Friday, March 23, 2007
Evil vs crazy
There's a series on the Discovery Times channel (I don't know what that name means either) called "Most Evil"
http://times.discovery.com/tvlistings/series.jsp?series=25220&gid=0&channel=DTC
Last night, I stumbled across an episode of the series called "Psychotic Killers," and learned of the horrific actions of some of our nation's most revolting murderers; I also learned that even indulging in the most nauseating behaviors imaginable did NOT guarantee that they'd be labeled insane. The most disturbing example was the case of Gary M. Heidnik, who kidnapped a half dozen women and held them prisoner in his basement; in addition to the standard physical and sexual abuse that a violent criminal would be expected to inflict upon captives, Heidnik added some sick twists... such as putting the flesh of one of the women who died under his abuse through a blender, mixing it with dog food and making the other women eat it. Is this something that a sane mind could even come up with, much less DO? Not in MY book, but, because Heidnik carried out his crimes in a systematic way over a long time, and was able to do things like make some $ in the stock market, he was judged to be SANE; this made me realize that, where grossly "anti-social" behavior is concerned, the psychiatric community is a little out to sea... their definition of insanity doesn't make sense, and they seem to not have ANY clear definition of, or even understanding about, what evil is.
It's easy to label someone insane if they're raving in a straitjacket or have lost all touch with reality, but what about everyone else whose behavior is demented? The program showed tests the experts have devised to determine if a person understands cause and effect and the consequences of actions, which are used as indicators of sanity or lack thereof; I'm sure they're valuable tools for proving the existence of mental problems, but where's the proof that everyone who passes those tests is SANE? On the other hand, if all that's necessary to pronounce one of these monsters "sane" is evidence of rational thought, wouldn't that make them ALL sane, since a totally irrational person couldn't carry off a crime like that?
You hear about murders that included deranged elements (torture, cannibalism, etc) all the time; how often were those crimes committed out in public? NEVER. The killers do their deeds in secret and hide the evidence. Doesn't that show that they KNOW they're doing things that aren't acceptable, that would get them in trouble if discovered? That sure sounds like awareness of right and wrong, cause and effect, consequences of actions, the whole 9 yards, doesn't it? These turds purchase or construct weapons/tools to use for torture, killing and body disposal, they take their victims places where they won't be seen, they make sure that their screams of agony won't be heard by soundproofing the room, gagging them or (Heidnik's trick) by playing loud music as camouflage, and they carefully choose and arrange "souvenirs" from the killings; compared to that, picking a few stocks is nothing. That's why it's problematic when the shrinks are asked if these "extreme murderers" are sane, eg normal people who just decided to do bad things, or crazy, as if those are the only 2 options; it's like examining a bird and trying to "calculate" whether it's a fish or a cat... evil is a whole separate entity.
Evildoers, and our fear of them, exert a huge amount of influence on the human race, so we're long overdue to understand these people whose brains cause them to imagine, and then DO, unspeakable acts; clearly, the brain of every such person is radically abnormal in some way(s), and we need to know exactly HOW, so that they can be identified, treated if possible, and removed from society when necessary. We need the answer to the question "What is evil?".
Is evil a form of insanity? Some crazy people mumble constantly, some smear feces on their walls, some harm themselves, and some do multiple "crazy" things; could evil be just another path that insanity takes, and when someone's evil and, say, believes that the trash can's talking to them, might that be conceptually no different than a crazy person who does both mumbling and feces-smearing?
OR, is evil a type of mental illness unrelated to insanity, and is just sometimes combined with insanity the way an insane person might also suffer from depression? (If evil turned out to be caused by an imbalance of neurotransmitters like depression is, that'd mean it could almost certainly be treated, maybe even cured; can you imagine?) Many evil types suffered crushing abuse as kids, and there's ample proof that the creation of a serious mental illness can result from that.
OR, is evil the result of a brain that functions in an unusual way but isn't "sick," in the way a retarded person's brain functions differently but they're not mentally ill?
OR, could an evil person's brain be physically different? They've found that pathological liars have more white matter in their brains than regular folks (see my post of 10-16-05), so it's not so far-fetched; also, from my spiritual perspective an evil person's soullessness would almost certainly require an abnormality in the part(s) of the brain responsible for soul generation... if we find a physical abnormality in the brains of evil people, will we have found the creation point for the soul?
OR, can evil come from more than one source, the way that more than one physical problem can make you cough... or does it REQUIRE more than one source to elevate it above regular badness?
We need to know what evil IS, how, or IF, it can be treated, or if we just need to lock evildoers up forever and throw away the key... and we need to scream in protest when well-meaning but misguided shrinks who can't see the forest for the trees try to make distinctions for which they don't have the knowledge instead of focusing on the main point; "This person committed horrific crimes, is a danger to society and always will be, and must never be permitted to breathe free air again."
http://times.discovery.com/tvlistings/series.jsp?series=25220&gid=0&channel=DTC
Last night, I stumbled across an episode of the series called "Psychotic Killers," and learned of the horrific actions of some of our nation's most revolting murderers; I also learned that even indulging in the most nauseating behaviors imaginable did NOT guarantee that they'd be labeled insane. The most disturbing example was the case of Gary M. Heidnik, who kidnapped a half dozen women and held them prisoner in his basement; in addition to the standard physical and sexual abuse that a violent criminal would be expected to inflict upon captives, Heidnik added some sick twists... such as putting the flesh of one of the women who died under his abuse through a blender, mixing it with dog food and making the other women eat it. Is this something that a sane mind could even come up with, much less DO? Not in MY book, but, because Heidnik carried out his crimes in a systematic way over a long time, and was able to do things like make some $ in the stock market, he was judged to be SANE; this made me realize that, where grossly "anti-social" behavior is concerned, the psychiatric community is a little out to sea... their definition of insanity doesn't make sense, and they seem to not have ANY clear definition of, or even understanding about, what evil is.
It's easy to label someone insane if they're raving in a straitjacket or have lost all touch with reality, but what about everyone else whose behavior is demented? The program showed tests the experts have devised to determine if a person understands cause and effect and the consequences of actions, which are used as indicators of sanity or lack thereof; I'm sure they're valuable tools for proving the existence of mental problems, but where's the proof that everyone who passes those tests is SANE? On the other hand, if all that's necessary to pronounce one of these monsters "sane" is evidence of rational thought, wouldn't that make them ALL sane, since a totally irrational person couldn't carry off a crime like that?
You hear about murders that included deranged elements (torture, cannibalism, etc) all the time; how often were those crimes committed out in public? NEVER. The killers do their deeds in secret and hide the evidence. Doesn't that show that they KNOW they're doing things that aren't acceptable, that would get them in trouble if discovered? That sure sounds like awareness of right and wrong, cause and effect, consequences of actions, the whole 9 yards, doesn't it? These turds purchase or construct weapons/tools to use for torture, killing and body disposal, they take their victims places where they won't be seen, they make sure that their screams of agony won't be heard by soundproofing the room, gagging them or (Heidnik's trick) by playing loud music as camouflage, and they carefully choose and arrange "souvenirs" from the killings; compared to that, picking a few stocks is nothing. That's why it's problematic when the shrinks are asked if these "extreme murderers" are sane, eg normal people who just decided to do bad things, or crazy, as if those are the only 2 options; it's like examining a bird and trying to "calculate" whether it's a fish or a cat... evil is a whole separate entity.
Evildoers, and our fear of them, exert a huge amount of influence on the human race, so we're long overdue to understand these people whose brains cause them to imagine, and then DO, unspeakable acts; clearly, the brain of every such person is radically abnormal in some way(s), and we need to know exactly HOW, so that they can be identified, treated if possible, and removed from society when necessary. We need the answer to the question "What is evil?".
Is evil a form of insanity? Some crazy people mumble constantly, some smear feces on their walls, some harm themselves, and some do multiple "crazy" things; could evil be just another path that insanity takes, and when someone's evil and, say, believes that the trash can's talking to them, might that be conceptually no different than a crazy person who does both mumbling and feces-smearing?
