+Stefan Houtman The Karma system in Fallout was meant to be like the morality of old table top RPGs. You do a bad thing and you lose karma. That makes sense. It's supposed to be an objective measurement. What didn't make sense was that NPCs were omniscient and would comment on it. It's a shame that instead of trying to make it less shallow and improve on it, they just removed it.
+Stefan Houtman at least we have modding community to fix it or tweak it, don't you feel boring play fallout 4 without karma system? don't you miss regulator and talon company hunt you down for being evil or good guy ? man I miss those, if fallout 4 have this, i would not feel the world is empty, no souls on it.
Being a good person, no matter the ending, gave you the best version of the four story endings. You were loved, supported. In the evil endings, you were feared, a monster. In the neutral endings, you were simply... useful.
This week we had a serious discussion about morality, evil, 9/11, and videos games. Next week we balance a cat on our head while juggling geese. Stay tuned! Follow us on Facebook | Facebook.com/ShoddyCast Follow us on Twitter | twitter.com/ShoddyCast Follow Austin | twitter.com/arhourigan Support the show | www.patreon.com/ShoddyCast
Bruh, moralitys a joke in videogames anyways. We steal *everything*, kill *everyone* nonessential, and use all who we can as cannon fodder. Well, I do anyways.
+ShoddyCast the rothschild bankers are pure evil. 95% of the worlds assets are owned and controled by 7 people. the rothschild family is 9999999999999999 times worse then aodlf itler. 911 was a setup by the us regime and saudi arabia so the us could steal resources and afect political change also to feed the us war machine. the people in power are our enemies.
Although it made for really unsatisfying story telling, this is why I think Skyrim's civil war was a stroke of genius. Both sides had completely legitimate complaints, and both had completely deal-breaking moral corruption at their heart. Imperials offered unity, stability, the only real chance to survive the Aldmer, as well as all the benefits of a settled civilisation, BUT were powerless to stop the Thalmor repressing and disappearing people; and were an empire created by conquest of local cultures. The Stormcloaks offered freedom, independence and resistance to the clear injustices of the Thalmor, a chance to feel pride in self and country, and a continuation of culture and sovereignty, BUT they were led by a genocidal maniac willing to massacre anyone who opposed him, whether they were armed or not, and had an intrinsically racist philosophy with unrealistic aspirations to go against the Aldmer alone after fracturing the only real hope to defeat them. So yeah, both pretty shitty choices really. Stability and rule of law without the justice, or independence and freedom so long as you had the right skin colour and waved the right flags. Much like a real civil war.
The real solution should be for the drangon born to defeat whit a army of dragons the three, the stormcloaks, the empire and the thalmor, and then create a new empire whit the cult of dragons.
to add more to the skyrims storyline, according to blades philosophy you the dragonborn are the ultimate dragonslayer and must kill every dragon not only alduin but parthnax who you could consider as one of the good guys, he teaches you the dragonrend for example
Well, that guy came along and killed my mum by shooting her, but at least he did not take a chainsaw to kill her, because he once cut of a part of a finger, while carpenting. Seriously: are you as stupid as shit or worse?
This actually reminds me of the first time I cleared the federal ration stockpile in fallout 4. I went through and killed all the raiders inside, eventually coming across the named raider red tourette. She had notes about her sister being kidnapped and was showing a lot of concern and frustration about the entire situation. A few in game weeks later when I was sent back to the same spot to rescue a kidnapped settler from sanctuary. My mind concocted the sad story of red's lover having been away only to have returned and find everyone including their lover, who was grieving over her potentially dead sister, brutally killed and looted. In the weeks that followed they gathered together new raiders, learned that it was my character that attacked and then kidnapped a settler from sanctuary in hopes of luring me back to avenge their fallen lover only to meet the same fate.
I am still waiting for a game that let's you trow everything out the window. Like for example in Skyrim I would have wanted to join Alduin and sort of become his "Rider of Death" or something.
I recomend pen and paper roleplaying for that experience. Try Dungeons &Dragons 3.5 edition, pathfinder, or any game by white wolf. Local colleges and universities will probably have a gaming club.
+Peter Menzies I asked myself that same question as I killed the rebelling slaves . . . I didn't have the heart to take the infant from it's parents . . .
It doesn't even matter honestly. Immediately after putting down the rebellion I turned on Asher and killed him and all of his raiders, as well as any slaves who survived. All so a lone psychopath could pick up some sick-ass loot for his hoard.
+Peter Menzies The moral question with the Pitt was whether you'd do the right thing for the wrong reasons (Werhner) or the wrong thing for the right reasons (Ashur). It's arguably the most morally gray and ambiguous decision Bethesda's ever done in a game because there is no right answer.
@@hartianx1698 In a way, the Jedi are partially Sith due to the statement that Sith are the only ones to deal in absolutes. Perhaps Obi Wan was having his judgement clouded by the Chancellor?
Am I the only the one who thinks karma is a good mechanic but also a bad one, it made everything feel more realistic. But when you murder someone for no reason in the middle of nowhere everybody knows about it is stupid
+gir craft I think New Vegas did it best. It made it so that only if you were witnessed by people was it deemed bad, and it was only that group of people or that faction that hated you afterwards.
NV really did it good and I fucking hate Bethesda for how they undermine alot of obsidians great ideas. In NV karma was treated purely as how you and the people who spent every waking second with you opinion of well, You! It wasn't how everyone saw you and many people who shouldn't have known about bad deeds you've done unless it directly effects them ( reputation ) which had positive and negative effects where as in the previous game karma effected too much and too little at the same time while being very vague. While in fallout 4 they completely trashed the concept because they couldn't understand a way to implement it, as reflected in places like combat zone and quests that start off seeming evil but most likely were slightly rewritten to be more neutral.
YT recently introduced me to one of his videos and I was immediately impressed! I’ve been on a binge of his content and, holy shit is this some of the most entertaining and thought provoking material ever!
-_________________________- Be me wanting to learn karma mechanics >clicks video >first 8 min talks about different effects of organizations > nine minute mark talks about 9/11 >mfw when I just wanted to learn about game mechanics
I think your example of terrorism is actually pretty easy to label as 'evil'. In the two attacks mentioned, the action did nothing to further the goal of those involved, and their goals are ones that, by Western standards, are indeed evil. While one can argue whether a totalitarian theocratic dictatorship that openly declares women to be worth half of what a man is, allows slavery, executes homosexuals and has a "kill or convert" policy for all non-Muslims (and even Muslims who don't conform to their particular sect). While it is always important to remember they are human, if there is such a thing as evil they most certainly are just that.
+dave19941000 You've just disproved your own comment. You said, "by Western standards," their goals are evil. Yes, it is true that we believe that their attacks did not further their goals, but _they_ believed that they did, whether it be for religiously extremist reasons or somehow simply misunderstanding exactly what they've accomplished. Of course, somewhere along the line, those horrible beliefs had to be acquired by some of their ancestors; however, that isn't an argument that hasn't already been made. They were born and raised in a country on the other side of the globe; it is indeed hard to get inside their heads, but they nevertheless truly believe in what they do. They believe that they are good and that we are evil, and that they do evil just because they think "evil is good" is not the case (and even in that case, I yet believe an argument could be made for them, as could be made for anyone). And what about the Western nations? It's estimated that over 10 million died in the African slave trade; that's a hell of a lot more than 9/11. Although that's the past, that's quite hefty compared to the mere 2,996 that they managed to do. Sure, they've likely managed to pick off some of our soldiers, but that's peanuts compared to what the Western nations have done overall. You're probably thinking "yes, but that was done by people who lived hundreds of years ago; we are not them." It probably would have been pretty easy to whip slaves when your father did it, your uncle did it, and all the adults around you did it if you were young back then. Children are impressionable; everyone was a child once in their lives. It's very easy to fall victim to the influences of "evil," once you think about it.
Avalaxy11 You do realize that the Arab African Slave Trade lasted twice as long as was much more brutal then the Atlantis Slave Trade, right? Slaves where castrated, living conditions where even worst, and the odds of death where higher. But that's beside the point. The point remains in most parts of the world the intentional targeting of civilians is considered wrong for a long list of reasons. When it comes to Al Quida or ISIL, both their goals are inherently evil to those not following their religious sects, and both have the extermination of those not following their sects as their long term goals. While one can argue WHY that is the case, one cannot forget that these are groups who are by their very nature inherently a danger that need to be dealt with by someone, or else they will become a threat that can't be ignored.
I actually didn't know of the Arab slave trade until you just stated so. It's interesting and enlightening, and as you said, beside the point. My point is that both Western culture and Arab culture are capable of doing horrible things and, therefore, "evil." It's also inherently awful to do any slave-trading at all, as well as crimes like large-scale killing for no seemingly good reason. Both Western and Arabic civilizations have done that. The Klu Klux Klan, an organization originating purely of Western culture, has the goal of white supremacy. Their methods are of terrorism, just as Al Queda and the Islamic State. What I'm trying to get across is that both are equally capable of crimes against human nature. This alone should prove to you at least that both are capable of being pure evil, which isn't what I'm trying to do. By this, I imply that neither are pure evil. I agree with your saying that they are by very nature dangerous and cannot be ignored. But animals and natural disasters can also be this. The quality of being dangerous does not equal the quality of being evil.
Avalaxy11 The Klan is a bit of a bad example as despite its size in the 30s and 40s it actually did not do that much terrorist action when compared to contemporary organizations. In fact since 1970s they've only killed one person, and the one responsible for that was handed over to police without a fight. Their beliefs are horrible but as an organization they have been a non-entity for decades now. A better comparison would be for the partisans in Northern Ireland.
Sorry for the poor examples. I guess I'm sort of sheltered in the ways of world culture and only know about American stuff. World History class in high school has mainly only taught me about the World Wars and the periods of western Europe. All that I'm trying to say is that anyone's actions can be rationalized somehow. Whether the rationing is good or not is a whole other issue. But psychology can explain why people do such stupid things. Punishment is necessary when due, but there is never such a thing as pure "black" and pure "white" in any situation; actions can be summed up one way or another. It's just a matter of knowing that everyone has their own thoughts, ideas, and interpretations, and no one is truly good or truly evil. Some people are probably better to have around than others, but anyone could have become any type of person at any point in his or her past with any kind of influential experience.
I don't need an angry Vault Boy telling me if my actions were "bad" or "good", I think it was good Bethesda got rid of this system. Even in Fallout 1 and 2 it was unnecessary and made no sense.
+Sir Edel Kantholz In fallout 2 it didn't really tell you if you did good or bad unless you specifically looked for it. Granted, it didn't really change anything.
Devouring_One yea. but don't deny that you, if not, someone, has had that happen in a fallout game. to be fair I think the karma system is ok, just not on a realistic standpoint and story wise....this is a nuclear wasteland, not a PBS kids show, sometimes survival is more important than morals, especially in the setting, granted, this is a nuclear wasteland in an alternate history where america never got sick of the 50s but you should understand where I'm getting at when I say "IT'S A NUCLEAR WASTELAND" to be fair, sometimes the affinity system has the same problems as the karma system Seriously, Piper, I want to steal the key from the mayor so I can help rescue my *BABY SON*, I'm not trying to open a portal to fucking hell.
