Why are there sadistic killers?
-
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: March 30th, 2014, 2:18 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
One is the desire to do the act, the second is the belief that one can "get away with it". The knowledge that the act is "wrong" is paramount since folks don't need to "get away with" acts that are acceptable, only with those that are "wrong". I will concede that some of these wrongdoers truly understand that their acts are wrong, while others would substitute "socially unacceptable to the point of punishment" for "wrong". From a practical standpoint there is no difference but within their minds there could be.
There are plenty more people/entities that would perform these atrocities than actually do, because they fail the second test, they don't think they can get away with it and thus have the desire but not the opportunity. I guess the Law can claim a moral victory in those cases, albeit they are silent cases since there is never a bad outcome.
As to the first, the desire to perform atrocities, or at least atrocious behavior, the OP's examples are, of course, outliers on a scale where there are many, many individuals who are closer to the mean. It can be said that the difference between Jeff Dahmer, someone guilty of animal cruelty (a misdemeanor in most states), and the office practical jokester with a known mean streak is all a matter of scale.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
I disagree that the difference between extreme acts of sadism and more common examples of malice is a matter of scale. I think that certain violent acts are qualitatively different. It seems that amongst both apes and humans, violence can be used in such a way that it holds meaning in itself, rather than purely being a means to an end. Serial killers who torture and murder their victims in sadistic ways is one example; there is also the example of human sacrifice. For example, worshippers to the god Molech were said to have their own children burned alive, the Druids were known to burn a group of people inside a giant wicker man, and some Native American peoples were known to have sacrificed some victims by carving the heart from their chest. It is possible that these forms of sadistic yet meaningful violence have a relation to the "ritual" murder and mutilation example by chimpanzees mentioned in the OP.LuckyR wrote:
As to the first, the desire to perform atrocities, or at least atrocious behavior, the OP's examples are, of course, outliers on a scale where there are many, many individuals who are closer to the mean. It can be said that the difference between Jeff Dahmer, someone guilty of animal cruelty (a misdemeanor in most states), and the office practical jokester with a known mean streak is all a matter of scale.
- Misty
- Premium Member
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: August 10th, 2011, 8:13 pm
- Location: United States of America
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
Do you believe humans come from the chimps? Is this why you compare chimps and human behavior? I agree it is not always a matter of scale or non killers following killers would be more rare.Mysterio448 wrote:
I disagree that the difference between extreme acts of sadism and more common examples of malice is a matter of scale. I think that certain violent acts are qualitatively different. It seems that amongst both apes and humans, violence can be used in such a way that it holds meaning in itself, rather than purely being a means to an end. Serial killers who torture and murder their victims in sadistic ways is one example; there is also the example of human sacrifice. For example, worshippers to the god Molech were said to have their own children burned alive, the Druids were known to burn a group of people inside a giant wicker man, and some Native American peoples were known to have sacrificed some victims by carving the heart from their chest. It is possible that these forms of sadistic yet meaningful violence have a relation to the "ritual" murder and mutilation example by chimpanzees mentioned in the OP.
The eyes can only see what the mind has, is, or will be prepared to comprehend.
I am Lion, hear me ROAR! Meow.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
I believe that humans share a common ancestor with the chimps, as according to the theory of evolution. I find it useful to remind myself that humans are animals just as any other animal. We like to think of ourselves as somehow above or altogether different from all the other animals, but I disagree. I think we have certain primal instincts just as any other animal, and I think we can learn about our own instincts by studying our closest kin in the animal kingdom.Misty wrote:Do you believe humans come from the chimps? Is this why you compare chimps and human behavior? I agree it is not always a matter of scale or non killers following killers would be more rare.Mysterio448 wrote:
I disagree that the difference between extreme acts of sadism and more common examples of malice is a matter of scale. I think that certain violent acts are qualitatively different. It seems that amongst both apes and humans, violence can be used in such a way that it holds meaning in itself, rather than purely being a means to an end. Serial killers who torture and murder their victims in sadistic ways is one example; there is also the example of human sacrifice. For example, worshippers to the god Molech were said to have their own children burned alive, the Druids were known to burn a group of people inside a giant wicker man, and some Native American peoples were known to have sacrificed some victims by carving the heart from their chest. It is possible that these forms of sadistic yet meaningful violence have a relation to the "ritual" murder and mutilation example by chimpanzees mentioned in the OP.
