The worst man/woman in history

[evenwolf]

Ted Bundy was a sociopath, and ignoring the fact that he may not have recognized distinctions between "right" and "wrong" I'll go out on a limb to call him a fairly evil person.  After all, the term "serial killer" was invented for what he did.

He confessed to 30 murders but investigators believe there have been over 100 since Ted was 14.  That means 70 families never found out where their daughters disappeared to.

Read up on him sometime.  While morbid, an interesting read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

People used to be comfortable walking at night, hitchhiking, and trusting strangers.  Ted Bundy gave us a reason not to.

[Nikolas]

Yes, but he is a sociopath! He's crazy. Isn't this enough excuse for what he did? I mean, yeah lock him up for good, for the rest of his life, but evil? I don't know?

Really I think that I define evil as an act somebody does that he knows that is wrong and still he does it. When you do something because you believe is right, does this make you evil? Are all soldiers evil? Or they're defending their country? Maybe the American soldiers, invading IRAW, Vietnam are evil? NO, I don't think so!

Evil is something that is delibaretly bad!

At least that's what I think

[evenwolf]

If evil exists, you did a fine job of defining it.

But did Hitler command the Holocaust and regard it "an evil thing to do"?

To him it was righteous.  He may not have been sociopathic but he and his followers were operating under a skewed perspective all the same.  In recent years, many Americans have witnessed a similar sense of nationalism.  Some of us feel pretty conflicted about it... but the others, are they evil?

"evil" and "crazy" are standards that you can never scientifically measure.  they're concepts for the extremes beyond our own stantards.  So I'll agree with you that Bundy wasn't evil.  Everyone that knew him claims that he was an incredibily nice guy, actually.


You guys know Hilter had Parkinsons?

[Nikolas]

I know, and I can't give a more accurate definition of evil or crazyness (maybe crazy people can be defined by phychologists but, I'm not one of them...)

The thing is quite simple (not at all, but anyway as an espression):

Would you kill? Anyone? Anything? For anything? If someone kills my family, my son, my wife, my cat, I could go crazy! Would I kill him/her? I don't know. Probably yes! Does this make me evil?

Well, the last question is the difficult one. But I believe that I would. And saying that I also believe that I'm not as pure hearted as someone else maybe. This makes me "evil" in a certain way. The simple way that no one has the right to take another humans life, or any life for that matter, except in self defense and in order to survive (eat). So...

Shit! It's so difficult debating over the interent ove things that really are at least two sided!

Well anyway for the worst man in history I think that Hitler qualifies much more than anyone else.

And I also find strange that no one has even mentioned Bin Ladden (sp) or Sadam Housein (again sp)...

Why Hitlers action are unjustifiable and Laddens are? Or the other way around, or I don't know...

[esper]

Technically we have mentioned them, when we were on the case of "religion."

When I was studying world religions at college, the "Christian Ethics" argument was as follows:

If you were harboring Jews in your home in occupied Poland during WWII, and the Nazis found you and asked if you were doing so, would you:
Ã,  Ã, A) lie to them, which is a sin (and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone) or
Ã,  Ã, B) tell them the truth, not sinning but being indirectly responsible for the death of the Jews.

Do you know (those arrogant bastards) made a public mockery of me in class because I dared say that I would do A, and when they started going at it I told them they forgot option C: Kill the damn Nazis, and walked out of class.

Thus, as it has been stated, the true measure of evil is based in the intention behind the action.

[Fuzzpilz]

Um, I don't know the specific scenario used in your class there, but even if it only involved a couple unarmed officials, good luck hiding the bodies and hoping nobody knows they were anywhere near your neighbourhood. Because otherwise, they're going to be looked for. And if people keep disappearing when they get to you, eventually they'll come by armed well enough to take out even the killing machine that is you, and they'll find your guests.

So... if you want to be part of an armed resistance to the occupators, that's all very nice and noble and all that, but attracting attention to yourself when you're simply trying to do a little good by hiding somebody is a bad idea.

I am interested to see where you stand on this, though. If C really isn't an option in the situation, do you really think B is better? Did you then?

