Island Life by David Slack

I'm reminded of a discussion on Not PC in the wake of post-Virginia Tech where commenters were disputing whether his assessment that the problem was "a failure to recognise evil" was accurate or helpful.

http://pc.blogspot.com/2007/04/virginaia-tech-string-of-failures-and.html
http://pc.blogspot.com/2007/04/does-evil-exist.html

Objectivism aside, one problem I had with that approach was the only question individuals of society then has to ask is whether they could have taken down the perp sooner. I think it shows a depressing lack of imagination to be certain one is incapable of anything.

It also gets in the way of coming up with fixes for the causes. Also if the evildoers end up thinking of themselves as evil it psychologically is not the way to redemption. Not that I said any of this at the time.

One must realise ones condition before one can do anything bout it.

One must realise ones condition before one can do anything bout it.

If the condition is 'being a monster' where do you go with that? (Is that what you're talking about?)

Having enhanced self-esteem does nothing to control criminal behaviour (not surprising if you think about it) but self-loathing isn't a very good position to rebuild your life from either.

And if we imagine the conversation:
"Why did you do the bad thing?"
"Because I'm evil."
"What will you do to stop it happening again?"
"Not be evil."
... I don't see it working.

I'm not an expert myself and I don't mean to go on about it. It's not a huge part of my point anyhow.

The thing that bothered me most was equating the behaviour with the person. It puts the blinkers on in many ways.

"What kind of mother would do this?"