Are evil people most often aware that they are evil?

[noname223]

My parents ruined my life but their intentions were good. There is a saying in my native language "well-intentioned is often the opposite of well done".

There is also the question whether there exist actually evil people.

I think in politics there are no groups who see themselves as the evil people. Even terrorists think God would be on their side.

Maybe people who intentionally torture other people know that they are evil. However, I could also imagine these people do enough mental gymnastics to deceive themselves. There will be many who scapegoat their victims or others.

In the end most people consider the members (especially longterm members) of this forum as purely evil.

My conclusion is: evilness is a matter of perspective. But most evil people probably don't consider themselves evil. It is even likely that many good people consider themselves evil. There are many people too harsh on themselves especially when they internalized too much self-hatred after bullying or abuse.

It is ironic many purely evil might be immune to feelings of guilt and remorse. While people who try to be good as possible torment themselves for inner thoughts (not actions) they have (done). I think most people have evil thoughts from time to time. That is human. Like wanting vengeance or stuff like that. But thoughts are not actions. I have had extremely intimate exchanges with my best friend about most taboo stuff there is like dreams about incest. And we saw some parallels and came to the conclusion that most people feel so bad about taboo thoughts that they do not speak them out and some people consider them uniquely weird or evil becauser they never speak to anyone about it. Despite the fact it is way more common in reality but noone talks about it openly.

 

[Jarni]

In case of mental degradation (psychopaths : criminals etc., dark triads etc.) we can rather be sure they are evil. It's mental degradation, so....

Otherwise I like very much this thought of L. N. Tolstoy:

"One of the most common misconceptions is to consider people good, evil, stupid, smart.

Man flows and he has all the possibilities: he was stupid - he became smart; he was angry - he became kind and vice versa.

This is the greatness of man.

And You can't judge a person because of this - you judged him, but he's already different."

 

[noname223]

Bump

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Is it not more evil to be aware of how evil one is and then continue to do it? Ignorance is not an excuse. Ignorance and intent are independent of ethics. For example, suppose you didn't know you killed someone. That still gets you an involuntary manslaughter charge. Suppose you had no idea that you aren't supposed to drink and drive, does that make it okay to do so? Of course not.

Just because many who are evil don't seem to realize they are doesn't mean everyone who's evil is. Plus they may just not outwardly show they know because it's the only way to stay sane while internally of course they know what they're doing is evil and they may even feel a little bad about it and yet they continue on anyway. Actions should be evaluated first and foremost.

One of the biggest empty platitudes I keep getting thrown when I try to say I'm an evil person is that "a real evil person wouldn't say that". I don't care that I said that, it doesn't make me good just because I happen to not fit a perceived stereotype of evil.

 

[noname223]

Is it not more evil to be aware of how evil one is and then continue to do it? Ignorance is not an excuse. Ignorance and intent are independent of ethics. For example, suppose you didn't know you killed someone. That still gets you an involuntary manslaughter charge. Suppose you had no idea that you aren't supposed to drink and drive, does that make it okay to do so? Of course not.

Just because many who are evil don't seem to realize they are doesn't mean everyone who's evil is. Plus they may just not outwardly show they know because it's the only way to stay sane while internally of course they know what they're doing is evil and they may even feel a little bad about it and yet they continue on anyway. Actions should be evaluated first and foremost.

One of the biggest empty platitudes I keep getting thrown when I try to say I'm an evil person is that "a real evil person wouldn't say that". I don't care that I said that, it doesn't make me good just because I happen to not fit a perceived stereotype of evil.

You could be right. I thought about socio- and psychopaths typing it down. If you lack empathy you might can fade out that your actions are evil for example by thinking the victims were NPCs. At the same time one could also imagine they enjoy the pain of their victims and are well aware about it.

 

[Pluto]

 

[NoPointOfReturning]

I'd say they aren't aware.

 

[DarkRange55]

@Pluto
@lamargue
@Praestat_Mori
@Forever Sleep
@Angst Filled Fuck Up
@sserafim (even though I think I'm dead to her lol)
@Blurry_Buildings
@SexyIncél
@anyone I missed!

