Re: rehabilitation versus punishment in a future society....

From: James Swayze (swayzej@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Feb 23 2000 - 02:20:30 MST


James Rogers wrote:

> This depends a great deal on your definition of evil.

I define evil as simply abject selfishness. I believe if you analyze it
carefully you will find at the heart of every heinous act of cruelty to another
human being, that the perpetrator cared only for their own and immediate self
gratification. Had they cared at all for others, enough to deny their own self
gratification, they would not have acted cruelly. Hitler wasn't truly interested
in Germany's future so much as he was in his own rise to and maintenance of
power. He proves this in the many mistakes he made which sacrificed fellow
Germans.

The same can be said for your basic serial killer or rapist. Regardless of what
brought them to be the way they are in the end they only care about themselves.
I could be wrong but I'd like to see if we can come up with some examples where
evil acts occur in the absolute absence of abject selfishness.

My next thought would be how do we give a person a conscience? I know a lad born
without one. For all intent and purpose he is absent a conscience. He feels
nothing for anyone but himself. He seeks immediate self gratification
constantly. He has violent tantrums when he doesn't get absolutely his way. He
is officially diagnosed as having Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder, but
his mother told me they also said he was genetically missing something in his
brain. I'm not saying this is where the conscience resides. I'm just pointing
out that ADHD is not his only woe. He certainly fits the bill for being one that
could not really be held accountable for his actions. However, I don't think
that every act of evil or cruelty towards another is as a result of illness.

James

-- 
"Quod de futuris non est determinata omnino veritas"
			    NOSTRADAMUS 15TH Century



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:04:04 MDT