A system can be more evil than the sum of the evil of its human parts. If you don’t account for emergent evil, you’ll end up with a useless morality where you can’t distinguish between people within human range of good/evil at all. It’s like adding a big constant to your y-axis.
Conversation
Replying to
OK - emergent evil may be my new favorite idea. I’ve generally thought about the banality of evil as enough but emergent behavior seems like a better construct
1
1
Replying to
I think they’re different though. A system might have neither, either, or both.
1
Replying to
“Evil” as a quality of humans is only useful for creating simplistic narratives. It has no predictive value and a negative understanding value.
You’re basically trying to write the script of the movie about the apocalypse
1
2
Replying to
It’s convenient shorthand for consensus net negative potentiality or something
1
1
1
Show replies
Replying to
Every organization with plausible deniability... It's like a voltage difference
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Not necessarily. Everybody within a system may acknowledge it is evil without accepting any charge of Complicity (“I’m one of the good people, it’s those people in sales who make it evil”)
2





