If you do something horrible without meaning to i dont think thats evil

I agree

I mean to say that "evil things" != horrible things

**Wesker#6593** just left the server.

In my opinion, good and evil are psychological terms used to justify a certain type of behavior, and disapprove of others, based on personal conviction, culture, and past-experience

Damn https://apnews.com/00b90ac3e97a41c3b3c078855b32d75f

Isn't evil subjective? Then again this depends on the context of the conversation that all of you are having.

some things about it are subjective yes, but, given we are all humans, there are things that are universal between us

And i also find that "evil" most often comes from disorder and tragedy

For example, i think Hitler would have never started the Nazi party if he had a therapist and personal fulfillment in his early life

Because no one person is born evil, and most people don't wish to be evil

But Hitler though the nazi party was morally right

I'll have to scroll up & read the conversation in a bit. Sadly I'm at work so I can only see so much at a time.

Yes but thats a bit of a fallacy. Everything has a cause and effect. You could use that logic to argue no one is responsible for anything because their life is full of circumstances out of their control

It's not popular, but the fact is even political ideologies have root in a person's biology

Brb i'll rant a bit later

Dinner time

No matter how much therapy Hitler would go through, he would have turned out atleast similar, maybe without the inclination to literally gas the Jews

Let's hope that's not the case Abel otherwise I'm more of a reject than I initially thought. That's not going to be good for my mental health lol.

something something free will debate rabbit hole

@ZerioctheTank Hey, I'm not saying people can be biologically Nazis

I'm saying people are biologically inclined to certain moral frameworks. From here they can go to the ideologies that serve those frameworks

Who we are is a combination of our biology and our experiences. so biology could actually play a part in who is and who isnt likely to fall into radical ideology

^

I guess? My guess is that if Hitler was born as a Jew, he would have been a radical Zionist

Double blind twin studies yield interesting results. Often twins separated at birth will end up leading very similar lives despite different circumstances

Not always

But often enough to make you wonder

Based on pure observation from watching my kids and my nieces and nephews, I agree with the idea that it's about 70% nature and about 30% nurture. You're born with a certain set of software that governs how you'll deal with incoming stimulus. The nature part is how that software is fine tuned

Maybe the ratio is different for everyone? Nature vs nuture. Who's more inclined to what, and how do we determine that ratio.

Now obviously, that can change depending on the magnitude of the nature and it can completely override the software but I think for a majority of cases it holds

again, more of a general observation but you can see, event at 1 year old, how kids will deal with environmental stimulus

The ratio of nature to nurture is a hotly debated topic in biology

I think the ratio could be different for different people. I'm thinking on average is a 60/40 or 70/30 split

And psychology

I dont know if there is a general consensus

Neuroscience cant tell us yet

having worked in psycho-social oncology, there is SOOOO much guess work going on in psychology today

And wouldn't certain circumstances cause one to shift more in one direction? An abusive parent or living in a communist society for example.

that's why I added stimulus of a certain magnitude

like reinstalling the operating system