Nazis and the Nature of Evil

[Jonathan101]

How about Soviet criminals, huh? Please don't tell me you subscribe to that bullshit theory their sins were the result of being "traumatized" by war. War has a lot of hardships, sure, but that feels disingenuous to their actual victims, who were left permanently afraid and doubly traumatized despite attempts to misrepresent them, downplaying their lifelong pain, and assassinating their character, while those who were guilty of such crimes likely never thought back to their conquests, and if they ever did, it was in the vein of "boy, that woman was sure such a good fuck, and she totally wanted me!" Hell, how about that confessed war criminal who paints himself as the victim here? Admits they hunted down numerous women, but when they couldn't find them, would prey on girls and stuff something in their mouth when they cried out, that he thought it was good fun, and "now it seems hard to believe that I could have ever done that, a good boy from a good home. But that was me." He's not giving us his name as a matter of public record. He's not turning himself in. He admitted to this anonymously in a book, in front of a woman doing interviews, apparently. It's similar to the rape apologia thread on Reddit, that got an actual psychologist to call it out. He won't let us fairly judge him except as an anonymous war criminal, and I doubt he was ever celibate to try and make up for his evil acts. What would you diagnose him as?

I mean, I'd need more information on that guy, but that sounds more like the culture of the Red Army at the time that Stalin was infamously Blaise about as much as the guys personality.

[Yukaphile]

And that's the thing. There is none. It really feels like the phenomenon we got with Reddit today.

[Yukaphile]

What would you say about people who feel sorry for the soldiers "traumatized" by the war? I mean, life traumatizes us all in some ways. Very few people are going to escape it. It's how you deal with it that matters. They feel sorry for the victims, sure, but they also try to paint those guilty as somehow victims themselves. This attitude is pretty damn bad.

[Dragon Ball Fan]

I still don't buy it at all, you didn't give me a specific example of a sociopath who doesn't hurt other people for their own gain or pleasure. and empathy is all or nothing for me and my father and from what I can tell, everyone else in my life.

I never claimed that sociopaths don't- I was arguing that there is a spectrum to hurting people for pleasure or gain, and on that spectrum are a whole bunch of people who are not sociopaths.

But then, you rejected the clinical definition (insofar as their is one) in favour of your own, so you are basically taking it upon yourself to decide who is a sociopath and who isn't. You like the sound of the term because you think it is useful, but you don't want to know about it in any real depth.

And with all do respect, you do not get to decide what sociopathy or empathy are. Just because you think it is all or nothing for you does not mean that it actually is, for you or anyone else, and "from what you can tell" is meaningless anecdotal evidence versus decades of scientific research from various schools of thought.

how can you tell that empathy isn't all or nothing for me? you are not me. as I said before on this thread, I am reluctant to hurt even flies. yes, I do have some aspects of my personality that some may see as not the height of morality, like enjoying Dawrin Award styles stories but my empathy is still in the back of my mind even at those moments, sometimes I even think those darwin award style stories are in bad taste for that reason.

and I'm not trying to decide what is and isn't a sociopath but I just am completely in capable of seeing how anyone who hurts others in any way, consistently, for their own gain or pleasure can have any empathy or compassion in them, maybe I should use words like "aberration" or "monster".

[Yukaphile]

I think it's a VERY bad idea to sympathize with people like that, or trying to claim their victims did. That's the classical definition of victim-blaming.

[Yukaphile]

Let me say this, and have you judge me. I don't think the sympathy should lie with those who were guilty of that, because it takes the spotlight away from those who are the real victims here, those who had to deal with the pain their whole lives, and then have horrible jerks today try and downplay it. Those who got away with their crimes versus those who were never the same. It feels more political than anything remotely related to human decency.

What would you rate me, psychologically?

[Jonathan101]

And that's the thing. There is none. It really feels like the phenomenon we got with Reddit today.

What would you say about people who feel sorry for the soldiers "traumatized" by the war? I mean, life traumatizes us all in some ways. Very few people are going to escape it. It's how you deal with it that matters. They feel sorry for the victims, sure, but they also try to paint those guilty as somehow victims themselves. This attitude is pretty damn bad.

It is perfectly possible to be both victim and victimiser.

Just because one person goes on to victimise others and another does not does not mean that being victimised played no part in the first persons psychology, whether down to trauma or something else.

What you are talking about is more behaviour- why they are painting people that way is down to the individual doing the painting, and their motives will vary.

I still don't buy it at all, you didn't give me a specific example of a sociopath who doesn't hurt other people for their own gain or pleasure. and empathy is all or nothing for me and my father and from what I can tell, everyone else in my life.

I never claimed that sociopaths don't- I was arguing that there is a spectrum to hurting people for pleasure or gain, and on that spectrum are a whole bunch of people who are not sociopaths.

But then, you rejected the clinical definition (insofar as their is one) in favour of your own, so you are basically taking it upon yourself to decide who is a sociopath and who isn't. You like the sound of the term because you think it is useful, but you don't want to know about it in any real depth.

And with all do respect, you do not get to decide what sociopathy or empathy are. Just because you think it is all or nothing for you does not mean that it actually is, for you or anyone else, and "from what you can tell" is meaningless anecdotal evidence versus decades of scientific research from various schools of thought.

how can you tell that empathy isn't all or nothing for me? you are not me. as I said before on this thread, I am reluctant to hurt even flies. yes, I do have some aspects of my personality that some may see as not the height of morality, like enjoying Dawrin Award styles stories but my empathy is still in the back of my mind even at those moments, sometimes I even think those darwin award style stories are in bad taste for that reason.

and I'm not trying to decide what is and isn't a sociopath but I just am completely in capable of seeing how anyone who hurts others in any way, consistently, for their own gain or pleasure can have any empathy or compassion in them, maybe I should use words like "aberration" or "monster".

I'm saying that people who study and research empathy professionally would probably disagree with you. It is only "all or nothing for you" because you are defining it in a particular way. Being reluctant to hurt even flies is not empathy but kindness- I avoid hurting flies too, but it isn't the same as imagining what it is like to be a fly, or imagining feeling the pain of a fly, or trying to understand the fly, which is closer to what empathy actually is.

As for being incapable- do you WANT to be capable?

[Yukaphile]

And that's the mindset we're getting. All people do is blame the victims, and trying to paint those guilty as victims too. I don't think most people really grasp the full severity of this here. They are not victims. Their victims suffered a billion times worse than they ever did.

[Yukaphile]

Do the words "double trauma" mean anything to you?!

[Yukaphile]

A man like that is scum. He doesn't deserve sympathy. The real victims do. There is still a clear line of morality here. If you wanna argue a serial rapist/murderer/looter is a victim, then you need to argue all human beings are victims. Some to more degrees than others. And this is just about the worst of them all. See, I find all this very convenient, because those insisting the Soviet soldiers were "victims..." would they insist the same for Japanese soldiers? It seems more political than anything.