Conversation

Replying to
10/ Shades of red theory asserts that majority - everybody to right of "apathetic" - gets off on others' unnecessary pain at least a little
2
11
Replying to
11/ Shades of red is based on a deontological notion of evil -- finding pleasure in causing/witnessing pain. Good is negatively defined.
1
9
Replying to
12/ By this theory, most "good" people are actual bad: they define "evil" to dehumanize, to justify causing pain for pleasure
1
11
Replying to
13/ Our penal system implicitly assumes shades-of-red theory. Prison guards and cops I suspect have at least a small streak of sadism.
2
12
Replying to
15/ If this is true, my original definition of civilizing project is nonsensical and most people are NOT on board with it
1
15
Replying to
16/ Worse, most moral philosophy is obsessed with defining evil primarily to find targets for justifiable pain-causing.
3
22
Replying to
17/ Enemies give life meaning and purpose. Moralizing is overtly about trying to do good, but covertly about prepping victims for pain
5
19
Replying to
18/ The most common form is NIMBYism/tribalism. For many, the ingroup is _formed_ in order to create an outgroup it's ok to hate and hurt
2
19
Replying to
19/ As a mostly-apathetic, I only came very reluctantly to this conclusion: that many actively enjoy causing/witnessing pain
1
10
Replying to
21/ Note that feeling others' pain (friends, kin, ingroup, random others) is not mutually exclusive with finding pleasure in pain
1
5
Replying to
22/ You might be capable of both. But people *incapable* of finding pleasure in others' pain might be minority mutants.
2
4
Show replies