To rant about “evil” people

[Stormypaige]

What’s all this shit about ‘evil’ people? Begum is ‘evil’, Bulger killers are ‘evil’, Trump is ‘evil’, etc?

Kids who still believe in magic, or religious fanatics might talk like this, but adult / balanced / rational people should know better!!

Probably got something to do with gutter-press headlines trying to dehumanise and sensationalise people like Begum.

When exactly do people become ‘evil’? At birth? At the point they commit a crime? What about when they were still planning the crime- were they evil then? Or before?

We dehumanise at our peril. Understanding is the only way to prevent such crimes in society. Understanding doesn’t mean excusing it. But no understanding can come from the term evil.

Damaged? Definitely.
Worthy of punishment? Of course.
Unforgivable? Quite possibly.

Evil? Grow up.

Everyone likes to think that they wouldn't have been a Nazi but what is actually the difference between people in Germany then and people here now? The difference is that was Germany then and this is here now.

I saw a programme about the 10 stages of genocide. They said it could take as little as 6 months to go from here to Rwanda style genocide with neighbours killing each other. We're normally hovering about stage 3 in the UK.

I dislike dismissing people as evil and monsters too. Far too simplistic and doesn't solve anything.

It's easy to see how children with slightly less fucked up childhoods can go on to do fucked up things
There's at least one poster in here has talked about how screwed up their childhood was and how they're now a functioning adult and mother who hasn't committed and crimes. It isn't like a + b = c. If that's the case we should lock up any child taken from their parents for abuse because they can't help the inevitable decline into commuting heinous acts.

Yes of course it impacts on them, but there will be people who commit evil acts who had perfectly nice normal childhoods and one's who don't who didn't. And for those who did there will be points when they made a decision to put their own pleasure and interests above what they know to be wrong.

I think very few people who commit heinous crimes TRULY think what they did was fine. I would question the mental wellbeing of anyone who truly believes killing a child is totally OK cos they enjoyed it

*And tbh you can't "fix" someone who wants to harm others . You can't "fix" someone that would rape their own child. You can't "fix" someone that enjoys destroying another person be it physically,mentally or emotionally. Regardless of what you call them.

And to be fair I think it's very arrogant to think that you can "fix" and prevent it all*

That’s not what I said.

There are people who very clearly have gone well beyond being ‘fixed’ or rehabilitated, and even if they could be, they should stil be removed from society.

I was talking about trying to learn from and address the reasons why some people commit evil acts. Can we learn to intervene sooner, can we do things that will protect potential victims, can we - for example - try to do things to reduce the likelihood of, say, another murder committed by children?

The Netflix series Mindhunter was very interesting on this subject. The old-fashioned approach to serial killers was essentially ‘they are degenerates’ and the investigative approach was achieving little until the FBI started trying to gain insight by talking to other, convicted serial killers. Obviously they could still do this while describing them as ‘evil’ but the writing off of people as ‘set’ or ‘unable to change’, or simply having made individual choices, without looking at context, also meant they were worse at catching them and less likely to prevent future crimes by others.

Calling people ‘evil’ might make us feel better but does it actually achieve anything?

Isn't good vs evil the main theme of a lot of media? Books, TV, Films. There's usually a villain or villains, and sometimes an anti hero, who tries to fight the evil within and without. People have been arguing about good vs evil for years, I don't think "evil" as a description/concept, will go away anytime soon. I do agree the term is overused though. Like with Trump, he's a lot of things I don't like or agree with (as with a lot of politicians), but evil?

I find it interesting that we can inherit physical characteristics ; hair colour height etc, but almost no one believes we can inherit bad characteristics and we are not “born that way” but are shaped exclusively by our upbringing.

Llot5 but there is evidence of the genetic basis of height or eye colour or rolling your tongue, even inntelligence. Until someone can isolate some genes that make you enjoy murdering people, there's no evidence of it being inherited rather than being due to upbringing or life choices

Evil comes in all sorts of guises....people like to forget that our government chooses to sell arms and other weapons of mass destruction to dictatorships, totalitarian regimes and support them by providing training to their armies.
Then when the inevitable shit hits the fan they use the media to manipulate the masses into believing that only other regimes/people are evil.

Personally I think by calling someone evil, you ignore the fact that they chose to commit those acts. We are all capable of good and bad, it's our choices that define us. "Evil" implies they do bad things because they're bad people, they had no choice, it lets them off the hook. No, ISIS and Hitler and others had a choice and we should hold them to account.

