Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

aaronsw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#21

Post by hinkley »

colordrops wrote: post #16
pan69 wrote: post #14

The world we live in is a super complex ecosystem of geopolitical, historical and cultural relationships and differences. To make sense of this complex world we create simplified narratives for ourselves, whether through movies or daily new broadcasts, whatever. Its easier to think in terms of good guys vs bad guys but in reality there are no good guys and bad guys. As the article says "Nobody thinks they’re doing ev…

There are many people who intentionally choose to act purely selfishly and not in good faith, to maximize personal gain. I met many of these types in SV, and I imagine they get much worse on wall street and in military industrial circles. Call it what you will, but these people don't have any illusions of being benevolent or fair.

The toughest one is when you see someone who, for instance, is living beyond their means and because of it they 'have to' do something unpalatable at work. They have walked into the trap and pulled the door closed behind them.

But I've also worked with many engineers whose actions and self-image don't align. When time is tight they'll participate in hand-wringing over all the tech debt we have, but the moment there's a gap in the schedule they "don't know what to work on". If you really meant it when you said "if only we had more time" then why don't you have a hit list? I don't think they're lying, or evil. They're just deluding themselves about their principles.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#22

Post by celticmusic »

pan69 wrote: post #14

The world we live in is a super complex ecosystem of geopolitical, historical and cultural relationships and differences. To make sense of this complex world we create simplified narratives for ourselves, whether through movies or daily new broadcasts, whatever. Its easier to think in terms of good guys vs bad guys but in reality there are no good guys and bad guys. As the article says "Nobody thinks they’re doing ev…

you could use that argument to defend hitler, after all, he did lift Germany's economics in a way that no one else could.

There's certainly a grey area, but there are also non-grey areas, and we need to make sure we're clear on those non-grey areas.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#23

Post by fourthark »

petermcneeley wrote: post #12
happytoexplain wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what it means to "all just come down to" a metaphor. Metaphors are inherently high level and abstract - the very opposite of what things "come down to", which is used to describe a concrete, pragmatic causation. The specific metaphor also is unhelpful, as it throws away the uniquely human nature of both morality and freedom of choice.

Aaron suggests that is childish to think evil people do evil things intentionality. But isn't actually the notion of good and evil completely childish? Arnt bankers just predators and their victims just prey? The banker isn't even thinking "I'm good" they are just thinking "I'm hungry" Realistically adults don't think about the morality of their actions much at all.

Morality is childish? What?

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#24

Post by pm90 »

aazaa wrote: post #20

> ... Nobody thinks they’re doing evil — maybe because it’s just impossible to be intentionally evil, maybe because it’s easier and more effective to convince yourself you’re good — but every major villain had some justification to explain why what they were doing was good. Everybody thinks they’re good. Could it be that the root of evil lies in failure to recognize this universal truth? In other words, the prerequis…

There are some instances where this is justified (e.g. Nazi Germany). If you look back in history, there are many instances of evil committed by most nations.

However, one has to be careful with conflating hyperbole with facts. A lot of very heinous crimes aren't committed outright; there is always some veneer of righteousness by demonizing the other. If you believe that "pure evil" exists, then you're more likely to believe such a narrative and maybe take part in the action it calls for.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#26

Post by sdegutis »

joe_the_user wrote: post #10

CS Lewis' Devil Screwtape describes the evil of today: "Oh, to get one's teeth again into a Farinata, a Henry VIII, or even a Hitler! There was real crackling there; something to crunch; a rage, an egotism, a cruelty only just less robust than our own. It put up a delicious resistance to being devoured. It warmed your inwards when you'd got it down. Instead of this, what have we had tonight? There was a municipal aut…

Reminds me of one of my favorite poems ever, written by a Chaplain during WWI:

    When Jesus came to Golgotha, they hanged Him on a tree,
    They drove great nails through hands and feet, and made a Calvary;
    They crowned Him with a crown of thorns, red were His wounds and deep,
    For those were crude and cruel days, and human flesh was cheap.

    When Jesus came to Birmingham they simply passed Him by,
    They never hurt a hair of Him, they only let Him die;
    For men had grown more tender, and they would not give Him pain,
    They only just passed down the street, and left Him in the rain.

    Still Jesus cried, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do,”
    And still it rained the wintry rain that drenched Him through and through;
    The crowds went home, and left the streets without a soul to see,
    And Jesus crouched against a wall and cried for Calvary.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#27

Post by Karunamon »

aazaa wrote: post #20

> ... Nobody thinks they’re doing evil — maybe because it’s just impossible to be intentionally evil, maybe because it’s easier and more effective to convince yourself you’re good — but every major villain had some justification to explain why what they were doing was good. Everybody thinks they’re good. Could it be that the root of evil lies in failure to recognize this universal truth? In other words, the prerequis…

Distilled down to a pithy saying, I think a good moral foundation is something like:

One may never morally commit an evil act for any reason, even if that act will prevent an even greater evil from being perpetrated.

That "will" is tricky, because often you don't actually know what the outcome will be, but I think it applies even if you do know with certainty.

Forgive my following ramble:

This is hardly a new thought - it's one shared by a number of religious belief systems (Catholicism comes to mind, CCC 1753 explicitly says this in about as many words), but there's a lot of wisdom to be had with this even if you completely write off the religious angle.

It completely removes this possibility. The avenue is forever closed; if you reject evil acts, no ifs-ands-or-buts, no ends justifying the means, this is simply never a thing you'll accept or allow yourself to be involved with.

It's simpler as far as moral thinking goes, it removes a lot of judgment, which is usually a red flag for lazy reductionism, but given the sheer quantity of evil in the would of the banal sort, exactly as you described, I'd wager that the world would be a better place overall if this principle were followed by good-faith actors.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#29

Post by fmajid »

aabeshou wrote: post #4
codingslave wrote: post #2

This post is similar to the ideas of Hannah Arendt and her concept of "the banality of evil". In her own words: "I was struck by the manifest shallowness in the doer [ie Eichmann] which made it impossible to trace the uncontestable evil of his deeds to any deeper level of roots or motives. The deeds were monstrous, but the doer – at least the very effective one now on trial – was quite ordinary, commonplace, and neit…

I've been listening a lot to Slavoj Zizek recently and he discusses this often. His argument is that to make good people do horrible things, you need an ideology that basically says that you are an agent of "what must be done" and then the ends justify the means. He describes how Nazi soldiers, who were instinctively horrified by what they were doing, were instructed to try to dissociate from their bodies and their a…

The Nazis also dosed their soldiers with methamphetamine.

Re: The Intentionality of Evil (2005)

#30

Post by fmajid »

codingslave wrote: post #2

This post is similar to the ideas of Hannah Arendt and her concept of "the banality of evil". In her own words: "I was struck by the manifest shallowness in the doer [ie Eichmann] which made it impossible to trace the uncontestable evil of his deeds to any deeper level of roots or motives. The deeds were monstrous, but the doer – at least the very effective one now on trial – was quite ordinary, commonplace, and neit…

Hannah Arendt was the mistress of Martin Heidegger, a firm Nazi, until his death. Philosophers are still debating about the levels of cognitive dissonance that took.
Post reply on HN