OR, is evil a type of mental illness unrelated to insanity, and is just sometimes combined with insanity the way an insane person might also suffer from depression? (If evil turned out to be caused by an imbalance of neurotransmitters like depression is, that'd mean it could almost certainly be treated, maybe even cured; can you imagine?) Many evil types suffered crushing abuse as kids, and there's ample proof that the creation of a serious mental illness can result from that.
OR, is evil the result of a brain that functions in an unusual way but isn't "sick," in the way a retarded person's brain functions differently but they're not mentally ill?
OR, could an evil person's brain be physically different? They've found that pathological liars have more white matter in their brains than regular folks (see my post of 10-16-05), so it's not so far-fetched; also, from my spiritual perspective an evil person's soullessness would almost certainly require an abnormality in the part(s) of the brain responsible for soul generation... if we find a physical abnormality in the brains of evil people, will we have found the creation point for the soul?
OR, can evil come from more than one source, the way that more than one physical problem can make you cough... or does it REQUIRE more than one source to elevate it above regular badness?
We need to know what evil IS, how, or IF, it can be treated, or if we just need to lock evildoers up forever and throw away the key... and we need to scream in protest when well-meaning but misguided shrinks who can't see the forest for the trees try to make distinctions for which they don't have the knowledge instead of focusing on the main point; "This person committed horrific crimes, is a danger to society and always will be, and must never be permitted to breathe free air again."
Monday, March 19, 2007
Does intelligence work against happiness?
Thanks to my friend Peety, whose highly entertaining blog is here
http://peety-passion.com/
I found a fascinating article by sociologist Bill Allin called "Why Intelligent People Tend To Be Unhappy," which begins with a thought-provoking quote:
"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know."
- Ernest Hemingway, author and journalist, Nobel laureate (1899-1961)
If you're puzzled as to how this could be, you haven't been paying attention; despite the lip service we give to how swell intelligence is, intelligent people are generally disliked and distrusted in our culture, and it's perfectly logical that they'd be less happy than average as a result. We hold intelligence in such contempt that even in the job world, where it should be eagerly embraced for its potential to make $, bright folks are often screwed:
"Western society is not set up to nurture intelligent children and adults, the way it dotes over athletes and sports figures, especially the outstanding ones. While we have the odd notable personality such as Albert Einstein, we also have many extremely intelligent people working in occupations that are considered among the lowliest, as may be attested by a review of the membership lists of Mensa (the club for the top two percent on intelligence scales)."
Or, as Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams put it:
"It turns out that the people who join Mensa and attend meetings are, on average, not successful titans of industry. They are instead - and I say this with great affection - huge losers. I was making $735 per month and I was like frickin' Goldfinger in this crowd."
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/11/are_smart_peopl.html
Even more important to happiness than job success is the ability to be a fully accepted member of the human race; we're social animals, and, while there ARE people who're content to be alone, nearly everyone wants friends and a romantic partner, and in general to fit in and be liked in whatever groups they find themselves in. It's no secret that many of the sharpest folks do NOT fit in; how do they get to be so socially clueless? It starts early:
"Education systems in countries whose primary interest is in wealth accumulation encourage heroes in movies, war and sports, but not in intellectual development."
That doesn't make SENSE; why encourage everything BUT intellectual development if your main goal is to accumulate wealth? Whatever the reason, that IS how it works in America, sadly.
"In classrooms, the smartest kids tend to be left out of more activities by other children than they are included in. They are 'odd,' they are the geeks, they are social outsiders. In other words, they do not develop socially as well as they may develop intellectually"
"Their emotional development, characterized by their ability to cope with risky or stressful situations, especially over long periods of time, also lags behind that of the average person."
