Why choose evil?

[tcaudilllg]

We know that people choose evil. But why? There must be reasons.

Evil is essentially acting with indifference to the well being of those who do not act indifferently to you. We call this "selfishness".

I am familiar with several kinds of selfishness, each associated with a specific social trait:

Normative selfishness is the pursuit of naked self-interest within the confines of the law. In AD&D terms it equates with true neutrality. Consider CPig, or Newt Gingerich, as an example.
Teleological concordant selfishness is the willingness to act beyond the boundaries of cultural decency in pursuit of selfish motives. It is the willingness to break the law and assist others in the breaking to achieve personal ends. The AD&D equivalent is neutral evil. Its exemplar is Vladimir Putin.
Discordant selfishness is sociopathy.
Telelogical discordant selfishness is borderline personality disorder.


Today I want to talk about concordant selfishness, because I've had a lot of interaction with these people and I've noticed some common things. The concordantly selfish are basically the neutral goods ("socially concordant" in terms of supersocionics) of the evil spectrum, people who have deep capacity for pity and compassion above and beyond cultural expectations. The concordantly selfish differ from social concordants, however, in that they fear letting people know they care. The reason for this is that enter relationships with others with abandon, lowering their defenses prematurely and as such, becoming deeply disappointed unawares. A key reason for this is in that they lower their defenses to people, as opposed to networks. Thus they will act selfishly against a friend of a friend, and lose the trust of their friend. Moreover, their friend is like to attack them openly in defense of their other more trusted and more esteemed friend. This is counted as a painful betrayal, and their walls go back up in response. With the walls up, the selfish concordant person feels in their isolation that they have no reason not to exalt their selfish side, and to push within the law as far as they can to achieve whatever they want. They may even push to repeal laws that stand in their way, and seek after political power and influence. For an exemplar, look no further than John Boehner, although I would also put Ashton in this category.

[Raver]

What makes you so sure that being evil or good is a choice? Maybe people are just wired to be more good or evil than others.

[Creepy-male]

If you studied enneagram alot of the elements of the concordantly selfish sound familiar to an e8.

As to the question of evil I'd think differently, immediately I'd be drawn to the concept of karma, your actions have an influence on others and so forth which creates a chain, if I'm a dick to a total stranger he is more likely to be negatively influenced -- his attitude towards humanity and good-will in general will be influenced and he may develop a cynical outlook towards other people and in turn become a dick to other people as a fact. If he expects people to meet him with hostility, this will characterize his first interactions with others to be defensive and hostile... which in turns follows down the chain to create a ripple in the social dynamics.

We could even look at this more rigorously, say from the perspective of the social contract. If someone is selfish towards you, you may react different. If you have no concept of a social contract, you will be indifferent as to if what is commited against you is right or wrong, although you may still find yourself annoyed, at any rate soon you will learn the "rules" for social interaction -- which is that other people are selfish towards you, so its normal to be selfish to others... a CONTRACT is established. If you have a pre-concieved concept of a social contract though, then you will feel wronged, or you will accept what happens to you. Those with a concept of a social contract that is pro-selfishness, will attribute the error to themselves for putting themselves in a position where they fail at playing the game competently, citing that no rules of the contract were broken. Those with a concept of social contract that is anti-selfishness, will attribute the error to the selfish person, feeling indignant at what happened to them.

This is a more rigorous look at how karma can make the jump from one individual to another -- negative actions either reinforce a cynical social contract where emphasis is placed on self-reliance, or negative actions reinforce a sense of righteous indignation due to a perceived obstruction of one's social contract. Both have the same outcome regardless, which is that the negative actions influence the recepient and increase their propensity towards negativity until the negative energy is dissipated through some means. Say apathy, resolution, transference to someone else or catharsis.

That's why evil exist or people choose evil, because it bounces around in this fashion and stays preserved. The origin of evil in religious mythology suggests its original source comes from a supernatural being "satan" which corrupted innocent humans by commiting the "original sin" and sense that point the negative energy has been reverberated, the forbidden fruit mythologically is the seed of this energy. Personally I don't literally believe this, but I acknowledge its symbolic/poetic message. Literally I believe that the source of evil can at least be traced back to primitive conditions in human society where survival was critical and death was likely by predators, in such conditions the rules for the social contract were different. The concept of "civil rights" did not exist as it would be absurd in such an environment, almost as absurd as a fish requesting civil rights from a shark in the ocean. Only over time did this slowly take root as conditions in human society improved and survival was less critical. Evil originated from early primal origins I think. However, I think people's good nature did as well. I tend to look at it like an equilibrium I think, at the start a large amount of negative energy was built up and overtime it was transferred through different conscious sentient entities, as the negative energy is passed around, at certain points the energy is resolved and converted to positive energy which over time grows. If positive energy only existed then there would be no opposite pole to drive the creation of it. The only thing I'm confused about is what would happen if all negative energy was converted to positive energy. Then life would seem somewhat pointless, yet it would be positive, it almost seems to imply people enjoy suffering in some ways, but they don't.... its a hard mystery to untangle -- especially as we aren't even getting into the whole concept that positive/negative may not be a universal thing and therefore any kind of concept of right or wrong is absurd, which is a novel viewpoint but leads to a nihilistic philosophy or an outlook so subjective it can become solipistic.

[NewBorn STAR]

One can chose evil because its fun to oppose. Fun to be a trickster of sort¨. It¨can give great¨satisfactïon tö be such individual working only¨for yöur gain.


Thats a sort of stupidity¨though because bigger reward come through mutüal cooperatïon and giving.

[tcaudilllg]

Good and evil comes from Zarathustra. Ahura Mazda, god of Good, and Ahriman, god of evil.

But most people agree that evil means doing harm to others in the pursuit of selfishness, which is itself measured as the pursuit of self-interest in situations and extents not condoned by society.