A year late, but yeah... All his premise is (and he convenently left out Hitler for that to work) evil is just an easy answer, instead we're should be looking for their motivations. And that strats to fall the moment you start to talk about, for example, slavery or Hitler.
+Matheus Boarini I think he left out Hitler because talking about why maybe he had reasons to do things he did might have been pretty controversial. Germany was in pretty poor condition, the punishments it received after losing WW1 were really harsh. Also, slavery has it's upsides too.
He isn't saying there isn't such a thing as genuine objective bad or good, more that on a pragmatic level you should refrain from quick judgments e.g. evil to make more informed moral judgments which include all the information possible, and to not let instinct drive your judgment. Absolute morality does not necessarily say x action is equally bad or good regardless of context, merely that objective answers exist in any possible case. Take a Catholic, for example, they believe suicide is by default a mortal sin (hence why in many places it used to be a crime), but they acknowledge there can be mitigating circumstances e.g. mental health issues (of course, I believe punishing someone for an action that's already self-punishing is both cruel and counter-productive, but hey, that's just me..
@@akev2794 depending on who you ask, almost all ethical philosophers would say that suicide cannot be a moral act. Some will say it's amoral and since would say it's immoral. I liked Kant's view on suicide which said that you cannot improve the quality of one's life by ending it. That is a great which argument to me because there is no real way to counter it. Yes, you can say that it reduces suffering but that doesn't matter because the life was not improved, it was ended.
Shroud Rehab Or it was shot-down and we went with the hero-people story so the public wouldn't go berserk at a necessary action. On the plus side, conspiracy theorists were more interested in pretending suicidal Islamic terrorists aren't real, that the real cover-up floated away.
Our Father Who AWPs in heaven CS be thy game, Uncase begun, them skins be won, Convert- and not a Mil-Spec. Give us this day a StatTrak knife And forgive us when we rage quit As we forgive those who aimbot against us And lead us not into scamnation Undeliver us a Battle Scarred Gaben.
I like how in depth you went into about how we view what is "evil". Not the video I expected from the title but I still really enjoyed the profound open mindedness and non ignorance.
You know, you can debate the morality of the Institute, Wall Street brokers, and the like...but when you look at people who are willing to set off explosives in areas populated by innocent people, or gun down men and women who haven't done anything worthy of death, there are few better words to describe that than 'evil'. Because when you knowingly and willingly pull the trigger on an unarmed, law-abiding civilian, I honestly don't give a shit what your motivations are at that point. There *are* things in the world that are unquestionably evil, and when you derive personal gain or pleasure or gratification, political or ideological, from the endangerment or harm of people who have done nothing to harm anyone and pose no threat to you, you've crossed that line. I'm fine with analyzing a morality system in games, but don't try to pretend that crashing a plane into a building filled with civilians just because they don't worship your god or subscribe to your beliefs or ideals is anything but *evil*.
+DrDemonHarlequin They're a problem don't get me wrong, but.... well, it doesn't seem like they have much else to live for. It doesn't justify it, but their religion seems to be the only thing they have. Something they would easily put their lives down for
It sure is easy to think that isn't it? Like he said in the video, seeing their side doesn't make what they did justified, but it does help keep things like that from happening in the future. Sure it's easy to say "this is evil" but it's worth it to look at yourself through their eyes.
id use another example, the terrorism of the IRA london n manchester bombings All they wanted was their part of northern ireland back. A devolved gov was the solution, the middle ground. one uk wouldnt have contemplated b4 the terrorism Now of course it has led to more surprises such as a hard vrs soft brexit A hard brexit would mean a solid border between northern ireland n ireland proper (Eire) This would break the good friday agreement/treaty n could lead to war/terrorism again Or a soft brexit where we remain in the customs union. Something many brexiteers are strongly against because of immigration n other trade related EU policies Thats ignoring current party politics! XD One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter who is simply so desperate having or feeling that theres no other course of action
Good and Evil are both subjective. Strangely this adds another layer of confusion to your video, and i am sorry about that. Good and Evil are subjective because our morality, ethics, and laws are different between each person. You and your parents have SIMILAR moral/ethical codes but even they are different. My brother and i even have different moral/ethical codes, he says violence is NEVER the answer and i see it as the last resort and a sign of a failure in solving the problem. these are close but different. Now imagine how people in china have a different moral/ethical code and you begin to understand why such things are subjective to the person.
you can say that for nazi germany too, it was bad killing 6 million people, but england killed millions of abrorignals, and were the ''good guys''. so this means that evil doesnt exist just people fighting for what they think is right.
I consider the pointless eradication of people to be 'evil', but again this is my point of view. Since both good and evil are subjective we codify some of our ideas of evil in laws against them. For example see the war crime laws that came from WWI and WWII. Humanity in general found what happened in WWII to be 'evil', hence the reaction we have today.
It also explains why conflict exists. Some conflicts are started because one of the sides simply doesn't care about morality. But sometimes (lots of times) it happens because both sides really believe they are doing the right thing. Like the cold war. It was really an ideological conflict, both sides saw themselves as good and the other side as evil.
I have been doing non-stop thoughts of how to word subjective morality and you managed to do it in a paragraph for a youtube comment. Props to you. I see a strong rebuttal of violence for violence's sake, people who will commit angry acts for nothing more than bloodshed, serial killers, phycopaths who simply do not have- or have lost- their moral sense. They are impossible to understand, and they can be the purist evil that the video talked about. Seemingly. Still, every person is born a blank slate with natural instincts in play. Parenting and the social world around us make us who we are, what we are exposed to forms our personality. It's so fragile, and having all the circumstances perfect for submerging morality and encouraging violence can make a person pure evil... Right? Well that and some sort of brain injury that rips away any and all emotions. I don't know if any studies looked into it, but the motivation could always be cold and hard reason with a spice of that coincidence making someone somehow reasonably believe that mass murder and violence is pure absolute evil. No massive figure has done this, not even Hitler, but still. Would that be considered pure evil, if someone somehow devoted themselves to murder? Did everything I just wrote answer my question, since it justifies that even then it's still human?
you are the literal manifestation of Milo Thatch from the Disney Atlantis movie and series. Incredibly well read and with a voice to match! Awesome videos!
"Ha" is "the" in Hebrew, and "satan" is "satan" in Hebrew... There is no "-" after "ha" but (not like in English) it's the first part in the word: not "ha-satan" but "hasatan"/not ״ה-סטן״ but ״הסטן״. And if you didn't got it, in Hebrew the word "satan" spoken the same way and its spoken as "hasatas" just when saying "the satan".
Evil is evil. Lesser, greater , middling, makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary, the definitions blurred. If I am to choose between one evil over another, I'd rather no choose at all...
But what is evil. If a good man, do a thing that he is sure that is a good thing, because he wants to do good things, but turn out that the vision of the good man was flawed and tunneled and has caused the painful deaths of millions? Is that evil? That hypotetical man had no ill-intent, and thought that what he do was the good thing, he do not feel that did anything wrong. Can you really say that man is evil, no he is not evil, he is good, is just that that man was a madman. If a evil man, do a thing that he is sure that would harm others for no good reason, and do it knowing that would harm others, and in fact do it because would harm others, but turns out that in fact, what he thought was harm, saved the humanity and destroyed the hunger in the world, saving millions of lifes-- is that good? That hypotetital man had only ill-intenten and thought that what he do had bring harm to others, he do not realize that he has helped people, he think that by letting them live, is torturing them, and he loves that. Can you really say that man is good? no he is not good, he is evil, is just that that man was a madman. TL;DR: The evilness of a person is on his intent. If a person willingfully is doing a thing that he thinks that would help other people, only for the sake of helping other people, that is good. If a person willingfully do a thing that he think that would bring unwaranted harm to other people, that is evil. For example, hitler is not evil, he really seemed to think that he was doing the good thing and the moral thing, it may have cause millions of deaths, but he do not percived that as being wrong, thus he was not evil, to be evil, you need to think that what you are doing is wrong, and still do it, hitler was just a madman and a product of his time, a time whit a very delicate socioeconomic situation.
I like how compared to Shoddy's other videos, I genuinely thought this would be a dissection of Fallout's karma system. Instead, I got the philosophy of evil as we know it. I'm all for watching both, and I lived the video. But the title was a little msleading.
It's just as you said. "Evil" is merely a label to give a face to which few wish to think in depth about, such as religion. Good, evil... They only exist in the mind of the beholder. Perspective, the tether that binds every idea and defines it. I say this so often how even if humans do horrible things, they must have a reason. Would you or someone you know do such things without a proper reason? What WOULD drive you do act in such a way? Are we truly as innocent as we would like to believe if there are those who hate us so? It's easy to think so simply when you're not directly involved in such matters. For example a man had his family taken hostage and was ordered to murder another person to get them back. He killed this person with witnesses. Can they rightfully consider this man "evil"? If things were so black and white, then soldiers, police, and acts of self defense in general could be considered evil indeed. At the end of the day, what truly defines our actions and who we are is perspective.
Thank you, for your trouble and the effort you had to put into this. The way you explain things not only gives the right amount of actual information, but allows me to understand the topic on a deeper level. So again, Thank you for doing these videos, and thank you for making them fun and knowledgeable. I can waste hours learning about what i love from someone who seems to think in a similar way as I do.
Christ this is THE best video on youtube. Iv had this same rationale bouncing around in my head for too long but i just couldn't bring it to completion but you just did. Also it was a excellent arguement for why we play games that seem adult. Im linking this one to fb and calling all those people that think i waste my time on games to watch it. Outstanding work
Dear Mr.Cast, or shall I just call you Shoddy? I just wanted to say that not only is this my first comment ever on RUclips, but this is my first comment ever, on any forum, for any reason. Currently I am cleaning my bathroom and listening to your brief discourse on evil. I have watched a number of your videos and I am pleased to say, as an information hound, your clips satisfy my neural desires. Synapses fire at astounding rates flooding my cortices with many complicated pleasure inducing and thought provoking chemical gymnastics. As a result I have paused from my chore to thank you for creating or reviewing content in a way in which I learn things without being overly irritated or bored. I appreciate your diligence to reason, science, and content. Thanks bud Not going to lie the offer, which imagine is super expired, for a random 1-up box, helped inspire my comment. Despite the fact I didn't really like anything in the box you featured, random swag is super alluring to me. Stay smart. Keep it coming. Thanks again
Yeah just like Sauron...which is why grassroot view is so important. Wether or not the average common folks benefit more from your change or they suffer, both in long term and short term.
This is quite possibly the most deep and philosophical video I've seen on RUclips (although I do tend to watch comedy so...) and, while I often consider philosophies, evil isn't something which you think about that much as it is a concept which is drilled into you. Actions are considered moral or immoral based on our understanding, beliefs and teachings which our predecessors or higher power(s) have taught us are fact. Good and evil are unnatural concepts which are heavily debated but we rely on them to keep our society running, things that we have no right to define but that only we can.
