164 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

It's subjective to a point that an arguement can be made were the action can be seen in a positive or negative way. Where is the positive in torrmenting someone for fun? 
Not all actions are subjective, especially if the action was to harm some one for personal enjoyment.

The problem is that it is imposible to make such an argument without it being a subjective opinion of one individual.
You said it yourself - fun. 
All actions are indeed subjective. 

All meaning of action is based on intent. If the person does the torremt out of personal enjoyment there no way it can be seen as morally good outside a view of a sociopath, whicj would mean the person is truely selfish.

[KainD]

leaguer of one wrote...

No, a Sociopath is on that lacks empathy and place one self as most important. 

Which is a totally valid way of life, one that most animals in nature share mind you - the strongest survives. Different morality. 

[KainD]

leaguer of one wrote...

All meaning of action is based on intent. If the person does the torremt out of personal enjoyment there no way it can be seen as morally good outside a view of a sociopath, whicj would mean the person is truely selfish.

One sociopath is enough to make it morally grey. 

Edit: I might also add, that I for example might be a friend of such person, and consider him/her having fun as something positive. 

Modifié par KainD, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:07 .

[leaguer of one]

Icy Magebane wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

KainD wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...
And don't try to say "well, it makes the tormentor happy, so that's beneficial..."  That can't possibly be your logic, which is why I asked.  

But it totally is, tormented suffers while the tormentor is having a good time. And if I view it as a third party ( neither the tormentor or the tormented ) then there no positive nor negatives to the situation, as it doesn't concern me. 

That still makes it not grey. That just makes the person a sociopath.

Unfortunately, this is really the best way to explain it.  A philosophy that ignores even the most basic principles of human perception and cognition is irrelevant to humanity.  If you can't see that harming someone simply because it makes you feel good is the very definition of evil, then I don't know what else there is to say.

Edit:  leaguer of one speaks the truth.  Sociopaths view other humans as objects and do not place value on the emotions of others.  They only see them as tools or parts of their environment.  The pain or pleasure another human may feel is irrelevant and alien to the mind of the sociopath.

Magebane, have you ever seen Pychopass?

[Icy Magebane]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

All meaning of action is based on intent. If the person does the torremt out of personal enjoyment there no way it can be seen as morally good outside a view of a sociopath, whicj would mean the person is truely selfish.

One sociopath is enough to make it morally grey. 

No, sociopathy is an abnormal mental state, and their views are therefore unrelated to humanity as a whole.


@leaguer of one -  Sorry, I've never even heard of it.  Is that a tv show or something?

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:08 .

[KainD]

Icy Magebane wrote...

No, sociopathy is an abnormal mental state, and their views are therefore unrelated to humanity as a whole.

Here we go again.. Norms are subjective. There is no such thing as ''whole'' humanity. 

Modifié par KainD, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:08 .

[KainD]

Icy Magebane wrote...

If you can't see that harming someone simply because it makes you feel good is the very definition of evil, then I don't know what else there is to say.

No, you just don't get it. I will call it evil, but only if I am going to be the tormented personally. Thats why it is grey. 

[Icy Magebane]

KainD wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

No, sociopathy is an abnormal mental state, and their views are therefore unrelated to humanity as a whole.

Here we go again.. Norms are subjective. There is no such thing as ''whole'' humanity. 

Yeah, keep telling yourself that.

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

All meaning of action is based on intent. If the person does the torremt out of personal enjoyment there no way it can be seen as morally good outside a view of a sociopath, whicj would mean the person is truely selfish.

One sociopath is enough to make it morally grey. 

A sociopath is a person with no standard morals. It not something to a make any ground on. Sorry, it does not make them moral grey.

KainD wrote...
Edit: I might also add, that I for example might be a friend of such person, and consider him/her having fun as something positive. 

If the friends sorce of fun is torrmeting others, I may consider you a yandere.

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

No, sociopathy is an abnormal mental state, and their views are therefore unrelated to humanity as a whole.

Here we go again.. Norms are subjective. There is no such thing as ''whole'' humanity. 

Morality is based on norms. Norms can be as different as moralities but they are clearly based on norms. Sociopath are out side of norms.

[KainD]

leaguer of one wrote...

Morality is based on norms. Norms can be as different as moralities but they are clearly based on norms. Sociopath are out side of norms.

The thing is a bunch of people that you could consider sociopaths could make their own society and make thier way of thinking a norm and a valid morality. Here's an example - Sith. 
And then a person that will show empathy in a sith society is a sociopath. 

Modifié par KainD, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:15 .

[Icy Magebane]

KainD wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

If you can't see that harming someone simply because it makes you feel good is the very definition of evil, then I don't know what else there is to say.

No, you just don't get it. I will call it evil, but only if I am going to be the tormented personally. Thats why it is grey. 

Listen, in order to call this action "morally grey," there must be a justification beyond the deriving of personal pleasure.  You said it yourself, the definition suddenly changes to evil once you are in the shoes of the tormented.  What happened to letting the tormentor have his or her fun?  This is simply an unwilingness to acknowledge that good and evil are based largely on perception.  Morality is a sliding scale, that's true, but certain situations are evil in and of themselves because there is no positive aspect.  "I like tormenting people," is not a good enough justification to shift this into a morally grey area.  "I need info," might work.  "You must be punished for committing crimes," is arguable.... the fact that there is no positive aspect beyond personal gain for a single party, the tormentor himself, is what makes the action evil.  In this example, there isn't even the pretense of justification, therefore it is indefensible.

[KainD]

Icy Magebane wrote...

