DrJ
Born again christian 😏
- Jun 4, 2024
- 35
"Q. What Evil are you talking about ?
A. I think there are two opposite kinds of Evil, the first is related to necessity of human activity going well and having the desired results and the other consists of deliberately violating some fundamental taboos like for example the taboo against murder or against some sexual possibilities
Q. As in do evil and act evil.
A. Yes"
Do Evil : When someone does evil, it implies that they intentionally engage in actions that are morally wrong, harmful, or malevolent.
Act Evil : When someone acts evil, it suggests that their behavior aligns with harmful or malevolent actions, but it may not necessarily be driven by a deep-seated evil nature.
It is clear that our moral code is static, especially from a religious definition. And disregarded the diversity of human needs.
So, can social general morality act evil toward those who act evil?
In my opinion, yes. There are compromises and sacrifices of small group individuals's necessities, probably we shouldn't have geographic oppressive universal morality, aka civilization, probably tribalism was more considerable by providing natural alternatives and a wide range of moralities for those individuals, and before you prefer the general good, just put yourself in the shoes of such individuals who act evil from good intentions.
Is there a solution? rehabilitation and deportation are tools to suppress individuals's natural behavior Thus, there aren't solutions simply because common morality can't operate upon those solutions.
Here, finally, is Sabrina Harman as she appeared at the height of the Abu Ghraib ordeal. She appears to be wearing panties similar to those that were worn by an inmate who was tortured by Palestinian hanging outside his cell on November 29. Such behavior is consistent with a pattern of treatment involving the degradation of Arab men by female soldiers at Abu Ghraib. Only here, in this case, the ritualized humiliation of a prisoner is literally connected to the sexual seduction of his female captor. The bad apple theory suggests that Harman is smiling because she is simply happy to be wearing her panties on the outside of her military uniform, in the middle of a maximum security prison, inside a war zone. But a cleaner eye prevails. Sabrina Harman is not just smiling; she is in a state of unremitting joy. Though closed in bliss, even her eyes seem to be smiling. This poses no problem for the bad apple theory (bad apples can enjoy their sadism) but it does create problems for Zimbardo. Inspect the photo: Which seems more likely? Is this the look of a bored, stressed-out soldier trapped in a descending spiral of victimization brought on by the pressure to conform to the demands of a chaotic and overcrowded prison? Or, is this the look of a satisfied employee who has just performed her assignments precisely as she has been ordered by her male superiors
A. I think there are two opposite kinds of Evil, the first is related to necessity of human activity going well and having the desired results and the other consists of deliberately violating some fundamental taboos like for example the taboo against murder or against some sexual possibilities
Q. As in do evil and act evil.
A. Yes"
Do Evil : When someone does evil, it implies that they intentionally engage in actions that are morally wrong, harmful, or malevolent.
Act Evil : When someone acts evil, it suggests that their behavior aligns with harmful or malevolent actions, but it may not necessarily be driven by a deep-seated evil nature.
It is clear that our moral code is static, especially from a religious definition. And disregarded the diversity of human needs.
So, can social general morality act evil toward those who act evil?
In my opinion, yes. There are compromises and sacrifices of small group individuals's necessities, probably we shouldn't have geographic oppressive universal morality, aka civilization, probably tribalism was more considerable by providing natural alternatives and a wide range of moralities for those individuals, and before you prefer the general good, just put yourself in the shoes of such individuals who act evil from good intentions.
Is there a solution? rehabilitation and deportation are tools to suppress individuals's natural behavior Thus, there aren't solutions simply because common morality can't operate upon those solutions.
Here, finally, is Sabrina Harman as she appeared at the height of the Abu Ghraib ordeal. She appears to be wearing panties similar to those that were worn by an inmate who was tortured by Palestinian hanging outside his cell on November 29. Such behavior is consistent with a pattern of treatment involving the degradation of Arab men by female soldiers at Abu Ghraib. Only here, in this case, the ritualized humiliation of a prisoner is literally connected to the sexual seduction of his female captor. The bad apple theory suggests that Harman is smiling because she is simply happy to be wearing her panties on the outside of her military uniform, in the middle of a maximum security prison, inside a war zone. But a cleaner eye prevails. Sabrina Harman is not just smiling; she is in a state of unremitting joy. Though closed in bliss, even her eyes seem to be smiling. This poses no problem for the bad apple theory (bad apples can enjoy their sadism) but it does create problems for Zimbardo. Inspect the photo: Which seems more likely? Is this the look of a bored, stressed-out soldier trapped in a descending spiral of victimization brought on by the pressure to conform to the demands of a chaotic and overcrowded prison? Or, is this the look of a satisfied employee who has just performed her assignments precisely as she has been ordered by her male superiors
Edward Snowden has warned that surveillance technology is so much more advanced and intrusive today it makes that used by US and British intelligence agencies he revealed in 2013 look like child's play.
In an interview on the 10th anniversary of his revelations about the scale of surveillance – some of it illegal – by the US National Security Agency and its British counterpart, GCHQ, he said he had no regrets about what he had done and cited positive changes.
But he is depressed about inroads into privacy both in the physical and digital world. "Technology has grown to be enormously influential," Snowden said. "If we think about what we saw in 2013 and the capabilities of governments today, 2013 seems like child's play."
He expressed concern not only about dangers posed by governments and Big Tech but commercially available video surveillance cameras, facial recognition, artificial intelligence and intrusive spyware such as Pegasus used against dissidents and journalists.
Looking back to 2013, he said: "We trusted the government not to screw us. But they did. We trusted the tech companies not to take advantage of us. But they did. That is going to happen again, because that is the nature of power."
In an interview on the 10th anniversary of his revelations about the scale of surveillance – some of it illegal – by the US National Security Agency and its British counterpart, GCHQ, he said he had no regrets about what he had done and cited positive changes.
But he is depressed about inroads into privacy both in the physical and digital world. "Technology has grown to be enormously influential," Snowden said. "If we think about what we saw in 2013 and the capabilities of governments today, 2013 seems like child's play."
He expressed concern not only about dangers posed by governments and Big Tech but commercially available video surveillance cameras, facial recognition, artificial intelligence and intrusive spyware such as Pegasus used against dissidents and journalists.
Looking back to 2013, he said: "We trusted the government not to screw us. But they did. We trusted the tech companies not to take advantage of us. But they did. That is going to happen again, because that is the nature of power."