[tcaudilllg]

If evil is an act that brings harm for selfish gain, then it would seem to me that it is in substance the use of Ni for one's own Si, without regard to others' Si. It would seem to me this truth is most evident in the concept of murder: deliberate, premeditated destruction of another's Si (their life) for the specific purpose of attaining functionality (delta Si) that improves one's own pleasure (alpha Si).

Then life would seem somewhat pointless, yet it would be positive, it almost seems to imply people enjoy suffering in some ways, but they don't.... its a hard mystery to untangle -- especially as we aren't even getting into the whole concept that positive/negative may not be a universal thing and therefore any kind of concept of right or wrong is absurd, which is a novel viewpoint but leads to a nihilistic philosophy or an outlook so subjective it can become solipistic.

No one wants to see people they have a positive emotional connection with suffer. However, the thought of unknowns suffering is dramatic and exciting.

[marooned]

I think evil is easier...

[Creepy-Snaps]

Something for you think about tcaud, but I've always noticed a tendency in people, almost wired, to want to "teach" to others their experiences as they get older.

Now, if a child has a horrible upbringing, say they went through different kinds of abuse... when they get into their younger 20s, and into 30s, that child, just like everyone else, would have a strong tendency to "teach" to others what the world is like. In some cases of extreme criminals, it's almost as if they commit a horrible offense, say acting out abuse to someone else, from what they experienced, to say "this is what the world is like". It's almost like subconsciously, they view it as their duty, to warn the world for what they want through. Almost genetic, inborn, without reason of whether the act itself is moral or unethical. Just a propensity to teach, to have their experiences in their life accounted for, to mean something.

I always like the psychology behind criminals. Interesting stuff. Seems to make sense to me, but hey, people already call me crazy.

That, and if anything, I'd say ENVIRONMENT is the biggest factor behind people changing. I know you mentioned political examples, tcaud, but consider the environment some of those candidates are in: greed, power, control, around others who push to do anything to get elected. You are the average of the 5 people you spend the most time with.

[DividedsGhost]

I don't understand your terms. Being teleological isn't selfish in itself; it can act for other people.
Also, pursuing self-interest is akin to fulfilling your own needs, while not expecting others to do that for you. It's probably selfish to expect others to fulfill your own needs.

It's impossible for me to understand you when I see contradictions you haven't solved in your reasoning. Could you elaborate on the terms? Because of this, I don't have any idea what you consider selfish or why or what to really base anything you're saying on.

[IEI]

I don't think it is evil to be selfish.

The defenition of selfishness is to lack consideration for others and be concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure. Where as an evil person may be morally bad, wicked and cause ruin and injury or being malicious to others.

A selfish person intends to improve their own interests. An evil person intends to make others situations bad.

The intent of a selfish person is entirley different from an evil person. The outcome however may be the same.

Would it be considered good to always show consideration for others and be chiefly concerned with putting others profit and pleasure before your own?

In my experience people who do this like to be liked. It makes them feel good to be popular and considered good. Therefore they are doing it for selfish motives.

If selfishness = evil then all people are evil.

[Capitalist Pig]

Normative selfishness is the pursuit of naked self-interest within the confines of the law. In AD&D terms it equates with true neutrality. Consider CPig, or Newt Gingerich, as an example.

WTF?

[Leader]

Because evil is the real world and not Disney, full of delusions and fabricated lies about what society deems to be "good". In the end there is no good or evil, there are only morals...and morals are selfish..

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I agree with Traveler.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of this stuff is genetic. When you're really empathetic and compassionate, it's quite annoying when you watch how other people don't see the same emotional cues and nuances about other people that you do. If you speak your concerns you will know you will just get told to 'shut up and stop being emo.' I don't think they really mean it though (sometimes they do when frustrated or overwhelmed) but they just don't have the same kind of perceptions as you do.

I say that I'm empathetic, but I don't think I'm terribly forgiving. In fact, I am glad if people get sick/hurt if I feel that they deserve it. Sometimes I cutely smile when I see people in pain, even though I know it's wrong. =p "Forgiveness is the key to my happiness, but so is hitting your face really hard with a hammer."

These things can balance each other out, and I would say that almost everybody has their moral virtues. For me my higher empathy lvls balance out my grudge/anger issues. (I smell sociopathy in others like a fat kid smells cake) For somebody else it might be the opposite. Somebody could know how to objectively help society better, whereas others are *much* better at dealing with people personally and their emotions. The whole stereotypical 'doctors know their shit but have no bedside manners' sort of thing.

The worst evil still always gets done with people thinking they are doing so much good, so playing placebo on repeat and saying' i know im selfish and im unkind' is still a better alternative, albeit kinda moody.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

In the end there is no good or evil, there are only morals...and morals are selfish.

lol there is still good and evil in the world. And maybe everybody is selfish but its obviously has a lot of different degrees to it.

Some people are nice. (Fluttershy)
Some people are hard-working. (Applejack)
Some people are generous. (Rarity)
Some people are brave. (Rainbow Dash)
Some people are talented/skilled. (Twilight Sparkle)
Some people are entertaining. (Pinkie Pie)

Like my little ponies.

[Park]

Because you're retarded, Tony, that's why.

[IEI]

Because evil is the real world and not Disney, full of delusions and fabricated lies about what society deems to be "good". In the end there is no good or evil, there are only morals...and morals are selfish..

next you will be telling me there is no santa.

Try living in the mind of an IEI and then decide if the real world is full of delusions.

[munenori2]

We know that people choose evil. But why?

Why???




Why not?

[Galen]

@tcaud what the hell are you talking about

[The Ineffable]

"For every one that doeth evil hateth the light" LOL! (Reverend Ray in "Call of Juarez")