Do evil people dehumanise themselves?

[Eulogy]

"He who makes a beast of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man." - Samuel Johnson

Making your opponents seem less human is an oft used tactic when you want people to be hostile towards a particular group. But somebody doing evil things - and getting caught - have no problems earning hatred from other people.

Granted, people do hate each other over stupid things as well, but that's besides the point. Do evil acts make a person less human? Do habitually committing wrongs really make a person less of a person, or do we, as emotions run high, just perceive it that way?

Does a person have to act like a monster, in order to be a monster, is what I'm trying to ask.

[Iroscato]

Interesting question. I think yes, people do eventually become detached from the rest of humanity by performing evil acts. It might be to do with just pushing it a little further each time, which eventually makes monstrously evil acts seem almost mundane and normal.

Detachment could also be caused as a way of lessening the guilt of a person, because even though they know it's wrong, it's still almost addictive.

[HeadCreeps]

or do we, as emotions run high, just perceive it that way?

This.

The acts of a human being, condemned by society and morally reprehensible, are still the acts of a human being. Given poor stimulus, there is in most, if not all of us, the capacity to commit acts which are either self-destructive or destructive to those around us. We sometimes refer to these acts as "inhuman" or "inhumane" because we are rightly encouraged to aspire to better than our baser instincts.

Does a "beast" decide to commit mass genocide on a race of individuals for no other reason than their belief system? Does an animal enslave others of its own species because of the color of its fur or skin out of principle? These are human acts. This is the darker side of humanity.

And really, these are terrible semantics. Does it really matter if those sorts of things are "human" or not? They're still ethically reprehensible and generally worthy of punishment.

[General Zod]

I think it's a load of rubbish. Some of the most vile acts in history have been perpetuated by people who thought they were doing the work of God or committing their acts for the greater good. Most people who commit these sorts of atrocities aren't going to think of themselves as evil.

[Surlethe]

Granted, people do hate each other over stupid things as well, but that's besides the point. Do evil acts make a person less human? Do habitually committing wrongs really make a person less of a person, or do we, as emotions run high, just perceive it that way?

What do you think it means to be a person? If you can't answer my question, you can't answer your question.

[Knife]

Indeed. To answer the question you need some sort of metric to measure it against. Most evil is a matter of perspective, in so much as what benefits one group and screws over another. Group A would obviously not think their actions are evil while group B would obviously think A is a bunch of evil fucks. You could compare them with their own rules, such as, if group A thinks it is immoral to do 1.2.3. but sees benefit in doing 1.2.3. to group B and so does it, by their own rules they are immoral and of course group B will think the same.

So really, we need a definition of evil and a definition of a person to measure.

[Sarevok]

The idea that people suddenly transform into "monsters" itself is a nice way to dehumanize human beings.

It is also a dangerous line of thinking, we like to believe men like Hitler were psycopaths, monsters or abominations. Instead of being wary that it is people like us that ultimately commit unthinkable acts and believe they are doing the right things. That given the right impetus any of us could be party to evil acts large or small.

[Surlethe]

Even within modern society, different subcultures think that the rest of society is party to evil acts, partly dehumanizing them. Two examples from the US. Consider how (conservative) evangelicals think of abortionists and the pro choice movement in general: as willfully ignoring the humanity of the fetus. It's no accident they consider the US 1973-present as morally equivalent to Nazi Germany during the holocaust. Or consider how the nonreligious subculture thinks of the (conservative) evangelical desire to impose theological constraints on the country, e.g., outlawing gay marriage and abortion. They think of this restriction of freedom as evil, and of (conservative) evangelicals as party to this evil.

[Rossum]

I'm sure that throuout human history therer have been people who did morally reprehensable acts and subsequently stared distancing themselves from the rest of society to cope with it, effectively becoming a monster or somesuch.

Also, there can be people who are socially maladjusted and willing to perform horrible acts because of this. Although I'm not sure how sucessful that sort of person could be.

I'd argue that the greatest amount of damage (or most evil acts) are those caused by large numbers of people working together. One mentally disturbed serial killer who kidnapps children and tortures them to death to get their souls into heaven could at best kill X number of children before being caught, and hopefully his disturbed status would make him show warning signs that would get other people in society to notice him and stop him.

However, acts of mass genocide or warfare like the holocaust, the Japanese biowarefare program during WW2, the extermination of the Native American tribes, and other things were carried out by large numbers of humans working together. Even if the act of commiting genocide against another group of humans makes the attacers turn into monsters or somesuch then if enough people do it then they all turn into monsters. If there are 'normal' humans in that society who start pointing out how the goniciders have turned into werewolves or whatever, then it wouldn't be hard to imagine the 'monsters' deciding to kill off anyone who argues against them.


Basically, history is written by the winners and if all the winners won by turning in to monsters then they'll just call themselves human and write history to say whatever they want. One monster living in a society of humans is a freak, a society of monsters will call themselves humans and call any humans who oppose them monsters.

[Alyrium Denryle]

The idea that people suddenly transform into "monsters" itself is a nice way to dehumanize human beings.

It is also a dangerous line of thinking, we like to believe men like Hitler were psycopaths, monsters or abominations. Instead of being wary that it is people like us that ultimately commit unthinkable acts and believe they are doing the right things. That given the right impetus any of us could be party to evil acts large or small.

This. Absolutely correct. It has even been shown experimentally in the Prison Experiment and others. Given the "right" conditions, normal people can and will do horrible things and setting up these conditions is very very easy. You can get some two thirds of all people--randomly selected--to shock another to death with just a lab coat and the perception of authority.