Bump

What say you, my friend (@Forever Sleep)?

 

[Angst Filled Fuck Up]

I think we have to look at the motivational force behind the "evil" (which is a bit of a crappy concept in and of itself). Dictators for example don't typically do the things they do to be evil for the sake of it. There will be some (deeply flawed) rationale or driver behind a given action. In fact, oftentimes they believe they are acting from a place of virtue or utilitarianism, even if a large chunk of people look at their behavior and go "what the fuck are they thinking?"

I suppose in that sense, evil is almost entirely subjective. Do your views align with what some "evil" person did? Then you won't perceive it as such. A great many atrocities have been committed in the name of religion or nationalism for instance, and it can all be quite easily sold to those with a proclivity to believe in the cause. When you're all on the same team, anything can be justified.

No doubt there are people who lean towards psychopathy or sociopathy, which is more the absence of self-reflection or ethics. No empathy means you can do just about anything without any qualms or self-examination. These people may not feel any guilt about harming their loves ones or torturing the neighbor's cat. We talk about this kind of thing often in the context of serial killers, but rarely in situations where these people run organizations or nations.

Most people are deeply uncomfortable with being labeled evil and from their own perspective, they almost never will be. How do you quantify this stuff, anyway? If you believe you're acting in the best interest of others or according to a set of ethics you adhere to, could you really be considered all that awful? What about your upbringing? Were your parents evil and you just inherited it or acted out as a form of trickle-down? Then there's the media slant. What are they putting out, and what angle are they playing up?

It's all pretty complicated, and probably on a spectrum. But I suspect most people aren't all that aware, due to the fact they have their own justifications for things, if nothing else.

 

[Forever Sleep]

It's a very interesting idea. I find it hard to believe that people who do awful acts don't realise on some level that they are doing something wrong. A criminal trying to cover their tracks at least demonstrates they know what they are doing is against the law.

As for what's going on in their heads though, who really knows? I think they may well have some bizarre narative going on that somehow enables them to not see themselves as evil. Others openly get off on it.

As for whether there even is such a thing as evil, that's tricky too. Some people who do terrible things had terrible things done to them. That's not to excuse it but you can better understand how it may have messed with their heads. I suppose you do still get outliers though who go off the rails despite a seemingly average background.

Do you suppose a fascination with this sort of stuff is unhealthy also? The past few years, I've gotten into true crime and I don't really know why because it's horrible!

 

[noname223]

It's a very interesting idea. I find it hard to believe that people who do awful acts don't realise on some level that they are doing something wrong. A criminal trying to cover their tracks at least demonstrates they know what they are doing is against the law.

As for what's going on in their heads though, who really knows? I think they may well have some bizarre narative going on that somehow enables them to not see themselves as evil. Others openly get off on it.

As for whether there even is such a thing as evil, that's tricky too. Some people who do terrible things had terrible things done to them. That's not to excuse it but you can better understand how it may have messed with their heads. I suppose you do still get outliers though who go off the rails despite a seemingly average background.

Do you suppose a fascination with this sort of stuff is unhealthy also? The past few years, I've gotten into true crime and I don't really know why because it's horrible!

I think to a certain extend morbid curiosity is normal. Modern humans are to an extent civilized but we are still driven by our instincts. And mass media nurtures us/caters to that. We get tamed. It is better to binge one true crime podcast after another than to actually plan murder. Despite the fact some sound sensationalistic to me.

 

[R_N]

There are plenty of people here who have evil thoughts and express them constantly but ironically consider themselves on the good side/only the victim. I'm not perfect but I am aware of how I hurt others.

For example this post might trigger people with similar behavioural patterns but maybe some of them open their eyes to their own evil. Most of them are brainwashed tho.

 

[Praestat_Mori]

I don't think that "evil persons" see themselves as evil. What evil is is a matter of how it is defined. We consider a murder as an evil person bc we usually don't and should not kill each other for no reason. Is a drug dealer evil bc he sells drugs to people who become addicted? I doubt a drug dealer sees himself as an evil person.

