Scientists Attempt to Identify the Evil Gene

Off Topic
21

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:

[quote]HardcoreHorn wrote:
I think if such a gene were discovered, people wouldn’t care much. People don’t like to hear that things have “reasons” or “causes.” It scares them, making them feel like free will doesn’t exist, so they will either deny the gene’s existence or just not allow themselves to think about so they can continue thinking about life the same way they already do.

Whether or not an evil gene is found, it seems clear that evil is, nevertheless, a purely physical mechanism. I base that on an underlying assumption I hold, which is that the physical universe is all that exists. Therefore, anything that exists is a purely physical phenomenon. Evil is an emergent property of very complex physical interactions. They only become bad by the subjective experience of other living beings, which of course is also the result of complex physical interactions. So when evil things happen in this world, does it not make sense that we should see it as a tragedy in our world that such things can end up happening, and try to find solutions in which these evil acts are eliminated from our physical world? This is better than simply feeling the need to angrily punish those who are committing the evil acts.[/quote]

Hmm… So in your opinion evil is all subjective to our culture, established ethics, and sociologically agreed upon concepts of right and wrong, but evil truly does not exist? I would have to disagree because like you i have my own underlying assumptions that this world is not solely physical. But that is a different debate for a much LONGER thread. haha
[/quote]

Evil definately exists and is genetic in some cases.Look at Albert Fish and jeffrey Dahmer.Dahmer hit a jogger over the head and knocked him out then layed down next to his unconcious body.he did this while he was a kid.

if you dont know about Alber Fish look him up.

22

[quote]horsepuss wrote:

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:

[quote]HardcoreHorn wrote:
I think if such a gene were discovered, people wouldn’t care much. People don’t like to hear that things have “reasons” or “causes.” It scares them, making them feel like free will doesn’t exist, so they will either deny the gene’s existence or just not allow themselves to think about so they can continue thinking about life the same way they already do.

Whether or not an evil gene is found, it seems clear that evil is, nevertheless, a purely physical mechanism. I base that on an underlying assumption I hold, which is that the physical universe is all that exists. Therefore, anything that exists is a purely physical phenomenon. Evil is an emergent property of very complex physical interactions. They only become bad by the subjective experience of other living beings, which of course is also the result of complex physical interactions. So when evil things happen in this world, does it not make sense that we should see it as a tragedy in our world that such things can end up happening, and try to find solutions in which these evil acts are eliminated from our physical world? This is better than simply feeling the need to angrily punish those who are committing the evil acts.[/quote]

Hmm… So in your opinion evil is all subjective to our culture, established ethics, and sociologically agreed upon concepts of right and wrong, but evil truly does not exist? I would have to disagree because like you i have my own underlying assumptions that this world is not solely physical. But that is a different debate for a much LONGER thread. haha
[/quote]

if you dont know about Alber Fish look him up.[/quote]

not really evil, sounds like he had schizophrenia.

23

[quote]An evil gene? Thats silly.
No man tries to do evil…to the bad thing. We all think we are doing the right thing (the good), we just choose rotten ways of attaining it sometimes.[/quote]

Pure, complete, total bullshit.

There are millions of people, I assert, who do the evil thing BECAUSE it’s not good. These people hold the understanding of what’s right and wrong, G and E, and act in opposition to the former in favor of the latter.

Not from a deep-seated misunderstanding of the differences.

Not from even self-absorption to the point of being outside the law.

Some people just like to fuck shit up because that means some shit got fucked up.


Not so long ago, I was less than a nice guy.  I've never had problems education-wise, law-wise (well, nothing on my record, but "men of law" tend to dislike me by scent).  I at one point chose to seduce (or be seduced by) married women.  Not just [i]any[/i] married women, though.  If someone pissed me off, embarrassed me, or if someone just straight looked funny, I wanted their woman.  And more often than not, I could have what I wanted.

Not because I thought I was a white knight, come to save the hapless damsel.

Not because I thought it was the right thing.

I did it because the opportunity arrived 'bout the same time as my motivation.  Fuck what was right.

I was who I was because of choice.  Mostly.

There are undeniably physiological factors which contributed to my moral abandonment.  My family has generations of tales of debauchery, violence, and at least two run-ins with the Inquisition.

There are also environmental factors; had a real shitty child hood, to the point I no longer believe in the existence of children, only adults who can not yet be blamed for their lot in life.

So, to refute the quoted text, [i]yes[/i], some people do bad for bad's sake.  It's just a fucking fact.

To the article, if we could establish the existence of an "evil gene," and a test therefore, we could begin "treatment" (counseling, medicine, diet, etc) which would help a person have the best shot at being decent to other human beings.
24

Vash,

I totally agree. I went thru a stage in my life where I was extremely bitter and angry at the shitty hand i was dealt as a child and I took pride in not being a very good person. I justified my actions by thinking I was miserable so fk it, everyone else should be. I knew I was doing wrong and knew exactly why I was doing it, and it wasn’t for “good”.

But people would have to get tested at birth. So if a baby is found with the evil gene do we monitor them until there of age to be treated? Or do we treat them despite their age or parental consent immediately after birth??

25

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:
I totally agree. I went thru a stage in my life where I was extremely bitter and angry at the shitty hand i was dealt as a child and I took pride in not being a very good person. I justified my actions by thinking I was miserable so fk it, everyone else should be. I knew I was doing wrong and knew exactly why I was doing it, and it wasn’t for “good”.
[/quote]

thats just being an asshole.

26

700×469 82.2 KB

^ Loves assholes! Literally

27

^ were did you get that pic of print?

28

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:

This article describes scientists attempt to identify an evil gene and gives examples of murderers whose fathers were murderers and the creepy similarities of their crimes despite the lack of the fathers presence in the child’s life.

So I ask T-Nation, if we do indeed discover an “evil” gene should we monitor these people or imprison them, or attempt to alter their genetic makeup and “turn off” the evil gene. Or do we allow them the same freedoms as everyone else and deal with the consequences of their genetic predispositions?? And if we do grant them freedom of living normally, when some of them do commit evil crimes can they use their genetic makeup as a defense?? [/quote]

Even if an “evil gene” is found, all that means is that the person has a greater than average chance of becoming “evil”. No one is claiming that having the gene is a guarantee the person will actually do anything evil.

It is possible that left alone, a person with this gene would never do anything that could be considered evil by anyone’s reasonable definition.

Given that we’re talking about predispositions and not actual guarantees of a certain behavior, no one can possibly justify locking these people up or monitoring them in any way before a crime is actually committed. And do we have the right to alter their genetic makeup? Absolutetly not.

For the above reasons, I can’t see it ever becomming a valid legal defense. All the prosecution would have to do on cross examination is ask the defense’s genetics expert “will every single person with this gene commit evil acts?” And the response will be “No, only some people with the gene will actually do things society considers evil”. Any sane judge or jury would see the defense was totally invalid.

29

[quote]Kerley wrote:

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:
I totally agree. I went thru a stage in my life where I was extremely bitter and angry at the shitty hand i was dealt as a child and I took pride in not being a very good person. I justified my actions by thinking I was miserable so fk it, everyone else should be. I knew I was doing wrong and knew exactly why I was doing it, and it wasn’t for “good”.
[/quote]

thats just being an asshole.[/quote]

Depends entirely on the extremes one goes to “to bring the world down to their level.”

The fact remains, as long as there are people, they will do wrong to have done wrong.