Korean Job Discussion Forums

[tfunk]

If a person commits an abhorrent act, that you wholly disagree with and believe should be punished, is it possible for you to also feel a degree of understanding for their condition?

There are devils that commit horrendous crimes and hells that these devils are doomed to live in. Some of the prisons around the world are not far removed from constant torture.

Do you believe that pain is an apt retribution for pain?

[beercanman]

If someone feels guilt over a deed, whether or not the deed was done intentionally, and usually things are done with forethought I suppose, then I might feel sorry for him. It's a bit harder to pity someone who has no sense of wrong though. Can't say I feel much empathy for sociopaths who fail to understand the wrongness of their actions. They may know in a cold way that their actions are against what society considers acceptable, yet they choose to act in a brutal, ruthless and selfish manner, having no feeling for others. For the very worst of these people I condone death.

[beercanman]

It's an interesting question actually. At least I think it is, so I want to say more. This will stray from your main query.

Revulsion and empathy are not mutually exclusive in most minds. In fact they are often close together. You see that garbage on the street? You see that homeless guy, ragged, dirty, looking pathetic? Without empathy for these sad sights one is not human. We all want pleasurable scenes to fill our days, and we react with either joy or disgust, or many other emotions, according to what we see. To simply look at displeasing sights is hard for most of us. The brain chatters and doesn't like the scene. When you just look or listen without that chatter it is really not so bad.

Still, serial killers and those as bad ought to be killed. That's what I believe anyway. I fully support the death penalty for the likes of Ted Bundy and others like him. Sick people who do not belong in this world.

[cherrycoke]

i think the way we try to change people to become more fit citizens doesn't work. We've proven it by sending people to jail and see them come out even crazier. Someone kills or hurts so we hurt them. There is no moral high ground in doing this, we just do it because collectively we are more powerful and because we can do it. That's really all there is to it. Maybe in the future there will be a more effective alternative to imprisonment.

[Joe666]

[Goku]

Empathy is a human condition that allows humans to co-exist harmoniously by understanding each other.

This should especially include those who are deranged or suffering from defunct social mentalities.

We should understand the problem in order to correct it. We don't have to sympathize with them, but we do have to empathize and understand their thinking.

Generally deranged killers and rapists have some sob story of childhood abuse. But not all of them. The human mind is complex. We should still try to understand those kinds of people. We don't have to feel pity for every case. Since there are some serial killers that do things because they are sociopaths or just remorseless.

Frankly, I hate sociopaths, since I can't empathize with them. As someone who suffers from a lot of guilt by doing the wrong thing, it's hard for me to empathize with that kind of situation. But we should always try. I know that sociopaths lack the same kind of chemical receptors that allow them to feel guilt as normal humans. Not necessarily their fault. It's their genetics

[Bramble]

I'm not sure what the OP is referring to, but in response to the question in the subject line, I think revulsion tends to get in the way of empathy. The example of the homeless person is a good one, and a person who is very sick would be another.

Until a few months ago I was friends with a person who'd been through some difficult experiences, and I felt bad for her. But my ability to empathize got weaker and weaker the more she talked about her problems. Eventually I came to feel she was an energy vampire and couldn't deal with her anymore, even though I know that what happened to her is terrible.

More recently there was an incident at work where a person was being disruptive. At the time my reaction was irritation, but today I began to feel guilty for not approaching the person to try to calm him down. I don't think anyone did try, because I think everyone shared my sense of revulsion toward the person's outrageous behaviour.

It's sad. The person did deserve our empathy, but that behaviour was alienating us all and making empathy impossible.

I wonder if "revulsion" was a poor choice of words, and if what the OP is really talking about is disapproval? My friend didn't commit any crime and neither did the disruptive person at work. Being homeless or sick or deformed isn't a crime, and if you got to know a person in one of those situations I think you'd naturally lose your sense of revulsion and become more empathetic. Moral issues are different ... I believe it would be impossible to empathize with a person who'd committed a crime you could never imagine wanting to commit in a million years, and easier if you viewed the crime as "understandable" or "excusable" in some way.

If someone harmed my little dog for no other reason than to get back at me for an Internet argument, I certainly hope no one would have any empathy for the person whatsoever. If there was a front-page story about an "Internet-bully revenge slaying," that would be different. I think we'd all say, "I don't approve, of course, but I can see how these situations can happen."

How all this relates to crime and punishment, I'm not sure. I think the purpose of putting someone in prison is to protect society and send a message of disapproval, not to make them suffer unnecessarily. If I empathized with the perpetrator I think I'd want them to get a lighter sentence than if I found their crimes completely unimaginable, but it would also depend on whether the person was still a threat and someone I'd be afraid of.