"I like tormenting people," is not a good enough justification to shift this into a morally grey area. 

Why not? 

Edit: If I am going to be tormented I won't feel like I have a higher moral ground than the one that is tormenting me for fun. 
It's the same as for example: 
Some people like to sleep around. Some people like to sleep only with their loved ones when they have serious relationships. 
A person that would be tricked into thinking that he/she is in love for a one night stand, might feel like the person that did this to get into their pants is evil, BUT it doesn't mean that having one night stands is evil on it's own. Understand? 

Modifié par KainD, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:19 .

[leaguer of one]

Icy Magebane wrote...




@leaguer of one -  Sorry, I've never even heard of it.  Is that a tv show or something?

It's a very good anime covering the very subject we are arguing about. And no it's not crazy over the top. You can easily think it's westernly done.

[David7204]

I'm curious. What do you think would happen if you murdered someone and in court defended yourself with "It wasn't wrong because everything is subjective"?

Modifié par David7204, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:18 .

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Morality is based on norms. Norms can be as different as moralities but they are clearly based on norms. Sociopath are out side of norms.

The thing is a bunch of people that you could consider sociopaths could make their own society and make thier way of thinking a norm and a valid morality. Here's an example - Sith. 
And then a person that will show empathy in a sith society is a sociopath. 

The sith morality is more then just harm to others. It's not torrment for torrmrnt sake. It's an idea of strongest of the fittest. It's might makes right. They have the belief that sociaty must be made to make the strongest indivisuals.

A better example of a sociaty of sociopaths is the drow but they see themselves as evil anyway.

[KainD]

David7204 wrote...

I'm curious. What do you think would happen if you murdered someone and in court defended yourself with "It wasn't wrong because everything is subjective"?

You can't defend yourself with that because there are more people that don't want to to be killed by you, than people that do ( if any ), and so the majority is going to act upon it. 

Modifié par KainD, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:22 .

[leaguer of one]

David7204 wrote...

I'm curious. What do you think would happen if you murdered someone and in court defended yourself with "It wasn't wrong because everything is subjective"?

They would brand you a sociopath or throw you many life sentences.

[David7204]

And why is it, exactly, that most people don't want to be killed by you?

[KainD]

leaguer of one wrote...

The sith morality is more then just harm to others. It's not torrment for torrmrnt sake. It's an idea of strongest of the fittest. It's might makes right. They have the belief that sociaty must be made to make the strongest indivisuals.

A better example of a sociaty of sociopaths is the drow but they see themselves as evil anyway.

But you know what I mean. Sith and Drow would be considered sociopaths in most modern societies, that was the point. 

[KainD]

David7204 wrote...

And why is it, exactly, that most people don't want to be killed by you?

Because the majority wants to live? I'm not sure what you are getting at. 

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

"I like tormenting people," is not a good enough justification to shift this into a morally grey area. 

Why not? 

Edit: If I am going to be tormented I won't feel like I have a higher moral ground than the one that is tormenting me for fun. 
It's the same as for example: 
Some people like to sleep around. Some people like to sleep only with their loved ones when they have serious relationships. 
A person that would be tricked into thinking that he/she is in love for a one night stand, might feel like the person that did this to get into their pants is evil, BUT it doesn't mean that having one night stands is evil on it's own. Understand? 

1. Because moral gray mean their moral good and bad ways to see an action. Say personal enjoyment is just being a sociopath. The has to be some grounds of empathy in the action.

[Icy Magebane]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Morality is based on norms. Norms can be as different as moralities but they are clearly based on norms. Sociopath are out side of norms.

The thing is a bunch of people that you could consider sociopaths could make their own society and make thier way of thinking a norm and a valid morality. Here's an example - Sith. 
And then a person that will show empathy in a sith society is a sociopath. 

No.  "Sociopathy" is an abberation because it is outside the norms of human psychology.  It is literally the inability to see humans in any way other than as objects or identify them as even capable of having emotions similar to the ones felt by the individual sociopath.  In your example, a culture based around these principles might be considered "culturally sociopathic," but they would also be considered "culturally normal."  For them to be true sociopaths and therefore "psychologically normal," this mentality would have to be shared commonly and a part of their genetic makeup.  In this case, people who did feel empathy would be abnormal... so technically they would not be humans.  "Cultural sociopaths" might simply mimic this mindset, because it's impossible for the human mind to otherwise not understand that other people have emotions.

As a side point... are we still on topic?  I'm not trying to get the thread locked...

@leaguer of one - I do like anime... I might check that out.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:26 .

[KainD]

Icy Magebane wrote...

It is literally the inability to see humans in any way other than as objects or identify them as even capable of having emotions similar to the ones felt by the individual sociopath. because it's impossible for the human mind to otherwise not understand that other people have emotions.

What if you do understand that other people also have emotions, and you accept the fact they are just like you, but you simply don't care? Your existence is simply above others just because it's YOU. 

[leaguer of one]

KainD wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

The sith morality is more then just harm to others. It's not torrment for torrmrnt sake. It's an idea of strongest of the fittest. It's might makes right. They have the belief that sociaty must be made to make the strongest indivisuals.

A better example of a sociaty of sociopaths is the drow but they see themselves as evil anyway.

But you know what I mean. Sith and Drow would be considered sociopaths in most modern societies, that was the point. 

No, Sith can be seen as evil not sociopath. The sith have reason beyond just personal enjoyment. The drow already see themselves as evil. They already place themselve there. Your missing that consept. A sociopath has no moral ground out side of selfishness. They don't even consider morals. The drow at least do. The sith see there action as good with the nature of the galexy.