Amiga.org

Coffee House => Coffee House Boards => CH / Science and Technology => Topic started by: the_leander on February 09, 2005, 07:54:08 AM

Title: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: the_leander on February 09, 2005, 07:54:08 AM
Predatory killers often do far more than commit murder. Many perform their grisly rituals as much for pleasure as for any other reason.

Among themselves, a few forensic scientists have taken to thinking of these people as not merely disturbed but evil. Evil in that their deliberate, habitual savagery defies any psychological explanation or attempt at treatment.

Most psychiatrists assiduously avoid the word evil, contending that its use would precipitate a dangerous slide from clinical to moral judgment that could put people on death row unnecessarily and obscure the understanding of violent criminals.

Still, many career forensic examiners say their work forces them to reflect on the concept of evil, and some acknowledge they can find no other term for certain individuals they have evaluated.

In an effort to standardize what makes a crime particularly heinous, a group at New York University has been developing what it calls a depravity scale, which rates the horror of an act by the sum of its grim details.

(*Sensitive Reader Caution) While not highly graphic, some descriptions of the criminals' acts may be upsetting to sensitive readers or to former victims of abuse.

Full story here (http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050208/ZNYT04/502080308/1010/STATE)

I do hope that this is in the right CH forum, if not, shout at me and a moderator :-D
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: whabang on February 09, 2005, 09:44:52 AM
Very interesting article! Thanks!
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 09, 2005, 12:57:18 PM
Well, I think there's a part of the human brain wich is evil. And it will be activated when there's a certain atmosphere (maybe the sense of too many men in society).
For instance, did you actually knew that after each war, an exceptional amount of male babies are being born?

Probably this part of these nutcase's brain is in overdrive at times...
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: bloodline on February 09, 2005, 02:46:34 PM
There is no such thing as Evil... don't believe me? Try and define it...
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 09, 2005, 02:50:58 PM
Quote

bloodline wrote:
There is no such thing as Evil... don't believe me? Try and define it...
OK. Evil is attempting to make other ppl's lives as horrible as possible, and inflicting physical or mental pain
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: bloodline on February 09, 2005, 03:23:49 PM
Quote

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Quote

bloodline wrote:
There is no such thing as Evil... don't believe me? Try and define it...
OK. Evil is attempting to make other ppl's lives as horrible as possible, and inflicting physical or mental pain


That's a good one. So that doesn't include some one/thing that doesn't care if it causes pain?
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 09, 2005, 03:59:22 PM
in the strict sense, yes
but the world is full of implications
for instance, the tsunami in Asia was terrible, but not evil.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: bloodline on February 09, 2005, 04:41:12 PM
Quote

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
in the strict sense, yes
but the world is full of implications
for instance, the tsunami in Asia was terrible, but not evil.


ok.

You've got me stummped... but I know I had a point.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 09, 2005, 04:48:20 PM
let me put you on the rails back then:
I talked about a natural disaster, wich has no intention
But there can be an intention by doing nothing, watching someone to die or suffer without doing anything.
There lies the subjectivity of evil. But that's a thing apart from really doing evil, the latter can be defined clearly as being evil and the first isn't.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Wain on February 09, 2005, 04:55:29 PM
Nothing can be clearly defined as Evil because the entire concept is subject to interpretation.

Although in order to function we will need to have some generic societal axiom the same way we have right and wrong, and Speel's seems to be as good as anothers.

Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Wilse on February 09, 2005, 05:29:15 PM
@Wain:

But what about all those evildoers who hate freedom, aren't they evil?
;-)
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: bloodline on February 09, 2005, 05:58:38 PM
Quote

Wilse wrote:
@Wain:

But what about all those evildoers who hate freedom, aren't they evil?
;-)


So Evil is anything that inhibits freedom!!! :-D



I shal liberate my door from it's evil hinges... which themselves need to be liberated from their evil screws...
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: KennyR on February 09, 2005, 06:30:22 PM
And once upon a time, epilepsy meant you were possessed by demons.

No-one could argue that predatory killers like serial murderers are "normal". There is obviously something wrong with them, either by birth or how they were treated in youth.

The nature of these people's crimes makes it hard ever to accept that they are comitting them because they are "sick", but they are. A normal person cannot do these things. There are too many psychological safeguards.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: bloodline on February 09, 2005, 07:36:52 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
And once upon a time, epilepsy meant you were possessed by demons.

No-one could argue that predatory killers like serial murderers are "normal". There is obviously something wrong with them, either by birth or how they were treated in youth.

The nature of these people's crimes makes it hard ever to accept that they are comitting them because they are "sick", but they are. A normal person cannot do these things. There are too many psychological safeguards.


There was my point! :-D There is no evil just aceptable and unaceptable :-P
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: T_Bone on February 09, 2005, 07:55:17 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
The nature of these people's crimes makes it hard ever to accept that they are comitting them because they are "sick", but they are. A normal person cannot do these things. There are too many psychological safeguards.


I wonder how many of those safeguards are above sea level though, er, consious. They can be ignored at will, by perfectly normal people.

I wonder if this line is even the same or everyone. Are processes that happen mostly consiously in one, occuring unconsiously in most others?

Anyone can act normal, but can anyone be abnormal at will?
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: KennyR on February 09, 2005, 08:18:26 PM
Quote
T_Bone wrote:
I wonder how many of those safeguards are above sea level though, er, consious. They can be ignored at will, by perfectly normal people.

I wonder if this line is even the same or everyone. Are processes that happen mostly consiously in one, occuring unconsiously in most others?

Anyone can act normal, but can anyone be abnormal at will?


You can no more do this than conciously stick your hand in a fire and let it burn. At some point something subconcious kicks in. In the case of your hand, it's an evolved response to prevent you from harm. In the case of impulse action, it's not much different, except the mechanism is more complex. Most people wouldn't even be able to poke another person in the eye, even if they wanted to.

Everyone has dark thoughts - we are killers, after all, with complex and powerful sexual drives. On top of this is an evolved psychological control system, which can be degraded or strengthened by life experiences. Sometimes, for whatever reason, people lose control. They remain conscious, calculating, and intelligent; but they don't have these barriers any more. They know what wrong is, they know what pity is - but they can still do what they do.

There's an old story about how to tell a psychopath apart from a normal person. A woman is at her mother's funeral, and spots an attractive man, who she then loses. If she was a psychopath, she'd kill her father on the off chance that he'd come back. And psychopathia is just one of the less subtle of mental illnesses.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 10, 2005, 12:02:11 AM
Quote

Wain wrote:
Nothing can be clearly defined as Evil because the entire concept is subject to interpretation.

yes, and considering the human brain, interpretation is everything,
and that's what these scientists are trying to get at
These mad ppl try to do as bad as possible considering their interpretation
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Karlos on February 10, 2005, 02:07:59 AM
Quote
Most people wouldn't even be able to poke another person in the eye, even if they wanted to.


Oooh, I dunno. I could quite happily give Tony Bliar of Dubya a good comedy finger jab in the eye.
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: the_leander on February 10, 2005, 05:09:11 AM
Wow, what a broad range of responses, heh, not bad for my first post into this CH (IIRC).
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Wilse on February 10, 2005, 06:35:59 PM
@Karlos:

I'd pay to watch that. :-)
Title: Re: For The Worst Of Us, The Diagnosis May Be 'Evil' (*Sensitive Reader Caution)
Post by: Karlos on February 10, 2005, 06:58:30 PM
Quote

Wilse wrote:
@Karlos:

I'd pay to watch that. :-)


I'd do the other eye as an encore for free :lol: