
wishIwasSalludon
broken but not destroyed
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2023
- Posts
- 26,890
- Reputation
- 44,559
What if I told you the average person is much more malicious than you think? You're probably thinking, "Yeah, obviously, people are fucked; stick to r/14andthisisdeep." but you're actually underestimating
The historical evidence:
History is not seldom filled with atrocities. It was common in history to kill literally everyone in a conquered city; it wasn't uncommon to not even spare the infants.
These orders were carried out happily by "ordinary" men who just so happened to have become soldiers; they would eventually go back to their wives and children and wouldn't so much as lose a wink of sleep over what they did.
You may say, "Ok, that's in the past; surely a modern ordinary person isn't capable of such a thing." Nope, you're wrong about that, as I'll show in my second proof.
The experimental evidence:
The Milgram Experiment was an experiment that showed that a normal everyday person is willing to murder an innocent person if told to do so.
www.simplypsychology.org
Participants were instructed by an authority figure to administer increasingly intense electric shocks to a “learner” (an actor), who feigned pain and distress. The participants were told that the highest intensity shock could even be fatal, and yet a significant number of participants chose to administer the shock because the researchers said they had to.
The logical/philosophical evidence:
Peter Singer, in his paper Affluence, Famine, and Morality, makes a robust argument for why even ordinary people are evil according to our current ethical views.
https://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil308/Singer2.pdf
Imagine you're walking past a lake, and you see a child drowning.
You could swim into the lake and save the child, but there's a catch. The $200 shoes you just bought will be ruined.
Are you morally obligated to save the child? The answer issly yes (according to 99% of people).
The problem that comes with this is we make the choice not to save the child every day.
The clothes you're wearing were probably made by some Chinese sweatshop worker who lives off of 1 dollar a week and works 12 hours a day.
The cobalt in your phone was probably mined by a child slave in Congo.
The avocados you eat are literally called "blood avocados" because of the horrible slave-like conditions Mexican cartels put workers in.
So people know all this and yet keep consuming; this shows that you're no better than the man who walks past the lake.
Considering that most people won't even bother to round up when checking out at the register to donate should be proof enough.
@greycel @HimmyButlerV2
The historical evidence:
History is not seldom filled with atrocities. It was common in history to kill literally everyone in a conquered city; it wasn't uncommon to not even spare the infants.
These orders were carried out happily by "ordinary" men who just so happened to have become soldiers; they would eventually go back to their wives and children and wouldn't so much as lose a wink of sleep over what they did.
You may say, "Ok, that's in the past; surely a modern ordinary person isn't capable of such a thing." Nope, you're wrong about that, as I'll show in my second proof.
The experimental evidence:
The Milgram Experiment was an experiment that showed that a normal everyday person is willing to murder an innocent person if told to do so.
The Milgram Shock Experiment, conducted by Stanley Milgram in the 1960s, tested obedience to authority. Participants were instructed to administer increasingly severe electric shocks to another person, who was actually an actor, as they answered questions incorrectly. Despite hearing the actor’s...www.simplypsychology.org
Participants were instructed by an authority figure to administer increasingly intense electric shocks to a “learner” (an actor), who feigned pain and distress. The participants were told that the highest intensity shock could even be fatal, and yet a significant number of participants chose to administer the shock because the researchers said they had to.
The logical/philosophical evidence:
Peter Singer, in his paper Affluence, Famine, and Morality, makes a robust argument for why even ordinary people are evil according to our current ethical views.
https://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil308/Singer2.pdf
Imagine you're walking past a lake, and you see a child drowning.
You could swim into the lake and save the child, but there's a catch. The $200 shoes you just bought will be ruined.
Are you morally obligated to save the child? The answer issly yes (according to 99% of people).
The problem that comes with this is we make the choice not to save the child every day.
The clothes you're wearing were probably made by some Chinese sweatshop worker who lives off of 1 dollar a week and works 12 hours a day.
The cobalt in your phone was probably mined by a child slave in Congo.
The avocados you eat are literally called "blood avocados" because of the horrible slave-like conditions Mexican cartels put workers in.
So people know all this and yet keep consuming; this shows that you're no better than the man who walks past the lake.
Considering that most people won't even bother to round up when checking out at the register to donate should be proof enough.
@greycel @HimmyButlerV2
Last edited: