SAD NEWS

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think my post defends their 'enjoyment' somewhat Dex...
I disagree - having pleasurable thoughts about (or in light of) someone else's misery is evil. Thus what huntley did was evil, just as the pleasure derived by those on here from news of the attack on him. Just because it's the "majority" view doesn't make it right nor just.
But that's what I said...

'Whichever way you want to look at it, psychologists basically agree that 'evil' is either a word used by us to defend our want of 'vengeance' against an 'evil person' and/or it is something that an 'evil person' just doesn't recognise. He/she is 'removed' from feelings of compassion etc. So in both respects, evil is a 'mental' state of mind. I'd argue that someone wanting to 'do Huntley in' is not evil, they're simply driven by a mental state that sees Huntley as evil and therefore they want revenge and if all 'evil' is a 'mental' state of mind, they therefore cannot be held accountable for their actions in trying to kill Huntley et al.'
 
Interesting talk about 'evil'.
For example, no-one that is mentally ill should go to prison, they should go to a secure hospital...

But there aren't any, any more. Secure hospitals now only exist within prisons. Maggie did away with them all.

It's now called care in the community!

The Government don't care who the release into the community. :evil:
 
The pedants will hasten to add that schizophrenic people don't have alter-egos, they have voices. Dissociative identity disorder or split personality have multiple egos :)
could one of you expand on that, please.
 
So, huntley wasn't evil and neither is what he did then? Or am I misreading your argument.
 
I think my post defends their 'enjoyment' somewhat Dex...
I disagree - having pleasurable thoughts about (or in light of) someone else's misery is evil. Thus what huntley did was evil, just as the pleasure derived by those on here from news of the attack on him. Just because it's the "majority" view doesn't make it right nor just.

Also, what is 'right' or 'just' anyway?

It is all point of view stuff.
 
.....it's evil..to you...I used to laugh at "you've been framed"...is that evil?
It has the potential to be. But the line was drawn at the use of permanent physical and emotional damage, unlike the current scenario.
 
Also, what is 'right' or 'just' anyway?

It is all point of view stuff.
This is the very crux of the argument. Whatever is 'right' or 'just' has to be entirely consistent if it is to carry credibility.
 
Firstly we need to make clear a difference in Law and our ideas of 'Evil' and 'Just'.

The law states what is lawful and unlawful.
It doesn't let personal emotions get involved.
Therefore, attacking someone is wrong...whether the victim is a nun or Ian Huntley.

Our OWN moral compass is very much subjective. A football hooligan feels perfectly justified punching his opponent....he is 'just' in his own mind.
 
Firstly we need to make clear a difference in Law and our ideas of 'Evil' and 'Just'.

The law states what is lawful and unlawful.
It doesn't let personal emotions get involved.
Therefore, attacking someone is wrong...whether the victim is a nun or Ian Huntley.
and what about a soldier attacking an enemy? (regardless of how underpaid they may be :roll: :wink: )[/quote]
 
dex, you should know better.
Cogito ergo sum is a statement, not a question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top