This creates a vicious cycle, because the more a kid lags socially and emotionally the more they'll be excluded, and even mistreated, which makes them fall even further behind. Worse, unlike with most childhood problems, the adults in their lives aren't inclined to try to fix it:
"Adults tend to believe that intelligent kids can deal with anything because they are intellectually superior. This inevitably includes situations where the intelligent kids have neither knowledge nor skills to support their experience. They go through the tough times alone. Adults don't understand that they need help"
Even if parents and teachers DO see that a bright child is NOT handling things well, that they're friendless and solemn, they won't take action because that's what they're USED to seeing with bright kids; they accept it as somehow normal and ok rather than realizing that it's proof that the child has become a pariah and/or emotionally crushed and needs adult intervention.
"Western society provides the ideal incubator for social misfits and those with emotional coping problems. When it comes to happiness, people who are socially inept and who have trouble coping emotionally with the exigencies of life would not be among those you should expect to be happy."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8778/Why-Intelligent-People-Tend-To-Be-Unhappy
I really enjoyed this article-it filled in some major gaps for me. Thank you, Bill Allin and Peety. :-)
http://peety-passion.com/
I found a fascinating article by sociologist Bill Allin called "Why Intelligent People Tend To Be Unhappy," which begins with a thought-provoking quote:
"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know."
- Ernest Hemingway, author and journalist, Nobel laureate (1899-1961)
If you're puzzled as to how this could be, you haven't been paying attention; despite the lip service we give to how swell intelligence is, intelligent people are generally disliked and distrusted in our culture, and it's perfectly logical that they'd be less happy than average as a result. We hold intelligence in such contempt that even in the job world, where it should be eagerly embraced for its potential to make $, bright folks are often screwed:
"Western society is not set up to nurture intelligent children and adults, the way it dotes over athletes and sports figures, especially the outstanding ones. While we have the odd notable personality such as Albert Einstein, we also have many extremely intelligent people working in occupations that are considered among the lowliest, as may be attested by a review of the membership lists of Mensa (the club for the top two percent on intelligence scales)."
Or, as Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams put it:
"It turns out that the people who join Mensa and attend meetings are, on average, not successful titans of industry. They are instead - and I say this with great affection - huge losers. I was making $735 per month and I was like frickin' Goldfinger in this crowd."
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/11/are_smart_peopl.html
Even more important to happiness than job success is the ability to be a fully accepted member of the human race; we're social animals, and, while there ARE people who're content to be alone, nearly everyone wants friends and a romantic partner, and in general to fit in and be liked in whatever groups they find themselves in. It's no secret that many of the sharpest folks do NOT fit in; how do they get to be so socially clueless? It starts early:
"Education systems in countries whose primary interest is in wealth accumulation encourage heroes in movies, war and sports, but not in intellectual development."
That doesn't make SENSE; why encourage everything BUT intellectual development if your main goal is to accumulate wealth? Whatever the reason, that IS how it works in America, sadly.
"In classrooms, the smartest kids tend to be left out of more activities by other children than they are included in. They are 'odd,' they are the geeks, they are social outsiders. In other words, they do not develop socially as well as they may develop intellectually"
"Their emotional development, characterized by their ability to cope with risky or stressful situations, especially over long periods of time, also lags behind that of the average person."
This creates a vicious cycle, because the more a kid lags socially and emotionally the more they'll be excluded, and even mistreated, which makes them fall even further behind. Worse, unlike with most childhood problems, the adults in their lives aren't inclined to try to fix it:
"Adults tend to believe that intelligent kids can deal with anything because they are intellectually superior. This inevitably includes situations where the intelligent kids have neither knowledge nor skills to support their experience. They go through the tough times alone. Adults don't understand that they need help"
Even if parents and teachers DO see that a bright child is NOT handling things well, that they're friendless and solemn, they won't take action because that's what they're USED to seeing with bright kids; they accept it as somehow normal and ok rather than realizing that it's proof that the child has become a pariah and/or emotionally crushed and needs adult intervention.
"Western society provides the ideal incubator for social misfits and those with emotional coping problems. When it comes to happiness, people who are socially inept and who have trouble coping emotionally with the exigencies of life would not be among those you should expect to be happy."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8778/Why-Intelligent-People-Tend-To-Be-Unhappy
I really enjoyed this article-it filled in some major gaps for me. Thank you, Bill Allin and Peety. :-)