-
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: March 30th, 2014, 2:18 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
So to you killing a human is the same thing as killing an ant?Mysterio448 wrote:
I believe that humans share a common ancestor with the chimps, as according to the theory of evolution. I find it useful to remind myself that humans are animals just as any other animal. We like to think of ourselves as somehow above or altogether different from all the other animals, but I disagree.
While that's true do you see any chimpanzees producing literary masterpieces of Shakespearean quality? Are they sending rockets to the moon and back?I think we have certain primal instincts just as any other animal, and I think we can learn about our own instincts by studying our closest kin in the animal kingdom.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
Of course not. I care more about human life than ant life, but that's just how I personally feel; it doesn't mean that ant life is objectively any less important. For that matter, I would assume that ants value ant life more than human life -- and that's their prerogative.Ruskin wrote:So to you killing a human is the same thing as killing an ant?Mysterio448 wrote:
I believe that humans share a common ancestor with the chimps, as according to the theory of evolution. I find it useful to remind myself that humans are animals just as any other animal. We like to think of ourselves as somehow above or altogether different from all the other animals, but I disagree.
I agree that our intelligence gives us an exponentially greater amount of latitude in our possibilities, but the heights of our lofty accomplishments do not negate the depths of our primal nature. We are still animals; really, really smart animals, but animals nonetheless.While that's true do you see any chimpanzees producing literary masterpieces of Shakespearean quality? Are they sending rockets to the moon and back?I think we have certain primal instincts just as any other animal, and I think we can learn about our own instincts by studying our closest kin in the animal kingdom.
-
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: March 30th, 2014, 2:18 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
So if I were to kill a random human and then tread on an ant and claim that to me both these things are equal in my own opinion then that would be fine with you. We would have difference of opinion but we could agree to disagree because the objective fact is that humans and ants are equally the same thing. There no point trying to argue over personal preference, say my favourite colour is blue, you don't get argue about this and say the better colour is red.Mysterio448 wrote:
Of course not. I care more about human life than ant life, but that's just how I personally feel; it doesn't mean that ant life is objectively any less important.
I don't think they have a concept of values or if they're even sentiently aware of anything at all.For that matter, I would assume that ants value ant life more than human life -- and that's their prerogative.
Say a man married a woman with children from a previous marriage and she did not want more children, would it be socially acceptable for the man to kill her children and so bringing her into reproductive readiness? It's something a male lion will do to cubs he didn't father should he take over a pride of lionesses. It's something even male chimps have been know to do and it makes good sense on an evolutionary level as it preserves your genetic lineage. If we were just more intelligent animals then why are we not behaving in such an amoral fashion?I agree that our intelligence gives us an exponentially greater amount of latitude in our possibilities, but the heights of our lofty accomplishments do not negate the depths of our primal nature. We are still animals; really, really smart animals, but animals nonetheless.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
I'm not sure what your point is. If you were to kill a random human, I would probably call the police on you because you are a dangerous sociopath. But my actions emanate only from self-interest and personal feelings, not from knowledge of some objective truth about the value of human life.Ruskin wrote:So if I were to kill a random human and then tread on an ant and claim that to me both these things are equal in my own opinion then that would be fine with you. We would have difference of opinion but we could agree to disagree because the objective fact is that humans and ants are equally the same thing. There no point trying to argue over personal preference, say my favourite colour is blue, you don't get argue about this and say the better colour is red.Mysterio448 wrote:
Of course not. I care more about human life than ant life, but that's just how I personally feel; it doesn't mean that ant life is objectively any less important.