Why stop at colonialism? We could take a look back at when the Crusades happened, or before that when the caliphate expanded westward and conquered parts of Europe, doing exactly the same things colonials did to the local populations only more... medieval. Europe and the Middle East have literally been at war for over a thousand years. There is so much blood in the soil of both regions that the periods of peace between them should probably be considered the exception rather than the rule. We're both responsible for our own and each others suffering. Humans are fucking disgusting. :D
For those curious, it started before then with the ancient greeks n the 'sea peoples' (in bronze age? 3-4,000 BC ish?) They built city states in Persian territory n then went running to 'greece' when they faced consequences of that. Of crse 'greece' was gunna defend their ethnic citizens, land they'd 'conquered' n then ya had the persian war, battle of troy, the immortals, the 300 spartans n marathon etc (i write 'greece' because it was more a collection of city-states back then who each sponsored the creation of 'daughter' city-states, esp Athens in new territory, some of which was persian controlled albeit loosely) [interesting fact; some of these daughter city-states were around the coast of the Black Sea waaaay before Alexander the great conquered the area] Europe couldnt be touched while romans were strong n undivided n i think maybe the romans took persian territory too (wikipedia map shows the roman empire covered parts of northern arabia, parts mesopotamia (iraq/iran) esp the ancient tributaries of tigris n Euphrates rivers, down to the (red sea?) coast, Egypt and all of Turkey, and the east coast of the black sea to the Caspian sea, so it seems likely im right that that territory was persian/caliphate before Romans) which eventually led to the attacks against constantine roman empire which then led to the caliphate expansion into eastern europe after constantine n thus to the 2nd, 3rd n 4th crusades, so on n so forth the history goes
Another problem is contradictory claims. As the place where the first cities were built (Eridu, Uruk and Ur in modern-day Iraq), the Middle East has so many ancient claims on it that it’s impossible to say who it truly “belongs” to. Everyone fighting for their homeland there is technically correct, but also mutually exclusive. This is further compounded by the fact that not one but THREE major world religions trace their origins back to the SAME holy city in this region! And all have a claim on this Holy Land... sure, they could share it, but there are centuries of grudges layered over the brotherhood of a common root belief system. TL;DR, the Middle East right now is a place where “good” and “evil” vary based on ten miles difference and where your gun is pointing.
This is exactly why I am angry and frustrated with the world. "Calling something evil, instead of understanding the reasoning behind it.", I find it just baffling and irritating. For example when I try to say that the 9/11 attacks were America's own fault.", People think then I am defending the terrorists. Which I am actually NOT DOING, was it wrong for the Terrorist do those actions, fucking YES. it is painful to lose someone close. But should you be surprised that it Happened 'I SAY NO', considering if you look at History (the events before all this) and human behavior? What makes me even angrier, is that the 9/11 attacks were even used as a 'justification' to invade Irak, while something "similar" in history "CAUSED THIS REACTION IN THE FIRST PLACE". Just thinking makes me angry, maybe it is way for me to defend myself of people telling me that I live in a so-called "fantasy world", while in reality, most things we believe to think that are real are just concepts we "invented" and not actual reality, if you look from another angle, like for example "Touch" does not exist on the atomic level because "Atoms can't actually touch each other" so our brain make us think we feel the object. But when I say this people just get angry...sigh how Ironic life really is.
Thunder Spark Please, USA wasn't at fault for 9/11 - the terrorists, at least, bear the majority of the responsibility, if not all of it. If you think the Middle East is sk o innocent, I dare you to go live there. I lived in Lebanon from birth for 10 years, and know a few things. I know which part of the world has proper freedom and democracy, and it's not really there.
Did I say the Middle East, was innocent here? Both parties are at fault here. Yes, the Terrorist they bear the majority of the responsibility because they did the act. But consider this, what is the cause of the most of the problems today? Because of the past, and we still are suffering the consequences today. Look at history, and you will see that the US caused Ironically caused THIS REACTION. I looked back at history and every fucking time I see the that the USA has made the same fucking mistake TWICE. Once in Afghanistan and the second time in Irak. If you want a full detail of the history here it is: Feature History - Soviet-Afghan War ruclips.net/video/FDQLHFBp4aM/видео.html Feature History - Saddam's Iraq ruclips.net/video/84v9HpI0LvY/видео.html And they sell the same fucking bullshit as a justification to meddle again, to make sure the Middle East becomes democratic. *Do not get me wrong, I want to that the Middle East also to have it better. But considering the History here, I question:* *Is the USA really the right the power to do it?* Because I am sorry, with the considering the Current President, I am gonna see a lot of mistakes being repeated in the future.
@@akev2794 Sorry to butt in here but no part of the "civilized world" has "proper freedom" as you put it. Freedom is the ability to do whatever one wants without any hindrance. There are several countries we could both name where murder is illegal; if there were any parts of the world that have proper freedom there would be no such laws against someone conducting themselves in a particular way. America is supposedly "the land of the free" but nothing here is free. We have to pay taxes, follow laws in three different levels of government that are constantly under debate, and if we decide to go against these laws we're severely punished. If there are rules there is no freedom, sometimes even the wild has no freedom.
It's definitely hard being able to see outside a box a lot of other people would rather stay in. But as The Outsider from Dishonored said to Corvo near the end of the game, "It's funny how there's always just a little more innocence to lose."
@@lawrencemccaskill1544 You've presented a false dichotomy - either there is total freedom or a total lack of it. This is obviously a stupid way of thinking about the problem. Your definition of freedom is also self-contradictory, because one's freedom to murder goes against another person's right to life, for example. The closest thing to complete freedom that isn't self-contradictory in this way is the freedom over your own life, body and mind that does not also infringe on someone else's freedom over their own life, body and mind. And it's clear that such individual freedom is much greater in America (no matter what other problems I may have with America) than the Middle East in general. Apostasy laws are greatest in the Middle East, good luck being a homosexual in much of the Middle East, good luck being a woman in much of the Middle East, freedom of speech is much more prevalent in the West (though there have been some worrying trends lately) - the list goes on.
This video just cemented my respect for you as a person. I have had a massive intellectual respect for you since I started watching your videos admittedly just a few days ago, starting with the fusion core debunk. This stretching of moral concepts and discussing logic and reason behind actions, It's refreshing to know thank people still think about this stuff in place of just googling it. I would love to sit down sometime and have a beer with you, you beautiful person you.
Nathan Price yes, but that's not what I'm saying. Terrorism for example, like he said in the video, in their eyes there's a 'good reason' for the terrorist do the terrorism Or the Nazists, almost everyone agree that they are pure evil, but the Nazist himself thinks he's the good guy
Vinny Carvalho those people are brain washed they don't see others as people just enemies. they could fall under both sides. the people who have been thought it all their life to see them less than human they fall under the crazy side. the people who teach them that others are less than human those are the evil ones. keep in mind that evil spreads.
Nathan Price judging this, we can trace that the root of evil nowadays go strsight to Corporations and Goverment that brain washes the people and dehumanize the "enemy", that's a common army tatic to make soldiers do atrocities and feel good about it, because the target wasn't human, it was the enemy.
Everything on life has a *black and white side*, good and evil side because everything you do in life, every choice you make, has a black and white side consequences. I mean how would you call *killing, rape, terrorist*, and *discrimination*?
Sagnus1 Rape is not only about women you know? Killing is all depend who you're killing of course. Terrorist who target civilians obviously evil and criminals who commit a terrible action obvious evil.
+linkzellda "Rape is not only about women you know?" That was kinda the point, sadly it appears to be seen as a lesser crime (if it is seen as one at all) when done by a woman. It is somehow seen a 'lesser evil'. A little moral question for you. Are civilian deaths due to strategic military bombings (which *does* happen) somehow less evil than a deliberate terrorist attack on civilian targets and if so why? Are incidental civilian deaths any less tragic than deliberate ones?
Sagnus1 Death of a civilian is always wrong accident are accident but if an action is done on purpose such as killing civilian, then is evil. Also I now about morality better that anyone else on the world. The problem here is that people always want to make excuses for their action, and then claim that their actions have a valid justifications.
+linkzellda When you talk about killing civilians...USA used two atomic bombs during WW2 against Japan, they dropped it on cities full of civilians, however it was done because more people (civilians included) would die if they invaded Japan instead...do you think that killing civilians was wrong in that situation as well? After all if they didnt, even more civilians would die. Just a little thought...
Matthew33 Yes it was evil too, but Japan kill other civilians on America, I think. Either war World War 2 was a pointless conflict, and why you ask too much?
This was an *excellent* video, +ShoddyCast You've got yourself a new, loyal subscriber and serious fan! Thank you for making this wonderful series of videos! :D On the subject of "evil"... My parents raised me to be a critical thinker, they taught me scientific skepticism, logic and reason early in my childhood. I continue to recognize and embrace the benefits of critical thought in my life and I'm grateful for having received this type of education at such an early age. Analytical and objective cognition have contributed to my formulation of a working hypothesis that evil is nothing but a product of the human mind, rather than a physical, energetic, or psychospiritual-immaterial force of nature. I hypothesize that there are no evil people alive today, nor have there ever been, nor will there ever be, assuming reality remains mostly the same and follows the same physical laws in the future. I have maintained this hypothesis, about the probable non-existence of evil, since I was about ten years old and was able to move somewhat past purely concrete thinking. Over my lifetime I have repeatedly tried to challenge my hypothesis, test it, analyze it under the lens of new evidence to the contrary, but I have yet to discover any tangible evidence supporting the idea that evil is real, in any way. There have been many times in my life when I've certainly felt, in the heat of the moment, that something "evil" had affected me or someone else, however, after spending time contemplating these events, situations, experiences, actions, and behaviors that seemed evil, I always come to understand the etiology of what transpired to be unremarkable, natural and the product of many smaller explainable interactions. Time after time, negative experience after negative experience, after I analyze a situation or someone's behavior, I always find a logical rationale. These rationales are based on my observations of seemingly-evil events always being a result of a complex system of individual events that easily and logically explain the situation under analysis which are supported by verifiable physical, psychological, emotional, developmental, biological, social, historical, medical, and other scientific phenomena. I believe, until I find evidence to the contrary, that "evil" people are not inherently negative or bad, but rather that they are complex systems of systems, each person is the product of millions of minute physical, psychological, emotional, cognitive, genetic, developmental, behavioral, neurological, anatomical, physiological events, experiences, and interactions between themselves, other humans and animals, and their environment. I also believe that if one deeply analyzes the history of any person or event considered by some to be "evil", that a logical explanation of their actions can be uncovered and that person's humanity and psychological and emotional plasticity can be revealed, inspiring empathy and understanding for that person, no matter how "evil" their actions seem. We are all products of our environments, genetics, social interactions, and physical history of events and memories. Life, in its incomprehensible complexity and dynamism, can shape the malleable psyche and personality of human beings into limitless variations over the course of a lifetime.
Bravo my friend, you are certainly well rounded in the idea that human nature alone is paradoxical and ever changing. I said something similar during my introduction to psychology. Morality in it of itself is an illusion that we cling to to make the favored or desired choices we seek. I was delighted with you hypothesis and by the end I found myself pondering like I had before.
+Vampiric Coffee really morality is an illusion done by the weak to control the strong ?? :D you should read basic philosophy please your argument is the same as sophists time
Thomas Scally Not really a good or bad thing. Just an observation. I would say it's probably one of his influences as a video personality. Don't take my comment to mean that I disliked the video - it was interesting. You also could say in some ways that he is influenced by Vsauce as well.
To me Evil is a choice, a bear is not Evil, but a terrorist is. The bear is just trying to eat and survive, while a terrorist has no excuse for what he/she does, which is indiscriminately kill, enslave, or torture everyone they can because of vague reasons that they have been told justify their atrocities to the point where it's not greed, revenge, envy, or belief that is the reason for why they do things, but instead they do them because they choose not to do something that might actually help someone, anyone.
A terrorist is a hero to himself and other extremists not evil to themselves. they do what they do for the glory of god so I'll have to disagree with you when you say they choose to become bad guys.
The issue is that these people legitimately believe that they are doing the right thing, that we, in fact, are the evil ones. Human 'evil' is really just differing perspectives on the morality of... anything, really. To use another example, the current economic crisis was created because the economically powerful didn't care they were driving the world economy into the ground. They believe that increasing their own wealth is more important than protecting those without great wealth. We may not agree with them, but they still believe that. Morality is not an objective set of facts. It is merely individual beliefs on right and wrong- sometimes they're shared, and sometimes they aren't.
I find your view of the current economic crisis............................................................................. lacking. And generally people view giving to others to be more moral than taking for oneself. Most of morality is basically the same across the entire human race with some extreme divergences (i.e. ISIS, Nazis, BLM, KKK, etc) and it's only in details and grouping (who you with, who you not) that sort of thing.
Except cannibalism begs to differ. The practice often viewed as wrong on every level, but there are historically tribes who believe it honors their dead. There are some things most agree to be evil, but even those aren't universal.
In the case of cannabilism it is the difference in details, some believe it honors the dead (almost always considered a good thing) where others believe it dishonors the dead (again, almost always viewed as a bad thing), it's the reason why things are viewed the way they are that reveals morality, the beliefs behind the taboos and such.
This.... Is good content... Exestencial crisis aside, this is a very good video about a very important topic, I never expected this channel to dive into something like this, but I'm glad you did
The hit in the pentagon was a faliure only hit the outside they where aiming for the military officials who where further inside so only office workers where killed another example of not thinking your plans through
You should do some Rethinking with Halo. I've seen some pretty interesting theories about the Covenant and it's formation and why it lasted as long as it did. And that's just one faction within the Halo Universe
You need to do some more research on Christian "mythology." There are a lot of references to an individual entity, Satan, in the Jewish Torah regardless of the fact that Jewish tradition does not typically give that entity much acknowledgement. It's not something that Christian "mythology" just invented from an abstract Jewish concept. A majority of early Christians were also Jews. They were in a position to know whether Judaism's Satan was merely a concept or a reference to an actual entity. It's not something they just made up, because once again, they had been Jews for most of their lives before they were Christians. You should probably also not use the word "mythology" when talking about Christian theology. Some people might take it the wrong way.
Charles Lathrop The site above confirms what I said. "Zoroaster also recognized Ahura Mazda's twin brother: Angra Manyu, (a.k.a. Ahriman) the God of Evil. The only things that he created were snakes, demons, and all of the world's evil. 2 The old gods of the previous polytheistic religion became the demons of the new faith. Thus, Ahriman became the first Devil that the world has seen, and his assistants became the first cohort of demons under the control of a all-evil deity" The idea of "Satan" (I.E. a Devil/Creature of opposition) it is older than 300 BCE. Zoroastrianism dates back to around at-least 600 BCE. the same time as the Babylonian Captivity. Prior to this time in History, the concept of Hell/Devils did not exist in Hebrew thought, the idea of an oppositional deity/entity in a Mono/Dualistic religion begins with the writings of Zoroaster, and eventually trickled down to Christianity. All the Hebrew writings that use the idea of Satan as a being/entity were written after the Babylonian Captivity, and Judaism's introduction to Zoroastrianism. The idea of Satan being the creature that tempted Adam and Eve is a retroactive application. Now that Humans understand the nature of a Devil creature we can understand it. But in its time, the idea never carried the same meaning.
Video games can give great context to questions humanity as a whole should ask itself. Good? Evil? Do they exist or is there a vast grey space? Maybe all or neither of these. Video games are no less works of art than books or literal art in previous centuries. To see how we philosophically evolve will be wonderful.
Just blew my mind. I've always felt what you explained about evil, terrorism, short sightedness, empathy, and how games let you explore those things. But I've never said it out loud or even in my head. I've always tried to have the best morals I can and weigh my options with what outcomes I could expect. I definitely don't endorse terrorism but like you said its not as simple as just calling them evil and killing them. We need to learn from our mistakes, or the cycle will continue.
I think Vault 19 did go psychological testing being over sulfur and hearing voices, but the split dorms, and by the way, logs seem too have been in wrong locations, blue dwellers had some logs in red and red dwellers had some in blue, if I paid proper attention when I did it a few days ago, seemed to me to also test morality, as with the one where they were "supposed" to make a sacrifice. And the one where those over 17 were killed, probably as well as they could have tried leaving the vault.
I really appreciate these videos. Most youtubers are just out there pronouncing shit incorrectly. You talk about philosophical questions and do your best to honestly confront them
About evil, There was a book i read i think it was "Star wars Dynasty of Evil" or "Star Wars The Rule of Two" The apprentice of Darth Bane named Darth Zannah said was "E vil is a label we put on things that threaten us"
I know you've done power armour but I would like to know if P.A is controlled mentally or physically because I want to know how Ingram uses her power armour without legs!?
I used to view bullies back then as "evil" ever since I was harshly victimized by many. But, as I grew up, I begun to understand them more as fellow humans with either reasons or bad decisions they had in life which made them that way.
"Being evil and being cold are very alike, they are entirely a matter of opinion/perspective" Something i realized years ago and still say to my self frequently. partly because i am forgetful and need to remind myself, or because i'm telling it to someone else. While i am terrible at explanations i still stand by this.
I think Austin, this is why they refer to the enemy in videogames as the antagonist. Calling them the villain in many games where you're either an anti hero or the straight up bad guy makes things awkward. Since theres a niche category of games where you just enjoy being evil. In many games this is why theres a karma system; Because the enemy is always your antagonist. But your choices define whether youre the good or bad guy.
Yasher koach! As someone who studies terrorism as a research assistant in the university here, I can say you are completely right. I only realized this as I learned more, but you realized this without writing countless papers on the issue. :)
Saying that "there is no evil" is a pretty easy way out if you think about it. One could easily reason, that since there "is no evil," they can do what ever they want. Examining reasoning is all well and good, but dismissing evil outright is a very dangerous path to walk.
I never did like Fallout's karma system. "Oh, you stole this one random thing, nobody saw it, everyone hates you for it now."
it's like when you accidentally end up stealing something like a plate or whatever in ES and then the entire town is out to get you.
+Matt Allen dunt kill da chicken m8
+Stefan Houtman The Karma system in Fallout was meant to be like the morality of old table top RPGs.
You do a bad thing and you lose karma. That makes sense. It's supposed to be an objective measurement.
What didn't make sense was that NPCs were omniscient and would comment on it.
It's a shame that instead of trying to make it less shallow and improve on it, they just removed it.
+Stefan Houtman at least we have modding community to fix it or tweak it, don't you feel boring play fallout 4 without karma system? don't you miss regulator and talon company hunt you down for being evil or good guy ? man I miss those, if fallout 4 have this, i would not feel the world is empty, no souls on it.
I know. And with Some ES games you can completely trash a person's house with your sword but if you pick up one sweetroll all hell breaks loose.
Hey guys, the phrase you're mishearing is "I'll show you negative karma." Austin is a serious mumbler. Sorry for the confusion.
I thought it was clear
+ShoddyCast I misheard that bit, didn't have a problem with it though, big deal.
+on3lim1t I heard nega Khama
your theory was good but what about cathulu??
talk about Makar Camreon
I just wanted to know what karma did in new vegas
Changes who you can work worth and the ending slightly.
Oh okay
Being a good person, no matter the ending, gave you the best version of the four story endings. You were loved, supported. In the evil endings, you were feared, a monster. In the neutral endings, you were simply... useful.
Wowmow What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
Wowmow practically nothing it really serves no purpose since they added the faction system
This week we had a serious discussion about morality, evil, 9/11, and videos games. Next week we balance a cat on our head while juggling geese. Stay tuned!
Follow us on Facebook | Facebook.com/ShoddyCast
Follow us on Twitter | twitter.com/ShoddyCast
Follow Austin | twitter.com/arhourigan
Support the show | www.patreon.com/ShoddyCast
Bruh, moralitys a joke in videogames anyways. We steal *everything*, kill *everyone* nonessential,
and use all who we can as cannon fodder.
Well, I do anyways.
+ShoddyCast the rothschild bankers are pure evil. 95% of the worlds assets are owned and controled by 7 people. the rothschild family is 9999999999999999 times worse then aodlf itler. 911 was a setup by the us regime and saudi arabia so the us could steal resources and afect political change also to feed the us war machine. the people in power are our enemies.
Followup question: what is schmevil?
+max Pritchard thats subjective though......harming one may benefit another.
+Peter James Ledwith that may be bad for the other but good for me.....who decides?
I'm ultimate good, give me your money.
That's what the Catholic Church said once.
And continues to implement lmao
and in Danish. jeg er god. giv mig dine penge :_:
Need your money give I'm ultimate good
@@mikathomo391 Reddit moment
Although it made for really unsatisfying story telling, this is why I think Skyrim's civil war was a stroke of genius. Both sides had completely legitimate complaints, and both had completely deal-breaking moral corruption at their heart.
Imperials offered unity, stability, the only real chance to survive the Aldmer, as well as all the benefits of a settled civilisation, BUT were powerless to stop the Thalmor repressing and disappearing people; and were an empire created by conquest of local cultures.
The Stormcloaks offered freedom, independence and resistance to the clear injustices of the Thalmor, a chance to feel pride in self and country, and a continuation of culture and sovereignty, BUT they were led by a genocidal maniac willing to massacre anyone who opposed him, whether they were armed or not, and had an intrinsically racist philosophy with unrealistic aspirations to go against the Aldmer alone after fracturing the only real hope to defeat them.
So yeah, both pretty shitty choices really. Stability and rule of law without the justice, or independence and freedom so long as you had the right skin colour and waved the right flags. Much like a real civil war.
tSp289 *3 sides
All Hail the Dominion!
Ace Hearts Fuck the Dominion.
The real solution should be for the drangon born to defeat whit a army of dragons the three, the stormcloaks, the empire and the thalmor, and then create a new empire whit the cult of dragons.
to add more to the skyrims storyline, according to blades philosophy you the dragonborn are the ultimate dragonslayer and must kill every dragon not only alduin but parthnax who you could consider as one of the good guys, he teaches you the dragonrend for example
Well, that guy came along and killed my mum by shooting her, but at least he did not take a chainsaw to kill her, because he once cut of a part of a finger, while carpenting. Seriously: are you as stupid as shit or worse?
Every villain is lemons.
How did I get up here
You comparation iiiis aan uunaceptable coomparationn... uunaaaceptabaaaaaaal
i like lemons
My sister is writing a story that has that exact philosphy behind it. I feel like I might know you.
lemon party
This actually reminds me of the first time I cleared the federal ration stockpile in fallout 4. I went through and killed all the raiders inside, eventually coming across the named raider red tourette. She had notes about her sister being kidnapped and was showing a lot of concern and frustration about the entire situation. A few in game weeks later when I was sent back to the same spot to rescue a kidnapped settler from sanctuary. My mind concocted the sad story of red's lover having been away only to have returned and find everyone including their lover, who was grieving over her potentially dead sister, brutally killed and looted. In the weeks that followed they gathered together new raiders, learned that it was my character that attacked and then kidnapped a settler from sanctuary in hopes of luring me back to avenge their fallen lover only to meet the same fate.
You are a way better person than I am, to me she was still a raider so doomed to dirt nap.
Better writing in that 1 interaction you made up than the entirety of Fallout 4
I am still waiting for a game that let's you trow everything out the window. Like for example in Skyrim I would have wanted to join Alduin and sort of become his "Rider of Death" or something.
that would be great!
Far Cry 4. Wait for Pagan Min to come back in the beginning for your wish to come true.
Greg Ellis I know that xD, you can complete the whole game in 20 minutes this way :D
That would be a very interesting game for speculation and psychology.
I recomend pen and paper roleplaying for that experience. Try Dungeons &Dragons 3.5 edition, pathfinder, or any game by white wolf. Local colleges and universities will probably have a gaming club.
EVIL Every Villain Is Lemons
Lol oh spongebob
+Jacob Provenzano You beat me to it lol.
+BossHalo219 same
EEEVIIILLL!
+Jacob Provenzano UnnnnnacceptableeeeeEEEEEEEE
I just wanted to know how the karma system worked in fallout :(
nevary 😂😂😂
The world may never know
it doesn’t
this started to sound like a vsause video
Keeping a baby with his family in fallout 3 the Pitt, was this evil?
Kind of, because it means that the Pitt kept their slaves
+Peter Menzies I asked myself that same question as I killed the rebelling slaves . . . I didn't have the heart to take the infant from it's parents . . .
It doesn't even matter honestly. Immediately after putting down the rebellion I turned on Asher and killed him and all of his raiders, as well as any slaves who survived. All so a lone psychopath could pick up some sick-ass loot for his hoard.
+Peter Menzies The moral question with the Pitt was whether you'd do the right thing for the wrong reasons (Werhner) or the wrong thing for the right reasons (Ashur). It's arguably the most morally gray and ambiguous decision Bethesda's ever done in a game because there is no right answer.
yeah... i ate it
Oh im evil alright, yesterday i stole a pen from my local post office.
+Vesa Laine Oh and next I went to a bank and nice lady bank teller said to me that I can take a pen with me and I DIDN'T!
+Vesa Laine You're going to hell. That is unless you take a pen from the bank and leave it at the post office, then everybody wins.
i stole a pencil from ikea
I ate 32 baby's
#nettivinkattu
But in my point of view the Jedi are evil
*You gained karma*
But only the Sith deal in absolutes.
Made my day.
@@hartianx1698 In a way, the Jedi are partially Sith due to the statement that Sith are the only ones to deal in absolutes. Perhaps Obi Wan was having his judgement clouded by the Chancellor?
"THEN YOU ARE LOST"
Am I the only the one who thinks karma is a good mechanic but also a bad one, it made everything feel more realistic. But when you murder someone for no reason in the middle of nowhere everybody knows about it is stupid
+gir craft I think New Vegas did it best. It made it so that only if you were witnessed by people was it deemed bad, and it was only that group of people or that faction that hated you afterwards.
+Huzzamossi I think the faction thing was could have been done better, but the karma system was the shit
NV really did it good and I fucking hate Bethesda for how they undermine alot of obsidians great ideas. In NV karma was treated purely as how you and the people who spent every waking second with you opinion of well, You! It wasn't how everyone saw you and many people who shouldn't have known about bad deeds you've done unless it directly effects them ( reputation ) which had positive and negative effects where as in the previous game karma effected too much and too little at the same time while being very vague. While in fallout 4 they completely trashed the concept because they couldn't understand a way to implement it, as reflected in places like combat zone and quests that start off seeming evil but most likely were slightly rewritten to be more neutral.
it would've been awesome with perks that allow you to make people think you're a good person until you do or say something evil to them
Mario Zand ooo that would've been awesome
Seriously, this is one of the best reflections on Evil that I've ever seen in YoutTube so far. Thank you for these 16 minutes of learning.
YT recently introduced me to one of his videos and I was immediately impressed! I’ve been on a binge of his content and, holy shit is this some of the most entertaining and thought provoking material ever!
Holy cow. Philosophy never fails to amaze me. You just earned yourself a sub.
-_________________________-
Be me wanting to learn karma mechanics
>clicks video
>first 8 min talks about different effects of organizations
> nine minute mark talks about 9/11
>mfw when I just wanted to learn about game mechanics
I think your example of terrorism is actually pretty easy to label as 'evil'. In the two attacks mentioned, the action did nothing to further the goal of those involved, and their goals are ones that, by Western standards, are indeed evil.
While one can argue whether a totalitarian theocratic dictatorship that openly declares women to be worth half of what a man is, allows slavery, executes homosexuals and has a "kill or convert" policy for all non-Muslims (and even Muslims who don't conform to their particular sect). While it is always important to remember they are human, if there is such a thing as evil they most certainly are just that.
+dave19941000 You've just disproved your own comment. You said, "by Western standards," their goals are evil. Yes, it is true that we believe that their attacks did not further their goals, but _they_ believed that they did, whether it be for religiously extremist reasons or somehow simply misunderstanding exactly what they've accomplished. Of course, somewhere along the line, those horrible beliefs had to be acquired by some of their ancestors; however, that isn't an argument that hasn't already been made.
They were born and raised in a country on the other side of the globe; it is indeed hard to get inside their heads, but they nevertheless truly believe in what they do. They believe that they are good and that we are evil, and that they do evil just because they think "evil is good" is not the case (and even in that case, I yet believe an argument could be made for them, as could be made for anyone).
And what about the Western nations? It's estimated that over 10 million died in the African slave trade; that's a hell of a lot more than 9/11. Although that's the past, that's quite hefty compared to the mere 2,996 that they managed to do. Sure, they've likely managed to pick off some of our soldiers, but that's peanuts compared to what the Western nations have done overall. You're probably thinking "yes, but that was done by people who lived hundreds of years ago; we are not them." It probably would have been pretty easy to whip slaves when your father did it, your uncle did it, and all the adults around you did it if you were young back then. Children are impressionable; everyone was a child once in their lives. It's very easy to fall victim to the influences of "evil," once you think about it.
Avalaxy11 You do realize that the Arab African Slave Trade lasted twice as long as was much more brutal then the Atlantis Slave Trade, right? Slaves where castrated, living conditions where even worst, and the odds of death where higher. But that's beside the point.
The point remains in most parts of the world the intentional targeting of civilians is considered wrong for a long list of reasons. When it comes to Al Quida or ISIL, both their goals are inherently evil to those not following their religious sects, and both have the extermination of those not following their sects as their long term goals.
While one can argue WHY that is the case, one cannot forget that these are groups who are by their very nature inherently a danger that need to be dealt with by someone, or else they will become a threat that can't be ignored.
I actually didn't know of the Arab slave trade until you just stated so. It's interesting and enlightening, and as you said, beside the point.
My point is that both Western culture and Arab culture are capable of doing horrible things and, therefore, "evil." It's also inherently awful to do any slave-trading at all, as well as crimes like large-scale killing for no seemingly good reason. Both Western and Arabic civilizations have done that. The Klu Klux Klan, an organization originating purely of Western culture, has the goal of white supremacy. Their methods are of terrorism, just as Al Queda and the Islamic State. What I'm trying to get across is that both are equally capable of crimes against human nature. This alone should prove to you at least that both are capable of being pure evil, which isn't what I'm trying to do. By this, I imply that neither are pure evil. I agree with your saying that they are by very nature dangerous and cannot be ignored. But animals and natural disasters can also be this. The quality of being dangerous does not equal the quality of being evil.
Avalaxy11 The Klan is a bit of a bad example as despite its size in the 30s and 40s it actually did not do that much terrorist action when compared to contemporary organizations. In fact since 1970s they've only killed one person, and the one responsible for that was handed over to police without a fight. Their beliefs are horrible but as an organization they have been a non-entity for decades now.
A better comparison would be for the partisans in Northern Ireland.
Sorry for the poor examples. I guess I'm sort of sheltered in the ways of world culture and only know about American stuff. World History class in high school has mainly only taught me about the World Wars and the periods of western Europe.
All that I'm trying to say is that anyone's actions can be rationalized somehow. Whether the rationing is good or not is a whole other issue. But psychology can explain why people do such stupid things. Punishment is necessary when due, but there is never such a thing as pure "black" and pure "white" in any situation; actions can be summed up one way or another. It's just a matter of knowing that everyone has their own thoughts, ideas, and interpretations, and no one is truly good or truly evil. Some people are probably better to have around than others, but anyone could have become any type of person at any point in his or her past with any kind of influential experience.
This got more Vsauce-y then I was expecting.
"The winner writes history"
What is good and evil is determined by the authority
Authority is evil even though it didn't actually exist, it's a belief system. A religion/cult.
Authority = right to rule over.
No one has that right.
This should be a Ted Talk
Yeah
No one cared for 3 years😂
@@n0seless_793 true
This dude is probably the most insightful and smartest youtube gamer, love your show
I don't need an angry Vault Boy telling me if my actions were "bad" or "good", I think it was good Bethesda got rid of this system. Even in Fallout 1 and 2 it was unnecessary and made no sense.
+Sir Edel Kantholz In fallout 2 it didn't really tell you if you did good or bad unless you specifically looked for it. Granted, it didn't really change anything.
Joe Olson To be fair, that would be a bit communistic.
Devouring_One yea. but don't deny that you, if not, someone, has had that happen in a fallout game.
to be fair I think the karma system is ok, just not on a realistic standpoint
and story wise....this is a nuclear wasteland, not a PBS kids show, sometimes survival is more important than morals, especially in the setting, granted, this is a nuclear wasteland in an alternate history where america never got sick of the 50s but you should understand where I'm getting at when I say "IT'S A NUCLEAR WASTELAND"
to be fair, sometimes the affinity system has the same problems as the karma system
Seriously, Piper, I want to steal the key from the mayor so I can help rescue my *BABY SON*, I'm not trying to open a portal to fucking hell.
Joe Olson That never happened... I steal them even when I could make by without them :P
All it did was prevent you from taking cool things, killing annoying npcs, and all it gave you was that one person who gave you useless "gifts"
Didnt know this was a philosophy channel now...
+Waddehaddeduddedaa Where have you been? They constantly went into the "why" while doing the Storyteller series.
+Kévin Joly Yes, the series is based on someone hearing rumors or experiencing things, and retelling them. He is the STORYteller, not the Historian.
+Waddehaddeduddedaa Its the only way to seriously discuss karma
Great episodes.
I kept thinking "contractors on the death star" when you were describing companies like the umbrella corporation.
To your credit, you demonstrated the failure of moral relativism very well.
A year late, but yeah... All his premise is (and he convenently left out Hitler for that to work) evil is just an easy answer, instead we're should be looking for their motivations. And that strats to fall the moment you start to talk about, for example, slavery or Hitler.
+Matheus Boarini
I think he left out Hitler because talking about why maybe he had reasons to do things he did might have been pretty controversial. Germany was in pretty poor condition, the punishments it received after losing WW1 were really harsh.
Also, slavery has it's upsides too.
He isn't saying there isn't such a thing as genuine objective bad or good, more that on a pragmatic level you should refrain from quick judgments e.g. evil to make more informed moral judgments which include all the information possible, and to not let instinct drive your judgment. Absolute morality does not necessarily say x action is equally bad or good regardless of context, merely that objective answers exist in any possible case. Take a Catholic, for example, they believe suicide is by default a mortal sin (hence why in many places it used to be a crime), but they acknowledge there can be mitigating circumstances e.g. mental health issues (of course, I believe punishing someone for an action that's already self-punishing is both cruel and counter-productive, but hey, that's just me..
@@akev2794 depending on who you ask, almost all ethical philosophers would say that suicide cannot be a moral act. Some will say it's amoral and since would say it's immoral. I liked Kant's view on suicide which said that you cannot improve the quality of one's life by ending it. That is a great which argument to me because there is no real way to counter it. Yes, you can say that it reduces suffering but that doesn't matter because the life was not improved, it was ended.
@@alistairgrey5089 i never said it was good, just not comparable to murder...
3 of the planes found their targets, you forgot the pentagon was hit
There was 4 planes though 3 hit one went into the ground because the people on board stopped it
Shroud Rehab
Or it was shot-down and we went with the hero-people story so the public wouldn't go berserk at a necessary action. On the plus side, conspiracy theorists were more interested in pretending suicidal Islamic terrorists aren't real, that the real cover-up floated away.
Wasn't the one that crashed going for the White House?
Austin is evil for forgetting all of the planes :-D
The third hit the pentagon but that doesnt mean it hit its target it is believed that they where aiming for the officials inside it but none died
A surprisingly deep and meaningful conversation about topics that don't get enough coverage. Thanks for this.
If pure evil does not exist: Then explain Donald Trump...
No satan inspired me
+Raven Dodger A stupidity that pure can sometimes be interpreted as evil.
Ohh kind of like Jeffrey Dahmer you mean
If that was unclear to you, then yes that is indeed what I am not doing
+Over-The-Shoulder Boulder Holder Ya see...there's a thing called....a joke....maybe you should do some research on how we interact with eachother.
Our Father Who AWPs in heaven
CS be thy game,
Uncase begun, them skins be won, Convert- and not a Mil-Spec.
Give us this day a StatTrak knife
And forgive us when we rage quit
As we forgive those who aimbot against us
And lead us not into scamnation
Undeliver us a Battle Scarred
Gaben.
M3RK...MUS...1C. Amazing.
not really m3rk. I made 1 myself
HERETIC
I have come, my child.
halleujah
Just this episode should be a whole series. It's really important.
You know it’s gonna be good when he says the n word within the first 20seconds
Seriously thought a bridge moment was coming when we said "what a fucking"
@@greenbrickbox3392 same lol
Evil is a matter of perspective.
I like how in depth you went into about how we view what is "evil". Not the video I expected from the title but I still really enjoyed the profound open mindedness and non ignorance.
You know, you can debate the morality of the Institute, Wall Street brokers, and the like...but when you look at people who are willing to set off explosives in areas populated by innocent people, or gun down men and women who haven't done anything worthy of death, there are few better words to describe that than 'evil'. Because when you knowingly and willingly pull the trigger on an unarmed, law-abiding civilian, I honestly don't give a shit what your motivations are at that point. There *are* things in the world that are unquestionably evil, and when you derive personal gain or pleasure or gratification, political or ideological, from the endangerment or harm of people who have done nothing to harm anyone and pose no threat to you, you've crossed that line. I'm fine with analyzing a morality system in games, but don't try to pretend that crashing a plane into a building filled with civilians just because they don't worship your god or subscribe to your beliefs or ideals is anything but *evil*.
+DrDemonHarlequin They're a problem don't get me wrong, but.... well, it doesn't seem like they have much else to live for. It doesn't justify it, but their religion seems to be the only thing they have. Something they would easily put their lives down for
It sure is easy to think that isn't it? Like he said in the video, seeing their side doesn't make what they did justified, but it does help keep things like that from happening in the future. Sure it's easy to say "this is evil" but it's worth it to look at yourself through their eyes.
id use another example, the terrorism of the IRA london n manchester bombings
All they wanted was their part of northern ireland back. A devolved gov was the solution, the middle ground. one uk wouldnt have contemplated b4 the terrorism
Now of course it has led to more surprises such as a hard vrs soft brexit
A hard brexit would mean a solid border between northern ireland n ireland proper (Eire) This would break the good friday agreement/treaty n could lead to war/terrorism again
Or a soft brexit where we remain in the customs union. Something many brexiteers are strongly against because of immigration n other trade related EU policies
Thats ignoring current party politics! XD
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter who is simply so desperate having or feeling that theres no other course of action
Good and Evil are both subjective.
Strangely this adds another layer of confusion to your video, and i am sorry about that.
Good and Evil are subjective because our morality, ethics, and laws are different between each person. You and your parents have SIMILAR moral/ethical codes but even they are different. My brother and i even have different moral/ethical codes, he says violence is NEVER the answer and i see it as the last resort and a sign of a failure in solving the problem. these are close but different.
Now imagine how people in china have a different moral/ethical code and you begin to understand why such things are subjective to the person.
you can say that for nazi germany too, it was bad killing 6 million people, but england killed millions of abrorignals, and were the ''good guys''. so this means that evil doesnt exist just people fighting for what they think is right.
I consider the pointless eradication of people to be 'evil', but again this is my point of view.
Since both good and evil are subjective we codify some of our ideas of evil in laws against them. For example see the war crime laws that came from WWI and WWII.
Humanity in general found what happened in WWII to be 'evil', hence the reaction we have today.
It also explains why conflict exists. Some conflicts are started because one of the sides simply doesn't care about morality. But sometimes (lots of times) it happens because both sides really believe they are doing the right thing. Like the cold war. It was really an ideological conflict, both sides saw themselves as good and the other side as evil.
Rick Apocalypse - pretty much, but alot of people can not understand the idea of subjective morality.
I have been doing non-stop thoughts of how to word subjective morality and you managed to do it in a paragraph for a youtube comment. Props to you.
I see a strong rebuttal of violence for violence's sake, people who will commit angry acts for nothing more than bloodshed, serial killers, phycopaths who simply do not have- or have lost- their moral sense. They are impossible to understand, and they can be the purist evil that the video talked about.
Seemingly.
Still, every person is born a blank slate with natural instincts in play. Parenting and the social world around us make us who we are, what we are exposed to forms our personality. It's so fragile, and having all the circumstances perfect for submerging morality and encouraging violence can make a person pure evil... Right? Well that and some sort of brain injury that rips away any and all emotions. I don't know if any studies looked into it, but the motivation could always be cold and hard reason with a spice of that coincidence making someone somehow reasonably believe that mass murder and violence is pure absolute evil.
No massive figure has done this, not even Hitler, but still. Would that be considered pure evil, if someone somehow devoted themselves to murder?
Did everything I just wrote answer my question, since it justifies that even then it's still human?
you are the literal manifestation of Milo Thatch from the Disney Atlantis movie and series. Incredibly well read and with a voice to match! Awesome videos!
He still lacks a Mythical white hairded princess GF whit magical crystals
"Ha" is "the" in Hebrew, and "satan" is "satan" in Hebrew... There is no "-" after "ha" but (not like in English) it's the first part in the word: not "ha-satan" but "hasatan"/not ״ה-סטן״ but ״הסטן״. And if you didn't got it, in Hebrew the word "satan" spoken the same way and its spoken as "hasatas" just when saying "the satan".
In Hebrew:
ה=the
סטן=satan
Evil is evil. Lesser, greater , middling, makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary, the definitions blurred. If I am to choose between one evil over another, I'd rather no choose at all...
But what is evil.
If a good man, do a thing that he is sure that is a good thing, because he wants to do good things, but turn out that the vision of the good man was flawed and tunneled and has caused the painful deaths of millions?
Is that evil?
That hypotetical man had no ill-intent, and thought that what he do was the good thing, he do not feel that did anything wrong.
Can you really say that man is evil, no he is not evil, he is good, is just that that man was a madman.
If a evil man, do a thing that he is sure that would harm others for no good reason, and do it knowing that would harm others, and in fact do it because would harm others, but turns out that in fact, what he thought was harm, saved the humanity and destroyed the hunger in the world, saving millions of lifes--
is that good?
That hypotetital man had only ill-intenten and thought that what he do had bring harm to others, he do not realize that he has helped people, he think that by letting them live, is torturing them, and he loves that.
Can you really say that man is good? no he is not good, he is evil, is just that that man was a madman.
TL;DR:
The evilness of a person is on his intent.
If a person willingfully is doing a thing that he thinks that would help other people, only for the sake of helping other people, that is good.
If a person willingfully do a thing that he think that would bring unwaranted harm to other people, that is evil.
For example, hitler is not evil, he really seemed to think that he was doing the good thing and the moral thing, it may have cause millions of deaths, but he do not percived that as being wrong, thus he was not evil, to be evil, you need to think that what you are doing is wrong, and still do it, hitler was just a madman and a product of his time, a time whit a very delicate socioeconomic situation.
Thank you Geralt!! Rivia wishes you too return xD
I like how compared to Shoddy's other videos, I genuinely thought this would be a dissection of Fallout's karma system. Instead, I got the philosophy of evil as we know it. I'm all for watching both, and I lived the video. But the title was a little msleading.
It's just as you said. "Evil" is merely a label to give a face to which few wish to think in depth about, such as religion. Good, evil... They only exist in the mind of the beholder. Perspective, the tether that binds every idea and defines it. I say this so often how even if humans do horrible things, they must have a reason. Would you or someone you know do such things without a proper reason? What WOULD drive you do act in such a way? Are we truly as innocent as we would like to believe if there are those who hate us so? It's easy to think so simply when you're not directly involved in such matters. For example a man had his family taken hostage and was ordered to murder another person to get them back. He killed this person with witnesses. Can they rightfully consider this man "evil"? If things were so black and white, then soldiers, police, and acts of self defense in general could be considered evil indeed. At the end of the day, what truly defines our actions and who we are is perspective.
*non sarcastic slow clap*very good sir, very good! Yet another enlightened mind, ah progress.
Thank you, for your trouble and the effort you had to put into this. The way you explain things not only gives the right amount of actual information, but allows me to understand the topic on a deeper level. So again, Thank you for doing these videos, and thank you for making them fun and knowledgeable. I can waste hours learning about what i love from someone who seems to think in a similar way as I do.
i am going to say something racist...
something racist.
Madlad
A racist ahole: I’m going to say the n word
Me:THATS RACIST YOU CAN SAY THE N WORD
@@theTrevorluck mrs.obama get down!
N
Nirvana
All this moral relativism in the comment section is straight cancer.
Christ this is THE best video on youtube. Iv had this same rationale bouncing around in my head for too long but i just couldn't bring it to completion but you just did. Also it was a excellent arguement for why we play games that seem adult. Im linking this one to fb and calling all those people that think i waste my time on games to watch it. Outstanding work
This is an incredibly interesting and accurate view on human empathy in the form of a video based on a game. Wow. This is impressive.
