto-efficiency in our morality towards eachother. That does require a few things, like being at least partially religious (and religious as in Jew Christian or Buddhist, especially not Hindu, Muslim or Shinto).
So I respectfully (but completely) disagree. You can know perfectly well if you’re being moral or not. Yes you cannot know the implications of your actions. But you can be “pareto” moral. And that’s already enough morality to create a very good society. ” I don’t undestand.
posted by John on June 21, 2007 #
There’s a perfectly simple and direct test for evil. If a person is utterly convinced of the correctness of his/her position and refuses to even contemplate that they might perhaps be in error — if they never step back to question themselves and re-check the belief structures for inconsistency (or become blind to or ignore inconsistencies when pointed out), then they are following the path of evil.
Self-doubt is a necessary condition for Good.
posted by constantnormal on August 5, 2007 #
The idea of evil is a concept that is socially generated. I think that all of the people as well as the writer are forgetting that. Nazi Germany (a very tired excuse, but it is the only one that comes to mind) was a society in which anti Semitism was used to explain the economic hardships that occurred with the shift of state from agrarian to capitalist. It was a tool used by the members of the elite to maintain their power over the ‘masses.’ This was happening at the same time that say, France was post revolution and bursting with ideas of individual liberty and many of the ideals that are seen as essential to the notions of liberty we consider as something of a backbone to our democracy.
Are you telling me that a German knew that they were doing the wrong thing when they voted in Hitler on his policy to annihiliate the Jews? How could they? The Church, the state and almost the entirety of academics were telling them (and had told their forebears for centuries) that the Jews were the cause of their problems. What mind can stand up to that kind of persistent barrage of information? As for God, the church themselves backed the racists pretty much as soon as they realised the power of this type of politics.
We believe what we believe because at the moment we have grown up with certain sentiments. Do not imagine that we have in any way any different understanding of life. We believe what we are told, just as they did. Stop separating yourselves from the people that you believe to be ‘evil,’ because we understand life just as they did. You are no ‘better’ then them, no one person is ‘better’ than another. You just have a different understanding of life. I would suggest that everyone dismount their very high horses, and examine their own beliefs, taking into account where they emerged from.
posted by Blask on November 18, 2007 #
I agree with this for the most part. I don’t think there is any way to label good and evil. Each and every person has a different view on what is right and wrong. I think there are people who intentionally do “bad” things because they LIKE doing it, but I think there are also people who do bad things because they think it is the right thing to do. Now, it may or may not be, but that just depends on the person analyzing it. There’s no way to label right and wrong, considering there is literally two sides to every argument and action. Interesting thoughts though; I don’t understand why people are attacking them so much.
posted by Ashley on January 27, 2008 #
@Constantnormal:
So no evil act has ever been committed by someone who was only mostly sure it was the right thing to do? Self-doubt is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one.
(And actually it’s probably possible to live a life without evil or doubt, provided that you really never do anything of note)
(Also, people without doubt can sometimes achieve marvels. There will be suffering with those marvels, but that’s not to say we’d judge those lives evil in every instance).
posted by Devin on July 11, 2008 #
You can also send comments by email.