Why some humans are so evil: double standards and irreligion

[henryp]

You probably fear losing what you have?  You don't want to be killed, jailed, be taken away from your family. Lose your house.  Car.  Access to the forum. Or whatever else it is you value.

The cost of committing atrocities is also so high, that the idea of committing them is a non-starter even if you'd enjoy it.

Add onto that, we're taught from childhood 'doing bad things is bad.'  And there's just no reason to question it.  But if you remove those consequences, like with the super rich or super poor, or if you're in one of those places there are large benefits instead of consequences, then all of a sudden, people start going the other way.  

If there weren't a lot of redundancies in the system, humans wouldn't have lasted as long as we have.

Those things you listed are fundamentally different from any post-mortem judgement and ensuing punishment - I know they exist and can be taken from me without any notice. However, it's even more basic than the fear of losing what I have which prevents me from raping, killing and torturing, or even lying, stealing and cheating - I simply don't want to. I'm not wired that way.  That some people think that the only thing stopping them being 'evil', for want of a better word, is fear of reprisal - illusory or otherwise - is a revealing commentary about them, as opposed to a thing lacking in me.

Why don't you want to do it, is the trick.  It's all very tenuous.  In my opinion, what keeps us from being awful is circumstance.  If you and I were born 200 years ago, we'd very likely have no problem owning some slaves.  400 years ago, we'd almost certainly be devoutly religious, maybe burning some people for witchcraft?  I don't think there's anything special about you and I that we aren't out raping and stealing.  What's special is the circumstances into which we were born.  That's primarily what's kept us from being a terrible people.  A coincidence of time and place.

[FatAndFaithless]

But those old bad times you reference..those only changed because people weren't bound by their circumstance. Obviously people saw the things wrong in their current time, current society, so they changed them. The world keeps getting better and better overall (there's always going to be dips, of course), but people always think it's getting worse and worse.

We aren't just bound by a chance of being born in this time and place. People have agency and ability to break from whatever the norm is. And in general, most people most of the time use that agency to improve things.

[henryp]

You probably fear losing what you have?  You don't want to be killed, jailed, be taken away from your family. Lose your house.  Car.  Access to the forum. Or whatever else it is you value.

The cost of committing atrocities is also so high, that the idea of committing them is a non-starter even if you'd enjoy it.

Add onto that, we're taught from childhood 'doing bad things is bad.'  And there's just no reason to question it.  But if you remove those consequences, like with the super rich or super poor, or if you're in one of those places there are large benefits instead of consequences, then all of a sudden, people start going the other way.  

If there weren't a lot of redundancies in the system, humans wouldn't have lasted as long as we have.

I think being super rich/super poor/getting a benefit instead of a bad consequence merely brings out the people who were shitty all along and allows them to do what they wanna do. And perhaps there are more of them out there than we would like to think. But I don't think this means we ALL would commit atrocities if given the opportunity. I was never a believer in Lord of the Flies.

How do you explain history though?  Don't the less developed periods of human history already show what we'd look like in a 'lord of the flies' scenario?  Back when crazy levels of comfort and security weren't just handed to us from birth, things were not very pretty.

[purplepurpose]

You gotta give credit to believers, they dive in to the most horrible shit world can offer to justify their acceptance of faith in hell.

[LastPoet]

What it means is that unless you exert power over others, others will exert it over you. Shitty philosophy. I know. Just be kind enough, but don't let them piss on you.

[FatAndFaithless]

I guess that's probably the only thing that bothers me about "most atheists" I know. I'd likely agree with most atheists on most issues, but for some reason it seems to be the cool or hip thing to take this horribly pessimistic view of humanity. Despite the fact that the evidence points to the contrary, it just seems easier to say humans are naturally shitty, most people would be bad if we didn't stop them, etc.

People are good! And we're getting better at being good!

[Catholic_Lady]

Those things you listed are fundamentally different from any post-mortem judgement and ensuing punishment - I know they exist and can be taken from me without any notice. However, it's even more basic than the fear of losing what I have which prevents me from raping, killing and torturing, or even lying, stealing and cheating - I simply don't want to. I'm not wired that way.  That some people think that the only thing stopping them being 'evil', for want of a better word, is fear of reprisal - illusory or otherwise - is a revealing commentary about them, as opposed to a thing lacking in me.

Why don't you want to do it, is the trick.  It's all very tenuous.  In my opinion, what keeps us from being awful is circumstance.  If you and I were born 200 years ago, we'd very likely have no problem owning some slaves.  400 years ago, we'd almost certainly be devoutly religious, maybe burning some people for witchcraft?  I don't think there's anything special about you and I that we aren't out raping and stealing.  What's special is the circumstances into which we were born.  That's primarily what's kept us from being a terrible people.  A coincidence of time and place.

But we still needed to justify those actions somehow.

With the slaves, we justified it by telling ourselves they aren't really people, or that we are somehow doing them a favor/it's for their own good, or that it was for the net good of higher priority humans (Side note: gee, where have I heard those exact justifications in the modern day)

With witch burning, it was seen as a defense of society against dangerous people who could do harm, and the cruel, painful death was "necessary" as a way to deter more people from becoming witches.

Of course both those acts are heinous, and we know better now, thank goodness. But my point is that for most people, there is indeed an inherent desire to do good. If not, then we wouldn't have needed justifications to commit atrocities as the ones above.

[purplepurpose]

You gotta give credit to believers, they fuck their mind in to oblivion with worlds trash news to justify their acceptance of hell, besides other things.

[FatAndFaithless]

You gotta give credit to believers, they fuck their mind in to oblivion with worlds trash news to justify their acceptance of hell, besides other things.

..Do you plan on adding to the conversation at all?

[henryp]

But those old bad times you reference..those only changed because people weren't bound by their circumstance.  Obviously people saw the things wrong in their current time, current society, so they changed them.  The world keeps getting better and better overall (there's always going to be dips, of course), but people always think it's getting worse and worse.

We aren't just bound by a chance of being born in this time and place.  People have agency and ability to break from whatever the norm is.  And in general, most people most of the time use that agency to improve things.

But what kept us from being bound by our circumstances?  Stuff.  The reason we're so progressive now, is we all have bunch of stuff.  House, food, security, etc...  And more importantly, there's enough stuff for us to have a bunch of it, and all of our neighbors to have a bunch of it.  The circumstances are we've evolved to not need to own slaves.  Or steal the neighbors sheep.  Or kill the rival tribe.  We want to sit on our couches and watch Netflix.  Our motivations change with our standard of living.  

If the North had still needed slavery, there wouldn't have been a civil war.  It wasn't a crisis of conscience, it was just that they could get what they wanted without slavery, so they stopped with the slavery.  And I'd guess it was also some power play by the North as it relates to their relationship with the South as well.  I don't think people get better.  There is just less incentive to be 'evil.'