Really? Do you really want to go there? Do you really want to say that the killing of innocent children is a gauge of animal-ness?Say a man married a woman with children from a previous marriage and she did not want more children, would it be socially acceptable for the man to kill her children and so bringing her into reproductive readiness? It's something a male lion will do to cubs he didn't father should he take over a pride of lionesses. It's something even male chimps have been know to do and it makes good sense on an evolutionary level as it preserves your genetic lineage. If we were just more intelligent animals then why are we not behaving in such an amoral fashion?I agree that our intelligence gives us an exponentially greater amount of latitude in our possibilities, but the heights of our lofty accomplishments do not negate the depths of our primal nature. We are still animals; really, really smart animals, but animals nonetheless.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
Mysterio448 wrote:I disagree that the difference between extreme acts of sadism and more common examples of malice is a matter of scale. I think that certain violent acts are qualitatively different. It seems that amongst both apes and humans, violence can be used in such a way that it holds meaning in itself, rather than purely being a means to an end. Serial killers who torture and murder their victims in sadistic ways is one example; there is also the example of human sacrifice. For example, worshippers to the god Molech were said to have their own children burned alive, the Druids were known to burn a group of people inside a giant wicker man, and some Native American peoples were known to have sacrificed some victims by carving the heart from their chest. It is possible that these forms of sadistic yet meaningful violence have a relation to the "ritual" murder and mutilation example by chimpanzees mentioned in the OP.LuckyR wrote:
As to the first, the desire to perform atrocities, or at least atrocious behavior, the OP's examples are, of course, outliers on a scale where there are many, many individuals who are closer to the mean. It can be said that the difference between Jeff Dahmer, someone guilty of animal cruelty (a misdemeanor in most states), and the office practical jokester with a known mean streak is all a matter of scale.
If you mean they HAVE TO BE matters of scale, I will agree. Examples such as a torturer/murderer and a robbery-gone-bad murderer have very little in common. One enjoys inflicting pain and suffering and killing, the other one is a professional petty thief in the wrong place at the wrong time, very different, though both are killers under the law.
OTOH, the difference between a torturer killer of people (the worst of the worst in most folk's opinion) and a torturer killer of pets (a misdemeanor in most states) are treated very differently under the law but psychologically are two points along the same scale.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
LuckyR wrote:
OTOH, the difference between a torturer killer of people (the worst of the worst in most folk's opinion) and a torturer killer of pets (a misdemeanor in most states) are treated very differently under the law but psychologically are two points along the same scale.
The question is: why do torturer killers of people and pets exist? Why do people have such irrational impulses in the first place? I think there is more to it than just to say "People do it because they can." Whether people are capable of doing it or not doesn't answer the question of why people have these obsessive impulses to begin with.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
Mysterio448 wrote:LuckyR wrote:
OTOH, the difference between a torturer killer of people (the worst of the worst in most folk's opinion) and a torturer killer of pets (a misdemeanor in most states) are treated very differently under the law but psychologically are two points along the same scale.
The question is: why do torturer killers of people and pets exist? Why do people have such irrational impulses in the first place? I think there is more to it than just to say "People do it because they can." Whether people are capable of doing it or not doesn't answer the question of why people have these obsessive impulses to begin with.
There are number of ways to answer the question, some statistical, others neurochemical and still others psychological. If you measure anything you will hve outliers if your group is large enough and the population of the earth is a large number. This is a statistical certainty, there can't not be someone with off the chart attitudes and/or outlooks.
Medical folks will try look at the known differences in brain function and brain chemicals in these individuals but most in philosophy find such data too dry.
The head shrinkers will seek to explain behavior based on either brain chemical imbalance or psychological trauma reaction.