I think in some ways this ties back in with what Andail cricitised about your earlier post: perhaps there is a way out of every miserable situation that somebody could be in, but that you saw and had the strength to take one out of yours (good for you, congratulations) doesn't mean that everyone can, or even that you yourself could in every situation! "Poor people are poor and their lives suck because they're a bunch of lazy, cowardly assholes" is not, in my view, a good attitude.

[esper]

Growl....

You had me confused, and then I looked back. I meant to say A... I was at a private college where most people were training for the clergy (I was kind of training for the anti-clergy, but I won't say much more there...), and everyone thought that B was the right answer: turning the Jews over to avoid lying. I meant to say I fought that in college, not that I was the only person who believed that in college. The truth is, I was the only person who thought lying was better than being responsible for innocent lives being taken.

[Nikolas]

"Poor people are poor and their lives suck because they're a bunch of lazy, cowardly assholes" is not, in my view, a good attitude.

This is getting rather serious, but this is not what esper said. He's had a difficult life apparentely and he's judging by what he's been through. Maybe he's being a little bit harsh but still of course the example he made was so awfull (The white trailer trash crack whores and their ilk simply choose not to, and don't care one way or the other. Even if I had turned out to be a "product of my environment," I think I might at least be upset when I left my baby to die in the backseat of my car. ).

I think that no matter what even animals protect their babys, and here we have a mother who kills her own. Well for me this is too much. No matter what the mother's been through there's no way to justify this! And anyway the simplest thing was to leave the baby to an orphanage (sp) or outside a door, knock the door and leave.

For some situations there is a way out, or if not at least a less harmful way.

[esper]

That was my point... I don't really see how I'm being harsh, I'm just calling them as I see them. I'm not saying all skinny white girls that live in trailers are white trailer trash crack whores... That would be like saying (I'm really sorry for this)

Spoiler

All black people riding bikes are thieves.

[close]

[Fuzzpilz]

No, but you came across to me as saying that all "white trailer trash crack whores" (and by extension, anybody in similarly crappy circumstances) basically got that way because they weren't trying hard enough and therefore don't deserve any compassion. I'm sorry if I was misinterpreting you there.

[Andail]

I think we can safely say that in one perspective, evil doesn't exist at all. At least that's my conviction. If we are indeed tabula rasa when it comes to morals and prejudices, and could form our lives freely, based on openminded ethical choices, nobody would deliberately pick the "evil" way. Evil to me is myth and fairytale. It belongs in the universe where things are black and white, where heroes fight villains, etc.

My arguments were more about which sort of "evilness" (since I can't be bothered to implement a new phrase right now) that bothers me most, and in this way, I'm more annoyed when people with lots of means, opportunities and freedom commit heinous crimes (and especially when they justify it with the will of God, etc) than when poor and challenged whose options (even though there may always be a hint of an option left, like in Esper's case) are extremely reduced.

And yeah, "not entitled to comment" sounded a bit harsh, but I meant that I don't think anyone can pass judgement that freely on another person, when you know nothing about this person except that he/she is in a horrible situation. You can never look through another person's eyes, or enter their brain.

It's just like when people say "it's always cowardly to commit suicide, and I resent it", just because they have, themselves, been in a situation close to giving up all hope but found it again, and so they apply that on every other person.
You can never pressume or pretend to know what another person is feeling or thinking.

[esper]

No, I understand now. I kinda did come off as saying that. I can't actually think of a better way to put it. I've worked with all sorts of people... I've seen people throw away their lives because of one bad decision that they were repeatedly warned against. I've seen (as I'm sure we all have, at least from watching Cops women stay with men that eventually kill them, although they are warned that it will happen. I've seen mothers let their children freely wander in the streets and come home shot up from gang violence and not care. I've also seen a young woman, in bad situation, who alot of people on seeing her might pass the judgment that she is a "white trailer trash crack whore" care so much for her five children that she willingly gave up her life to defend them from a robber, even though they resented her and never showed her anything in return.

I guess what I'm saying is that there are some people who don't need to be showered with compassion, but it isn't our job to judge who they are (like Andail said while I was posting this).

However, everyone DOES have a chance to make it, I believe. Strength is a choice. Dignity is a choice. Honor is a choice. Love for others more than yourself is a choice. Sometimes it's a hard choice, but in the end, it is a choice. Some people would rather die than make the right choice, but that is, when all is said and done, a choice.