 

[Pluto]

 

[lamargue]

Evil is very hard to define. For the most part, evil is a bound, an outlier, for which we operate under the assumption that people can do worse; in order to preserve our idea of good, we offset it with the belief that evil exists. But I'm not sure this is sufficient. Even if we don't believe evil to exist, can we deny the fact that most do, and consequently operate under the assumption that it does? I doubt dictators really thought they were evil themselves; they relegated this classification to rapists, serial killers and the like.

Terrorist organizations might not think of themselves as evil, due to the differences in their moral perspectives: they view death differently, as they themselves have been seen quite willing to sacrifice themselves, believing that they would have a place in paradise; consequently, murder is seen in the same vein. For serial killers, they are likely aware of how the act of murder is perceived by larger society, and yet act in spite of these values. If a person perceives that they are evil, are they? We often say to those who suffer from guilt of having committed something bad that 'the very fact that you recognize it is bad means that you probably aren't a bad person,' which of course is not the case all the time. It doesn't depend on intention for us; a serial killer who wipes out a kindergarten and, later, chooses to repent, will still justly be seen as evil by many; is he as evil as a serial killer who still believes his act to be just? Well, the latter is probably deluded, since the condemnation of murder is very clear. We ourselves play mental gymnastics to determine whether or not a person is evil or not.

But evil itself is very hard to talk about. In fact, there's clearly no intelligible way for us to speak about good and evil yet; we probably need to wait for some genius philosopher/mathematician to model conditions of normative variance in society, and map out those 'primitive' values which we hold. All we have right now are deflationary theories. It's, unfortunately, a matter of perspective right now. We can only conjecture, and never truly know.

How do we assign the term 'evil' to another? Is it constant? How does 'evil' differ from 'bad' or 'not good'? I mean, these are semantic difficulties, but the point is that we can't really talk intelligently about good and evil just yet. In my opinion morality is embedded within language. There are a few indications of this: we can deny casuistry and affirm deontological theories, for instance -- consequentialism is a joke. How do you determine if a moral agent is aware of the outcome of an act, and how do you assign value to this if your moral architecture is limited? In this sense, deontology must overlap with consequentialism, where deontology is preferable since it requires fewer assumptions.

There's a really good film called Secret Sunshine by Lee Chang-dong (spoilers). The serial killer in that film murders a little boy. The mother, in order to cope with her grief, chooses religion. Later in the movie, the mother, wanting to forgive the killer who is now in prison, visits him. She finds out that the killer has also become religious, and says that God has forgiven him for his sin. I think that's very interesting. If one commits something evil, are they able ever to do away with the label? In what cases is the label of 'evil' assigned to others as a practical measure, rather than ones own moral compass?

We can speak of these things, but we probably shouldn't yet. They seem fundamentally useless.

 

[Blurry_Buildings]

@Blurry_Buildings

I agree that what is evil and what isn't seems entirely subjective, making the term kind of useless. I also agree that most normal people won't consider themselves evil. Considering yourself evil means you have to admit you have been wrong and that your personality is fundamentally flawed beyond repair (at least in the short term). The only people who have enough time and willingness to do that kind of introspection are the kinds of people who probably aren't in positions of power. Of the tiny amount of people who do perform that introspection, I'm sure only a small fraction of that will also come to the conclusion that they are evil.

When a person observes their own actions they see their own thoughts, feelings, and intentions firsthand and associate all of these with the actions they take, making it hard to label themself as "evil". Evil is often used as a blanket term afterall. An evil person is seen by society as completely evil with no good, while a good person is allowed to make mistakes and have a flawed personality, especially if they have "good" intentions.

When a person observes another person's actions they see the effects of the other person's actions and nothing else, making it easy to label the other person as evil.

tl;dr When you question if you yourself are evil, you get to define what is evil and what is good yourself, and as long as you have the slightest amount of what you define as good, or the slightest desire to do what you define as good, you likely wouldn't think of yourself as evil. (Unless you're very depressed... then maybe you might)

There is a saying in my native language "well-intentioned is often the opposite of well done".

A lot of people near me used to say "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

 

[VeryShy]

I'll be short. The most evil people on this world never, and I mean never recognise and think they are evil.