Myself I like the statistical approach since numbers don't lie. Also labeling an outlier as "sick" is functionally true but is just the tyranny of the majority.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
I think all statistics really does is calculate the probability and prevalence of certain behaviors, and does not so much offer an actual explanation for behaviors. If statistics explains the existence of sadistic killers, then why do we not see such examples of obsessive murder and torture among all species of animals? These kinds of anomalies seem to only occur within certain species.LuckyR wrote:Mysterio448 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
The question is: why do torturer killers of people and pets exist? Why do people have such irrational impulses in the first place? I think there is more to it than just to say "People do it because they can." Whether people are capable of doing it or not doesn't answer the question of why people have these obsessive impulses to begin with.
There are number of ways to answer the question, some statistical, others neurochemical and still others psychological. If you measure anything you will hve outliers if your group is large enough and the population of the earth is a large number. This is a statistical certainty, there can't not be someone with off the chart attitudes and/or outlooks.
Medical folks will try look at the known differences in brain function and brain chemicals in these individuals but most in philosophy find such data too dry.
The head shrinkers will seek to explain behavior based on either brain chemical imbalance or psychological trauma reaction.
Myself I like the statistical approach since numbers don't lie. Also labeling an outlier as "sick" is functionally true but is just the tyranny of the majority.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
Good question, but you may not like the answer... What allows serial killers in humans is culture, society and the law. Let me explain: when the family and friends of a serial killer are interviewed it is common for them to say that "there was always something wrong with Jeffrey... he used to torture lizards as a kid etc". In Modern society we try hard to "understand" kids with these behaviors, try to rehab them, try to get them to fit into society in some way and to our benefit many times it works out. Some times it doesn't and presto! you've got an adult with sociopathic tendancies and later: behaviors.Mysterio448 wrote:I think all statistics really does is calculate the probability and prevalence of certain behaviors, and does not so much offer an actual explanation for behaviors. If statistics explains the existence of sadistic killers, then why do we not see such examples of obsessive murder and torture among all species of animals? These kinds of anomalies seem to only occur within certain species.LuckyR wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
There are number of ways to answer the question, some statistical, others neurochemical and still others psychological. If you measure anything you will hve outliers if your group is large enough and the population of the earth is a large number. This is a statistical certainty, there can't not be someone with off the chart attitudes and/or outlooks.
Medical folks will try look at the known differences in brain function and brain chemicals in these individuals but most in philosophy find such data too dry.
The head shrinkers will seek to explain behavior based on either brain chemical imbalance or psychological trauma reaction.
Myself I like the statistical approach since numbers don't lie. Also labeling an outlier as "sick" is functionally true but is just the tyranny of the majority.
In the animal kingdom, one cub acts sociopathically, they are either: killed outright as a youngster, kicked out of the pride to starve or so socially dominated (nutritionally) to become weak and unable to act upon their mental illness. It isnt like those disorders aren't there, they just never make it to functionality.
- Mysterio448
- Posts: 393
- Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm
Re: Why are there sadistic killers?
What data exists that says that some young animals are sociopathic? I understand that oftentimes the weak members of the litter may be either killed outright or neglected, but I have never heard of young sociopathic animals. How would one even qualify "sociopathic tendencies" in an animal species?LuckyR wrote:Good question, but you may not like the answer... What allows serial killers in humans is culture, society and the law. Let me explain: when the family and friends of a serial killer are interviewed it is common for them to say that "there was always something wrong with Jeffrey... he used to torture lizards as a kid etc". In Modern society we try hard to "understand" kids with these behaviors, try to rehab them, try to get them to fit into society in some way and to our benefit many times it works out. Some times it doesn't and presto! you've got an adult with sociopathic tendancies and later: behaviors.Mysterio448 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
I think all statistics really does is calculate the probability and prevalence of certain behaviors, and does not so much offer an actual explanation for behaviors. If statistics explains the existence of sadistic killers, then why do we not see such examples of obsessive murder and torture among all species of animals? These kinds of anomalies seem to only occur within certain species.
In the animal kingdom, one cub acts sociopathically, they are either: killed outright as a youngster, kicked out of the pride to starve or so socially dominated (nutritionally) to become weak and unable to act upon their mental illness. It isnt like those disorders aren't there, they just never make it to functionality.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023