Karma = Consequence
Dear Mr.Cast, or shall I just call you Shoddy? I just wanted to say that not only is this my first comment ever on RUclips, but this is my first comment ever, on any forum, for any reason. Currently I am cleaning my bathroom and listening to your brief discourse on evil. I have watched a number of your videos and I am pleased to say, as an information hound, your clips satisfy my neural desires. Synapses fire at astounding rates flooding my cortices with many complicated pleasure inducing and thought provoking chemical gymnastics. As a result I have paused from my chore to thank you for creating or reviewing content in a way in which I learn things without being overly irritated or bored. I appreciate your diligence to reason, science, and content. Thanks bud
Not going to lie the offer, which imagine is super expired, for a random 1-up box, helped inspire my comment. Despite the fact I didn't really like anything in the box you featured, random swag is super alluring to me.
Stay smart. Keep it coming. Thanks again
Handsome Jack is the Hero of the story!
Oh Jesus it's been so long since I've played a borderlands game, I think they're making a third one but my PC can't really handle anything past 2013
Behind every 'evil' act there is a person who believes they are working for the good.
Yeah just like Sauron...which is why grassroot view is so important. Wether or not the average common folks benefit more from your change or they suffer, both in long term and short term.
This is quite possibly the most deep and philosophical video I've seen on RUclips (although I do tend to watch comedy so...) and, while I often consider philosophies, evil isn't something which you think about that much as it is a concept which is drilled into you. Actions are considered moral or immoral based on our understanding, beliefs and teachings which our predecessors or higher power(s) have taught us are fact. Good and evil are unnatural concepts which are heavily debated but we rely on them to keep our society running, things that we have no right to define but that only we can.
Why stop at colonialism? We could take a look back at when the Crusades happened, or before that when the caliphate expanded westward and conquered parts of Europe, doing exactly the same things colonials did to the local populations only more... medieval. Europe and the Middle East have literally been at war for over a thousand years. There is so much blood in the soil of both regions that the periods of peace between them should probably be considered the exception rather than the rule.
We're both responsible for our own and each others suffering.
Humans are fucking disgusting. :D
For those curious, it started before then with the ancient greeks n the 'sea peoples' (in bronze age? 3-4,000 BC ish?)
They built city states in Persian territory n then went running to 'greece' when they faced consequences of that. Of crse 'greece' was gunna defend their ethnic citizens, land they'd 'conquered' n then ya had the persian war, battle of troy, the immortals, the 300 spartans n marathon etc (i write 'greece' because it was more a collection of city-states back then who each sponsored the creation of 'daughter' city-states, esp Athens in new territory, some of which was persian controlled albeit loosely)
[interesting fact; some of these daughter city-states were around the coast of the Black Sea waaaay before Alexander the great conquered the area]
Europe couldnt be touched while romans were strong n undivided n i think maybe the romans took persian territory too
(wikipedia map shows the roman empire covered parts of northern arabia, parts mesopotamia (iraq/iran) esp the ancient tributaries of tigris n Euphrates rivers, down to the (red sea?) coast, Egypt and all of Turkey, and the east coast of the black sea to the Caspian sea, so it seems likely im right that that territory was persian/caliphate before Romans)
which eventually led to the attacks against constantine roman empire
which then led to the caliphate expansion into eastern europe after constantine n thus to the 2nd, 3rd n 4th crusades, so on n so forth the history goes
Another problem is contradictory claims. As the place where the first cities were built (Eridu, Uruk and Ur in modern-day Iraq), the Middle East has so many ancient claims on it that it’s impossible to say who it truly “belongs” to. Everyone fighting for their homeland there is technically correct, but also mutually exclusive.
This is further compounded by the fact that not one but THREE major world religions trace their origins back to the SAME holy city in this region! And all have a claim on this Holy Land... sure, they could share it, but there are centuries of grudges layered over the brotherhood of a common root belief system.
TL;DR, the Middle East right now is a place where “good” and “evil” vary based on ten miles difference and where your gun is pointing.
This is exactly why I am angry and frustrated with the world. "Calling something evil, instead of understanding the reasoning behind it.", I find it just baffling and irritating. For example when I try to say that the 9/11 attacks were America's own fault.", People think then I am defending the terrorists. Which I am actually NOT DOING, was it wrong for the Terrorist do those actions, fucking YES. it is painful to lose someone close. But should you be surprised that it Happened 'I SAY NO', considering if you look at History (the events before all this) and human behavior? What makes me even angrier, is that the 9/11 attacks were even used as a 'justification' to invade Irak, while something "similar" in history "CAUSED THIS REACTION IN THE FIRST PLACE".
Just thinking makes me angry, maybe it is way for me to defend myself of people telling me that I live in a so-called "fantasy world", while in reality, most things we believe to think that are real are just concepts we "invented" and not actual reality, if you look from another angle, like for example "Touch" does not exist on the atomic level because "Atoms can't actually touch each other" so our brain make us think we feel the object.
But when I say this people just get angry...sigh how Ironic life really is.
Thunder Spark Please, USA wasn't at fault for 9/11 - the terrorists, at least, bear the majority of the responsibility, if not all of it.
If you think the Middle East is sk
o innocent, I dare you to go live there. I lived in Lebanon from birth for 10 years, and know a few things. I know which part of the world has proper freedom and democracy, and it's not really there.
Did I say the Middle East, was innocent here? Both parties are at fault here.
Yes, the Terrorist they bear the majority of the responsibility because they did the act.
But consider this, what is the cause of the most of the problems today? Because of the past, and we still are suffering the consequences today.
Look at history, and you will see that the US caused Ironically caused THIS REACTION.
I looked back at history and every fucking time I see the that the USA has made the same fucking mistake TWICE. Once in Afghanistan and the second time in Irak.
If you want a full detail of the history here it is:
Feature History - Soviet-Afghan War
ruclips.net/video/FDQLHFBp4aM/видео.html
Feature History - Saddam's Iraq
ruclips.net/video/84v9HpI0LvY/видео.html
And they sell the same fucking bullshit as a justification to meddle again, to make sure the Middle East becomes democratic.
*Do not get me wrong, I want to that the Middle East also to have it better. But considering the History here, I question:*
*Is the USA really the right the power to do it?*
Because I am sorry, with the considering the Current President, I am gonna see a lot of mistakes being repeated in the future.
@@akev2794 Sorry to butt in here but no part of the "civilized world" has "proper freedom" as you put it. Freedom is the ability to do whatever one wants without any hindrance. There are several countries we could both name where murder is illegal; if there were any parts of the world that have proper freedom there would be no such laws against someone conducting themselves in a particular way. America is supposedly "the land of the free" but nothing here is free. We have to pay taxes, follow laws in three different levels of government that are constantly under debate, and if we decide to go against these laws we're severely punished. If there are rules there is no freedom, sometimes even the wild has no freedom.
It's definitely hard being able to see outside a box a lot of other people would rather stay in. But as The Outsider from Dishonored said to Corvo near the end of the game, "It's funny how there's always just a little more innocence to lose."
@@lawrencemccaskill1544 You've presented a false dichotomy - either there is total freedom or a total lack of it. This is obviously a stupid way of thinking about the problem. Your definition of freedom is also self-contradictory, because one's freedom to murder goes against another person's right to life, for example. The closest thing to complete freedom that isn't self-contradictory in this way is the freedom over your own life, body and mind that does not also infringe on someone else's freedom over their own life, body and mind. And it's clear that such individual freedom is much greater in America (no matter what other problems I may have with America) than the Middle East in general. Apostasy laws are greatest in the Middle East, good luck being a homosexual in much of the Middle East, good luck being a woman in much of the Middle East, freedom of speech is much more prevalent in the West (though there have been some worrying trends lately) - the list goes on.
This video just cemented my respect for you as a person. I have had a massive intellectual respect for you since I started watching your videos admittedly just a few days ago, starting with the fusion core debunk. This stretching of moral concepts and discussing logic and reason behind actions, It's refreshing to know thank people still think about this stuff in place of just googling it. I would love to sit down sometime and have a beer with you, you beautiful person you.
evil is the opposite of good. if you know something is not good and do it any way that is evil.
It takes a lot on the point of view, most evil doers think they are doing the good thing
crazy and evil are two different things.
Nathan Price yes, but that's not what I'm saying. Terrorism for example, like he said in the video, in their eyes there's a 'good reason' for the terrorist do the terrorism
Or the Nazists, almost everyone agree that they are pure evil, but the Nazist himself thinks he's the good guy
Vinny Carvalho those people are brain washed they don't see others as people just enemies. they could fall under both sides. the people who have been thought it all their life to see them less than human they fall under the crazy side. the people who teach them that others are less than human those are the evil ones. keep in mind that evil spreads.
Nathan Price judging this, we can trace that the root of evil nowadays go strsight to Corporations and Goverment that brain washes the people and dehumanize the "enemy", that's a common army tatic to make soldiers do atrocities and feel good about it, because the target wasn't human, it was the enemy.
Everything on life has a *black and white side*, good and evil side because everything you do in life, every choice you make, has a black and white side consequences. I mean how would you call *killing, rape, terrorist*, and *discrimination*?
Sagnus1 Rape is not only about women you know?
Killing is all depend who you're killing of course.
Terrorist who target civilians obviously evil and criminals who commit a terrible action obvious evil.
+linkzellda "Rape is not only about women you know?" That was kinda the point, sadly it appears to be seen as a lesser crime (if it is seen as one at all) when done by a woman. It is somehow seen a 'lesser evil'.
A little moral question for you. Are civilian deaths due to strategic military bombings (which *does* happen) somehow less evil than a deliberate terrorist attack on civilian targets and if so why? Are incidental civilian deaths any less tragic than deliberate ones?
Sagnus1 Death of a civilian is always wrong accident are accident but if an action is done on purpose such as killing civilian, then is evil. Also I now about morality better that anyone else on the world.
The problem here is that people always want to make excuses for their action, and then claim that their actions have a valid justifications.
+linkzellda When you talk about killing civilians...USA used two atomic bombs during WW2 against Japan, they dropped it on cities full of civilians, however it was done because more people (civilians included) would die if they invaded Japan instead...do you think that killing civilians was wrong in that situation as well? After all if they didnt, even more civilians would die. Just a little thought...
Matthew33 Yes it was evil too, but Japan kill other civilians on America, I think. Either war World War 2 was a pointless conflict, and why you ask too much?
Please keep doing videos like this. They're so thoughtful and well done and brilliant in every way.
This was an *excellent* video, +ShoddyCast You've got yourself a new, loyal subscriber and serious fan! Thank you for making this wonderful series of videos! :D
On the subject of "evil"...
My parents raised me to be a critical thinker, they taught me scientific skepticism, logic and reason early in my childhood. I continue to recognize and embrace the benefits of critical thought in my life and I'm grateful for having received this type of education at such an early age. Analytical and objective cognition have contributed to my formulation of a working hypothesis that evil is nothing but a product of the human mind, rather than a physical, energetic, or psychospiritual-immaterial force of nature. I hypothesize that there are no evil people alive today, nor have there ever been, nor will there ever be, assuming reality remains mostly the same and follows the same physical laws in the future.
I have maintained this hypothesis, about the probable non-existence of evil, since I was about ten years old and was able to move somewhat past purely concrete thinking. Over my lifetime I have repeatedly tried to challenge my hypothesis, test it, analyze it under the lens of new evidence to the contrary, but I have yet to discover any tangible evidence supporting the idea that evil is real, in any way.
