Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

[Riedquat]

and this goes back to my disagreement on Chuck's speech in the review of "Lethe". it isn't different values that leads to atrocities, it's individuals who cannot feel empathy. we need empathy to co-exist but without it, horrible things happen and unless it is an accident or in defense of one's self or others, it is absolutely impossible for someone who feels empathy to harm another.

Suggesting that everyone who has ever hurt anyone is a sociopath or psychopath? I don't agree with that at all! Empathy is one feeling, anger and hatred (which may even be justified) are others almost everyone has. Most of us can't hurt in cold blood, particularly when face to face with someone (plenty of stories about soldiers deliberately missing) but that's as far as it goes. Different values on the other hand can generate the incentive to hurt, even if it's just because it's the only way of stopping someone acting in a manner so contrary to your values that you feel they must be stopped. How far would you be prepared to protect someone or something you truly thought was worth protecting that someone else was prepared to destroy?

[Dragon Ball Fan]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

[clearspira]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

This is an ideal world that I would love to live in. Can you give me the coordinates? Only I've just finished recharging my Sliders machine.

[TrueMetis]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

Seems to me this is going back on what you said earlier, since it's precisely different values that allow people to rationalize that the people they are hurting aren't innocent. Innocence is a value judgement and different values lead to different definitions of innocent.

So even If I agreed with you about it being "impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent", and I very much don't, it doesn't matter because innocent is subjective.

[clearspira]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

Seems to me this is going back on what you said earlier, since it's precisely different values that allow people to rationalize that the people they are hurting aren't innocent. Innocence is a value judgement and different values lead to different definitions of innocent.

So even If I agreed with you about it being "impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent", and I very much don't, it doesn't matter because innocent is subjective.

Nailed it. My sarcasm aside because I couldn't refuse the temptation, lets get serious here: Very few injustices throughout history have been the result of men who thought of themselves as evil. Real life contains a remarkably small amount of cackling villains. Often they thought that they were justified in what they were doing, and then they went home after a day of actions that we would perhaps find deplorable to lovingly kiss their wives and children on the cheek and promise to make the world a better place for them. These people had just as much empathy as you or I, they were just aiming it at different people than you are.

If you want an example of this, let me ask a serious question: when is the last time you tucked into your favourite meal? Lets say a big, succulent steak with onion rings and a cool beer, followed by a round of apple pie and cream. Did you spare a single thought for all of the innocent starving children throughout the world beforehand? All of those cute kiddies that through no fault of their own barely see a bowl of rice a week let alone the feasts that you enjoy every day? Because there is an aid worker out there right now that thinks that YOU are evil for not donating that meal. Hell, there is a good chance that those kids think so too.
Do you lack empathy? Why are you willingly hurting these innocents through your inactions if you aren't evil?

[Dragon Ball Fan]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

Seems to me this is going back on what you said earlier, since it's precisely different values that allow people to rationalize that the people they are hurting aren't innocent. Innocence is a value judgement and different values lead to different definitions of innocent.

So even If I agreed with you about it being "impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent", and I very much don't, it doesn't matter because innocent is subjective.

maybe I am being a bit to black and white but what about serial killers? they don't commit their crimes because of ideology, they just enjoy hurting people for it's own sake.

and back to fiction, again, I gave the example of Zamasu from Dragon Ball Super to show that "different values" and being written as "just a monster" are not mutually exclusive. if your values lead you to think an all individuals in a certain group of evil or inferior and you never consider the individuals, you are clearly a psychopath and are just using ideology as an excuse to hurt people.

also @clearspira. no, there is no such thing as selective empathy. if someone's empathy is diminished or outright non existent, that would apply to their "loved ones" too. I refuse to believe Hitler truly loved his wife, mother or niece.

and pure evil monsters do in fact exist in real life, again, the first recorded serial killer in the United States said "I was born with the Devil in me." and another early American serial killer, Jane Topan, said she wanted to kill more people than anyone else in history and the only way to accomplish that goal would be the complete extinction of the human race.

