[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.18126903 [View]
File: 375 KB, 1397x770, Screen Shot 2020-12-01 at 10.09.23 pm.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is a conversation I'd like to have. It's tough because it falls into the trap which so many modern conversations fall into, which is attempts at mindreading.

For instance, if Carl Panzram or the Columbine Killers etc leave behind explicit statements saying that they experienced (and revelled in) their own overwhelming intention to hurt others as much as possible... Does this not mean that, whatever its causes (brain diseases, brain tumours, injuries etc), the state of mind that we would colloquially described as Evil was experienced by them long and consistently enough that it constitutes their effective personality?

Everything has causes. But just like Love only makes sense as a qualia, as a subjective experience like happiness or confusion, or lust... Just like all these qualities are taken to exist purely on the fact that they can be experienced, who are we to denial the existence of evil if we know that people are capable of experiencing overwhelming hatred of innocent people? What better definition could there be?

Apologies if I didn't get my thoughts out clearly btw

View posts [+24] [+48] [+96]