There have been many times in my life when I've certainly felt, in the heat of the moment, that something "evil" had affected me or someone else, however, after spending time contemplating these events, situations, experiences, actions, and behaviors that seemed evil, I always come to understand the etiology of what transpired to be unremarkable, natural and the product of many smaller explainable interactions.
Time after time, negative experience after negative experience, after I analyze a situation or someone's behavior, I always find a logical rationale. These rationales are based on my observations of seemingly-evil events always being a result of a complex system of individual events that easily and logically explain the situation under analysis which are supported by verifiable physical, psychological, emotional, developmental, biological, social, historical, medical, and other scientific phenomena.
I believe, until I find evidence to the contrary, that "evil" people are not inherently negative or bad, but rather that they are complex systems of systems, each person is the product of millions of minute physical, psychological, emotional, cognitive, genetic, developmental, behavioral, neurological, anatomical, physiological events, experiences, and interactions between themselves, other humans and animals, and their environment.
I also believe that if one deeply analyzes the history of any person or event considered by some to be "evil", that a logical explanation of their actions can be uncovered and that person's humanity and psychological and emotional plasticity can be revealed, inspiring empathy and understanding for that person, no matter how "evil" their actions seem. We are all products of our environments, genetics, social interactions, and physical history of events and memories. Life, in its incomprehensible complexity and dynamism, can shape the malleable psyche and personality of human beings into limitless variations over the course of a lifetime.
+Anodyne Melody FINALLY! Someone who gets it!
Georges-Antoine Bourassa Thanks! Much appreciated compliment!
Bravo my friend, you are certainly well rounded in the idea that human nature alone is paradoxical and ever changing. I said something similar during my introduction to psychology. Morality in it of itself is an illusion that we cling to to make the favored or desired choices we seek. I was delighted with you hypothesis and by the end I found myself pondering like I had before.
+Vampiric Coffee really morality is an illusion done by the weak to control the strong ??
:D
you should read basic philosophy please
your argument is the same as sophists time
"Christian mythology" un subbed, you can have your disagreements with religion without offending them.
You can disagree without actually disagreeing. You must actually agree. Yes, good point...
The institute theme is absolutely perfect for this video's topic.
All I hear is Vlogbrothers when this guy talks.
Is that a good or bad?
+Thomas Scally Good yo, very good. Vlogbrothers have some very deep subjects they go into.
Thomas Scally Not really a good or bad thing. Just an observation. I would say it's probably one of his influences as a video personality. Don't take my comment to mean that I disliked the video - it was interesting. You also could say in some ways that he is influenced by Vsauce as well.
+Rob Fike Nah, some people just talk like that.
To me Evil is a choice, a bear is not Evil, but a terrorist is. The bear is just trying to eat and survive, while a terrorist has no excuse for what he/she does, which is indiscriminately kill, enslave, or torture everyone they can because of vague reasons that they have been told justify their atrocities to the point where it's not greed, revenge, envy, or belief that is the reason for why they do things, but instead they do them because they choose not to do something that might actually help someone, anyone.
A terrorist is a hero to himself and other extremists not evil to themselves. they do what they do for the glory of god so I'll have to disagree with you when you say they choose to become bad guys.
The issue is that these people legitimately believe that they are doing the right thing, that we, in fact, are the evil ones. Human 'evil' is really just differing perspectives on the morality of... anything, really.
To use another example, the current economic crisis was created because the economically powerful didn't care they were driving the world economy into the ground. They believe that increasing their own wealth is more important than protecting those without great wealth. We may not agree with them, but they still believe that.
Morality is not an objective set of facts. It is merely individual beliefs on right and wrong- sometimes they're shared, and sometimes they aren't.
I find your view of the current economic crisis............................................................................. lacking.
And generally people view giving to others to be more moral than taking for oneself. Most of morality is basically the same across the entire human race with some extreme divergences (i.e. ISIS, Nazis, BLM, KKK, etc) and it's only in details and grouping (who you with, who you not) that sort of thing.
Except cannibalism begs to differ. The practice often viewed as wrong on every level, but there are historically tribes who believe it honors their dead.
There are some things most agree to be evil, but even those aren't universal.
In the case of cannabilism it is the difference in details, some believe it honors the dead (almost always considered a good thing) where others believe it dishonors the dead (again, almost always viewed as a bad thing), it's the reason why things are viewed the way they are that reveals morality, the beliefs behind the taboos and such.
This.... Is good content... Exestencial crisis aside, this is a very good video about a very important topic, I never expected this channel to dive into something like this, but I'm glad you did
4 planes and 3 hit there targets one in each tower one hit the pentagon one was grounded in a field
Funny how he glossed over those two planes...
+JRhoney why? it's probably no great consieracy just an oversight
The hit in the pentagon was a faliure only hit the outside they where aiming for the military officials who where further inside so only office workers where killed another example of not thinking your plans through
Shinigami-kun you started this, this rage of him cursing. WHY
You should do some Rethinking with Halo. I've seen some pretty interesting theories about the Covenant and it's formation and why it lasted as long as it did. And that's just one faction within the Halo Universe
I personally don't think Christianity is a myth...
I just think Myth is to inflexible of a word to describe a religion which people truly believes in.
Yeah, exactly.
Is a Myth, we cannot confirm those thing really happened, so its a myth
You need to do some more research on Christian "mythology." There are a lot of references to an individual entity, Satan, in the Jewish Torah regardless of the fact that Jewish tradition does not typically give that entity much acknowledgement. It's not something that Christian "mythology" just invented from an abstract Jewish concept. A majority of early Christians were also Jews. They were in a position to know whether Judaism's Satan was merely a concept or a reference to an actual entity. It's not something they just made up, because once again, they had been Jews for most of their lives before they were Christians.
You should probably also not use the word "mythology" when talking about Christian theology. Some people might take it the wrong way.
Originally the idea of Satan, is supposedly taken from Zoroastrianism and the god of Evil.
That is incorrect.
www.religioustolerance.org/chr_sat2.htm
Charles Lathrop
The site above confirms what I said. "Zoroaster also recognized Ahura Mazda's twin brother: Angra Manyu, (a.k.a. Ahriman) the God of Evil. The only things that he created were snakes, demons, and all of the world's evil. 2 The old gods of the previous polytheistic religion became the demons of the new faith. Thus, Ahriman became the first Devil that the world has seen, and his assistants became the first cohort of demons under the control of a all-evil deity"
The idea of "Satan" (I.E. a Devil/Creature of opposition) it is older than 300 BCE. Zoroastrianism dates back to around at-least 600 BCE. the same time as the Babylonian Captivity. Prior to this time in History, the concept of Hell/Devils did not exist in Hebrew thought, the idea of an oppositional deity/entity in a Mono/Dualistic religion begins with the writings of Zoroaster, and eventually trickled down to Christianity.
All the Hebrew writings that use the idea of Satan as a being/entity were written after the Babylonian Captivity, and Judaism's introduction to Zoroastrianism. The idea of Satan being the creature that tempted Adam and Eve is a retroactive application. Now that Humans understand the nature of a Devil creature we can understand it. But in its time, the idea never carried the same meaning.
+Charles Lathrop rekt
Get the fuck over it loser, it's all as fake as the Norse gods.
Video games can give great context to questions humanity as a whole should ask itself. Good? Evil? Do they exist or is there a vast grey space? Maybe all or neither of these. Video games are no less works of art than books or literal art in previous centuries. To see how we philosophically evolve will be wonderful.
I'm writing a paper on evil for a literary studies seminar class and I found this video quite useful!
I came into this video expecting one thing but wow, you just became my favorite youtuber in a single video
Just blew my mind. I've always felt what you explained about evil, terrorism, short sightedness, empathy, and how games let you explore those things. But I've never said it out loud or even in my head. I've always tried to have the best morals I can and weigh my options with what outcomes I could expect. I definitely don't endorse terrorism but like you said its not as simple as just calling them evil and killing them. We need to learn from our mistakes, or the cycle will continue.
I don't really agree with your answers, but i absolutely love that you ask these questions
I know it's not a new video but mad props on the Original Diablo soundtrack in the background on the end of the video.
I think Vault 19 did go psychological testing being over sulfur and hearing voices, but the split dorms, and by the way, logs seem too have been in wrong locations, blue dwellers had some logs in red and red dwellers had some in blue, if I paid proper attention when I did it a few days ago, seemed to me to also test morality, as with the one where they were "supposed" to make a sacrifice. And the one where those over 17 were killed, probably as well as they could have tried leaving the vault.
This is probably your best video. Certainly the best one I've seen.
This has to be the best video from ShoddyCast that I've ever seen.
I really appreciate these videos. Most youtubers are just out there pronouncing shit incorrectly. You talk about philosophical questions and do your best to honestly confront them
About evil, There was a book i read i think it was "Star wars Dynasty of Evil" or "Star Wars The Rule of Two" The apprentice of Darth Bane named Darth Zannah said was "E vil is a label we put on things that threaten us"
This went deeper then just a fallout video. I love you.
You could easily have an hours maybe days long debate about magneto, father and elder Maxson
I love that you had original Diablo music fading in and out
I know you've done power armour but I would like to know if P.A is controlled mentally or physically because I want to know how Ingram uses her power armour without legs!?
There are already some modern prosthetic limbs that can be connected to the human nervous system to function the same way real limbs do.
Evil is when you just finish reloading and you are about to kill your enemy and you are a fraction of a second late to shoot and you die
I used to view bullies back then as "evil" ever since I was harshly victimized by many. But, as I grew up, I begun to understand them more as fellow humans with either reasons or bad decisions they had in life which made them that way.
Thanks, Austin, now I know what Godwin's Law is [Knowledge Intensifies.]
You forgot about the plane that the passengers took back over and crashed. They made a movie about it. It was in all the papers.
"Being evil and being cold are very alike, they are entirely a matter of opinion/perspective"
Something i realized years ago and still say to my self frequently. partly because i am forgetful and need to remind myself, or because i'm telling it to someone else. While i am terrible at explanations i still stand by this.
I think Austin, this is why they refer to the enemy in videogames as the antagonist. Calling them the villain in many games where you're either an anti hero or the straight up bad guy makes things awkward. Since theres a niche category of games where you just enjoy being evil. In many games this is why theres a karma system; Because the enemy is always your antagonist. But your choices define whether youre the good or bad guy.
It is very alright that you stayed up thinking about this. The thoughts that made this video were good thoughts
Me and the bois knowing that pure evil exists because we met Micah Belle
Such an amazing video, gave me an entirely new perspective thanks!!
Yasher koach! As someone who studies terrorism as a research assistant in the university here, I can say you are completely right. I only realized this as I learned more, but you realized this without writing countless papers on the issue. :)
I just wanna say that I love your vids and the thoughts you raise and topics you brush over. It's great stuff and I hope you keep doing it.
Ah this is where devil advocate started
The idea of the existence of "evil" has been and still is one of the greatest banes to the existence of humankind ever faced.
Saying that "there is no evil" is a pretty easy way out if you think about it. One could easily reason, that since there "is no evil," they can do what ever they want. Examining reasoning is all well and good, but dismissing evil outright is a very dangerous path to walk.