I'm going to shut up now, because I sound like a poorly scripted anime. Not to mention I think this is going way OT by now.

[Nikolas]

So problem solved! Yeah!

I think I have a talent of making threads that turn out to be arguments between members.

Anyway suicide, Andail, is an action that has no undo. And that's the problem with that! Apart from the fact that you do more harm to the people you leave behind rather than yourself. So it is a selfish deed. Theoritically speaking of course. But from my knowledge most people who commite suicide, do it for "small" reasons. People with huge problems usually fight back, and get on with their lives.

I know of a frined of mine, dead now, who left a little girl (her daughter), alone because she commited suicide because her husband was cheating on her, and taking money. Come on there are so many worst problems than your husband cheating on you, this is not worth suiciding , and even worst leaving behind your 5 year old girl. BTW, I'm very sensetive with little kids...

Again it is a fact that I can't judge because, I 'm not her, but given the facts that I just mentioned, it was not worth it... I've met a guy, who is tottally paralyzed, and the only things moving are his head and his left arm. Now this is sad! This is worth of suiciding. But no! He spends his time writting in a laptop, and taking baths on the sea (with the help of his fiancee). That's what I'm talking about!

[shitar]

Every human being in the world has the potential to be evil. So essentially it is stupid to call anyone the "most evil". Is Hitler worse then someone that privately believes everyone should kill the Jewish people? I hate all of us, we all can do unbeliavably bad things. Yet at some times we can do good through killing or "bad" acts. In my opinion people like Wiston Churchill and Roosevelt were true "good guys" but does that mean people that wanted to do what they did aren't just as good? Bleh Im not even making sense anymore. So much to say, such a little vocabulary.

[Nikolas]

No, Shitar, go on... I understand what you're saying!

No honestly I agree with you. and I'm the one who started the thread! Maybe I should change the question to what is the most hedious, worst act that you have ever seen, or think it is? Is it the terrorist attack of 9/11? The attack in IRAQ? Maybe the burning of a live cat in front of a camera? The burning of millions (?) of Jews? The two atomic bombs of WWII? Again I have to stress that I don't know how to measure these kind of things. And there is no wrong or right, everyone can think on his own!

[SSH]

I think there is a difference, though

Sometimes I have wanted to hit people and didn't do it. Obviously, I'd be less evil if I had never wanted to hit them, but that I restrained myself is somewhat virtuous. On the other hand, sometimes I shot the people instead... 

[big brother]

Perhaps this thread could be consolidated with another Gen Gen thread. I mean, since Jack Thompson is obviously the most evil man on the face of the planet.

Obviously.

[Czar]

There is much i'd like to discuss, but i don't have much nerve to write it all, so i'll just say that i believe most of the "evil" comes from our insecurities. Someone who is fully confident wont be bothered with some of the provocations this world seeds, the person can rise above it. There are a lot of factors connected, but mostly, it's our PERSONALITY that is actually the mover of things, and believe me, every sane person can change to better with using only his brain.
We are human beings and our destiny is to learn and improve during life. Some do it more while some are stuck in a mind pattern, which can sometimes be destructive. But I'm also talking about the fact that the more confident person could rise above situations where because of people's shyness something bad happens. How many times have you seen, or at least heard about a case where someone weaker was being in any way molested in front of a crowd, and everybody could see that it was for real, and the victim wasn't enjoying it, but no one did nothing. People would just be standing and not believing it, or perhaps being happy that it's not them in that situation.

Well, that brings us to our conclusion. Most people, as someone before mentioned, don't care really THAT much about other people (and i think that's because of more reasons than the obvious), and when something bad happens to them it's mostly superficial. But if it was the case with someone they are close with, or even themselves, i don't think they would be so indifferent about the case, and would really like some help.
I hope you guys understood what i was saying.

The point is that the story of bad and good could be simplified with the saying:
Don't do to others what you don't want for yourself.
( I think I just almost-quoted Jack Thompson! - tho' he was more classy with his words)


Izar

[Nikolas]

Don't do to others what you don't want for yourself.

AMEN to that!

( I think I just almost-quoted Jack Thompson! - tho' he was more classy with his words)

Maybe, but your heart is purer, and your intentions as well!

[Snaezycorangeio]

Oh, BUSH, definatly. Although its pretty close