0
0

[–] Doomking_Grimlock ago 

I think I have a pretty good idea of the difference between the two. I'm no expert, full disclosure, but I have an interest in psychology so I've certainly looked into both sociopathy and psychopathy. So yeah, maybe I'm totally wrong.

But you're no expert either, because in nothing I've ever read has either classification ever been described as "evil". That's an emotional assertion.

I don't think we're gonna get anywhere with this, so I'm tapping out, but before I go: in all seriousness, a man with a weapon is capable of horrible evil. Whether that weapon is a knife, a gun, a bomb, or just plain ol' poltical power. Does having any of that make them inherently evil? Or is it what they so with it that makes them evil?

0
0

[–] 8Ball ago 

They reap what they sow. Their only purpose in life is to win or to acquire power over others. When they act upon these things because they're the only things in existence that can make them happy, that's when they are evil.

0
0

[–] Doomking_Grimlock ago 

So in your opinion, if what makes them happy is the success and happiness of their friends, their family, their chosen tribe (regardless of why they made that decision), they're ok? Good to go? No reason to fear the torches and pitchforks? That's what I'm seeing here. I mean, if you were a black moslem and your brother was a sociopath who decided to put all his efforts into supporting his black moslem friends and family, that would be all right with you? I'm using black moslem as a hypothetical here. Substitute chinese atheist or white Christian or whatever your chosen tribe is, the point is, as long as a sociopath aligned himself with your chosen ideals and took action that protected, supported, and uplifted people you cared about, he'd be ok in your book? Doesn't that make your definition of evil entirely subjective? Doesn't that mean that, according to your beliefs, a sociopath can choose to be good, so long as his idea of what is good aligns with your tribe's idea of what is good?

It's a philosophical downward spiral, as far as I can tell. Maybe just focus on convicting people for what they do instead of something they have no control over. I mean, if it's genetic, they can't change it, and if it's nature, then they probably aren't even aware of what they're doing until someone makes them aware, at which point, the ball is in their court, isn't it? It's not something I'm qualified to delve into, that's all I know. I just don't care for blanket statements ans generalization. Too often, folks who are just trying to get by get fucked over by that shit.