[Fianna]

Of course it's possible for people with empathy to hurt innocent people. Empathy just means that you recognize and share in the feelings of others, so if you hurt someone, it will also hurt you to a certain extent. But people do things that hurt themselves all the time. Performing hard labor for twelve hours at a stretch would make most people absolutely miserable, but give them a big enough incentive, and they'll soldier on through it.

And selective empathy is absolutely a thing, too. If nothing else, it's pretty much indisputable that people have much stronger empathy towards people they can see or hear. Someone right in front of me getting their finger broken is going to generate a much stronger empathic response in me than reading a news report about 100+ people being killed or maimed by an explosion in some far off corner of the world.

[Dragon Ball Fan]

Of course it's possible for people with empathy to hurt innocent people. Empathy just means that you recognize and share in the feelings of others, so if you hurt someone, it will also hurt you to a certain extent. But people do things that hurt themselves all the time. Performing hard labor for twelve hours at a stretch would make most people absolutely miserable, but give them a big enough incentive, and they'll soldier on through it.

And selective empathy is absolutely a thing, too. If nothing else, it's pretty much indisputable that people have much stronger empathy towards people they can see or hear. Someone right in front of me getting their finger broken is going to generate a much stronger empathic response in me than reading a news report about 100+ people being killed or maimed by an explosion in some far off corner of the world.

that's a bad example, it's not that you do not feel sorry for people the news is talking about at all so that is not selective empathy.

again, what about my other examples I gave of a well written "one dimensional monster" and two real life one dimensional monsters?

[Darth Wedgius]

that's a bad example, it's not that you do not feel sorry for people the news is talking about at all so that is not selective empathy.

again, what about my other examples I gave of a well written "one dimensional monster" and two real life one dimensional monsters?

I've read about an Islamic terrorist who said he'd happily kill the infidels... but not at a soccer game. Empathy can have a lot of varying degrees.

[clearspira]

okay, there is such thing as justified homicide but I meant it's impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent.

Seems to me this is going back on what you said earlier, since it's precisely different values that allow people to rationalize that the people they are hurting aren't innocent. Innocence is a value judgement and different values lead to different definitions of innocent.

So even If I agreed with you about it being "impossible for a empathetic person to hurt an innocent", and I very much don't, it doesn't matter because innocent is subjective.

maybe I am being a bit to black and white but what about serial killers? they don't commit their crimes because of ideology, they just enjoy hurting people for it's own sake.

and back to fiction, again, I gave the example of Zamasu from Dragon Ball Super to show that "different values" and being written as "just a monster" are not mutually exclusive. if your values lead you to think an all individuals in a certain group of evil or inferior and you never consider the individuals, you are clearly a psychopath and are just using ideology as an excuse to hurt people.

also @clearspira. no, there is no such thing as selective empathy. if someone's empathy is diminished or outright non existent, that would apply to their "loved ones" too. I refuse to believe Hitler truly loved his wife, mother or niece.

and pure evil monsters do in fact exist in real life, again, the first recorded serial killer in the United States said "I was born with the Devil in me." and another early American serial killer, Jane Topan, said she wanted to kill more people than anyone else in history and the only way to accomplish that goal would be the complete extinction of the human race.

Of course selective empathy exists, that is a ridiculous thing to say. I would kill to protect my mother, I wouldn't kill to protect a stranger. This is selective empathy; I care less about your life than I do about the lives of my own blood.
And as you brought up Hitler, he is a great example. There are reels of footage of him petting his dog. The man was (and yes this sounds unbelievable but go and Google it) a staunch animal rights advocate and a vegetarian. Whilst he was killing men by their millions he was safeguarding the lives of animals which included laws against animal testing and hunting. This is selective empathy.

And BTW, I never said that evil people did not exist, I said that they were the minority.