I think there's a tendency to call such people 'evil' because that way they're completely removed from being human. It's uncomfortable knowing that human beings can commit such atrocities.

Whereas human beings are all capable of being evil. It's about the choices that we make, to do good or evil.

What’s being a left winger have to do with it? Most people regardless of their political affiliations agree that ISIS and their philosophy are evil.

However as supposedly intelligent human beings we should be capable of having an intelligent debate.

It's also about how we respond to the things that happen to us. Abuse victims can become abusers, but a lot of us who were victims don't. We all have a choice.

I think when people commit such horrific crimes, such as James Bulger's killers, we use the word "evil" as a coping mechanism because we can't comprehend that someone could do something so awful, therefore an outside "force" (ie the "evil") is the only possible explanation. We don't like to admit that humans can be this flawed.

But I'm not personally going to lose sleep on bad people being labelled as bad.

It depends whether you think if evil as a force that is within and cannot be denied, a type of possession of the soul

So Evil" implies they do bad things because they're bad people, they had no choice, it lets them off the hook

Whereas I think it's a chosen state of being, much as being good, altruistic, compassionate is. So

Evil" implies they do bad things because they're bad people, they had no choice, it doesn't let them off the hook

A lot of people seem to assume that others use evil because 1.they're uncomfortable with humans doing awful things and 2.the "evil" is some kids of outside force or prewritten destiny. It's a pretty big assumption to make.
Speaking strictly for myself neither of those are true. I'm very aware of how fucked up humanity is and more importantly that being evil is an active choice, a choice to harm others because you want to and you can.

Basically I don't call people evil and that's why they did bad things, I call them evil because they did those bad things. They're not evil because of whom they are,but because of what they chose to do.

I genuinely do think some people are evil

All humans have the capability to commit horrific acts - circumstance usually dictates whether or not that side will be revealed and to what extent.

It really wasn’t that long ago people viewed an execution as a good day out in this country. Some places in America still revel in the countdown to someone being executed.

I find it hard to reconcile views from people when they deplore violent and depraved acts with calls for ‘an eye for an eye’. I don’t understand how an act is unacceptable in one circumstance and perfectly justified in another. It suggests certain persuasions within that person aren’t as solid as they’d like to think they are.

Just to clear up any potential misconceptions about my personal use of the word 'evil' to describe certain people who choose to perpetrate acts of extreme depravity causing pain, injury and death to others, it's nothing to do with fairty-tale monsters or supernatural forces. It's simply a word which means worse than 'very bad' and is synonymous with heinous, egregious, iniquitous, depraved, inhumane, vicious and on and on. It does not dehumanize anyone or let them off the hook for their behaviour any more than any of those words would because it is a word that is most often applied to humans and the behaviour of those humans.

I'll tell you what does absolve evil people of responsibility for their crimes it's the apologist insistence that an abusive or or deprived childhood is to blame. Nope.

I'll tell you what does absolve evil people of responsibility for their crimes it's the apologist insistence that an abusive or or deprived childhood is to blame. Nope.

This with bells on. I suffered abuse as a child, as did many others who went on to live thoroughly decent lives. We all have a choice.

I'll tell you what does absolve evil people of responsibility for their crimes it's the apologist insistence that an abusive or or deprived childhood is to blame. Nope.

Bang on. I find it irritating, disrespectful, condescending to those of us who've suffered extensively through childhood, and so painfully sad people can think this.

and feel so

Because nobody is born bad

Sadly some people are.

Sadly some people are
Any famous examples? Proof that a different childhood or life experiences would. Have made no difference?

I saw a fascinating TV documentary a few years ago about a neuroscientist who discovered he was a psychopath. He had investigated his family tree and had discovered that there was an unusually high number of murderers amongst his ancestors. He then scanned his own brain and found that he was missing a part in the frontal lobe which governed morality and empathy. He also had a gene linked with aggressive behaviour.

As he recognised that he was very competitive and driven, but that he had never killed or raped anyone, he went on to investigate what makes someone who has the medical “diagnosis” of a psychopath to kill, rape etc. What he discovered was that such a person who was loved and cared for during their first few years (5, I think) would be okay, but if someone was abused, rejected etc during that period, there was a high chance that they would end up doing something that one might describe as “evil”.

If you google “doctor who discovered he was a psychopath” you will find articles about this.

Fascinating stuff!