5 ms·

I'm not in favour of revenge. But I find it irritating how rarely people resort to it. For example if I was a father and somebody killed and raped my daughter.

I'm not in favour of revenge. But I find it irritating how rarely people resort to it. For example if I was a father and somebody killed and raped my daughter. I'd like to think of myself as someone who'll kill that person if he receives anything less than a life sentence - or maybe even anyway. I'd be aware that this is a crime and I'll have to serve a prison sentence for it myself - I'd even see the point of it - a society cannot tolerate revenge. But I'd non the less feel morally obligated to do it. The only possible good reason not to resort to revenge would be if there is a possibilty of being wrong about the identity of the culprit. That this doesn't happen more often just shows to me that most wo:men are cowards. Not just that - our society even systematically rewards and encourages cowardry by reframing it as smartness or sober-mindedness. But this is true in a more general sense and not restricted to revenge of course. This can be observed on a daily basis at work, at school, pretty much anywhere. --- Of course, I get downvoted - but how do you argue against my point?

nicoburns 6y ago
What good would come of such revenge? Edit: to expand, if (god forbid) someone did that to my daughter, my instinct would not be to kill them, it would be to find them, talk them, to understand why they did it. And to try somehow to make them truly understand the consequences of what they had done. I don't feel like killing them would achieve any of that.
- 74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
  Thanks for your response instead of just downvoting. > What good would come of such revenge? One bad person less. And, yes, I'd feel a bit better. Not much maybe. I might even question it in the long run. But think about the alternative. In Germany it is not at all unheard of that murderers (who murdered for sexual desire or greed) get less than ten years of sentencing and are on day parole after a couple of years. How would you feel about that? What "good" comes from that? Do you maybe even wish that person a happy life? > to expand, if (god forbid) someone did that to my daughter, my instinct would not be to kill them, it would be to find them, talk them, to understand why they did it. You want to ask the guy "Why did you rape and kill my daughter?"? Are you kidding yourself? What would you expect for an answer? Also in this hypothetical situation you'd have to use force to even ask that question. You think you'd get an honest answer? "Sorry, didn't know it's your daughter." "I was just so horny - didn't know what else to do." What would you expect for an answer that even has the slightes potential of being meaningful to your pain? > to make them truly understand the consequences of what they had done. People who rape and kill don't tend to be the "understanding" type ... just think about how f'ed up someone has to be to do that. > I don't feel like killing them would achieve any of that. How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too.
  - xenophonf 6y ago
    > One bad person less. Reform is better than revenge. Not only would society lose a bad person, we'd gain a good one. > How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too. This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn.
    - imwillofficial 6y ago
      “Reform is better than revenge” Cite your sources where a rapist and murderer is a benefit to society after reform. “This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn” How is the murder and rape of an innocent comparable to the punishment of a murderer and rapist? How do you measure reform? Are their limits to what should be reformed? Do the risks of relapse ever outweigh the benefit of reform? An example to consider are the France Shooters or the Boston Marathon Bomber.
      - xenophonf 6y ago
        I explained my logic in the previous comment and don't feel the need to go into further detail. Demanding sources isn't really a logical argument, anyway.
      - nicoburns 6y ago
        IMO the limits lie where someone isn't interested or can't be reformed. If I could turn the Boston Marathon Bombers into adovcates against extremism I would. And if successful they'd likely be very good at it because they'd understand the motives of other extremists better. It doesn't work with everyone (that's why we have prisons), but AFAIK it's not that uncommon for people to tunr their lives aeound in this way. Most criminals are not inherently sadistic: they do care about other people. Their upbringing and circumstances just lead them to a bad place and they ended up taking that out on someone else. That doesn't mean they aren't repsonsible for their actions or that they shouldn't be punished, but it doesn mean that they can often be rehabilitated with the right support. And that's generally a win-win scenario where it is possible.
    - 6y ago
btilly 6y ago
For the full book length explanation of why your attitude is bad for everyone, read Enlightenment Now. The short version is that in a society where justice relies on the strength of the individual, there is more conflict, more injury, and more murder. In areas of the USA with more of an honor culture, the murder rate is 10x what it is in areas without one. The problem is that in an honor culture, people have a need to demonstrate how capable they are so that they will not be considered potential targets. This demonstration takes the form of proving that you will be willing to seek to right any perceived injustice, and are capable of doing so. But these demonstrations tend to involve violence, and lead to conflict. Up to and including murder. In a law and order society, by contrast, people's safety is based on the continuation of law and order. Which means that justice is available to all, regardless of strength. Consider. The strength difference between the average man and average woman is the difference between the average NFL linebacker and the average man. Do you think it right that the average woman's ability to obtain justice is dependent on whether some man stands up for her? And yet that is how things tend to work out in an honor culture. I want to live in a law and order society. A place where potential rapists are deciding whether to worry about the police, and not whether to worry about me.
- TurkishPoptart 6y ago
  Prison is often described as an honor society. So it seems like those that won't tolerate a law and order society and commit violent crimes are placed involuntarily into prison (an honor society).
  - 74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
    Your comment is of course facetious. Nonetheless I'd like to express that most interpretations of honor are of the perverted kind. This is especially true for professional criminals.
    - TurkishPoptart 6y ago
      what's facetious about it?
anoonmoose 6y ago
A Utilitarian would argue against your point by pointing out that the utility created by the revenge murder is less than the utility created by not doing so. With the revenge murder you add another corpse to the pile and probably end up removing yourself from the utility pool. Without it, perhaps the rapist-murderer adds something of value to the world before their death, and you don't remove yourself from the utility pool. Utilitarianism is simplistic, but then again, so is "I'd feel morally obligated to do it, and I'd be a coward if I did otherwise." Point being, this is not a hard point to argue against, using almost any philosophical framework created in the last couple thousand years.
- conanbatt 6y ago
  From this I would conclude that it is utilitarian-bad to revenge, but utilitarian good to murder
  - anoonmoose 6y ago
    Huh? Revenge murder would have the same net utility as regular murder.
- 74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
  My stance is based on a society which isn't able to protect its citizens. Why would I care about utility for this society with respect to the described scenario?
RankingMember 6y ago
You murder this rapist/murderer, and now you're in prison, and for what? Because you were mad, because you feel you'd lose face if you don't? Who benefits from this macho bullshit? The rapist is dead, your daughter is dead, and now your life is over. You've basically amplified the rapist's impact on your life- in a very real way, you let the rapist control you and ruin your life even more than it was when your daughter was murdered. What's so brave and manly about that?
rossvor 6y ago
I did not downvote you. But you haven't actually argued the point, you just said that you find it irritating. Why? What benefit do you envision revenge would provide you or society?
zajio1am 6y ago
> For example if I was a father and somebody killed and raped my daughter. I'd like to think of myself as someone who'll kill that person if he receives anything less than a life sentence And then some relative of that person would kill you, and some your relative would kill your killler and so on. Hopefully, after several generations and few tens of dead such cycle of vendetta would end.

nicoburns 6y ago

What good would come of such revenge? Edit: to expand, if (god forbid) someone did that to my daughter, my instinct would not be to kill them, it would be to find them, talk them, to understand why they did it. And to try somehow to make them truly understand the consequences of what they had done. I don't feel like killing them would achieve any of that.

74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
Thanks for your response instead of just downvoting. > What good would come of such revenge? One bad person less. And, yes, I'd feel a bit better. Not much maybe. I might even question it in the long run. But think about the alternative. In Germany it is not at all unheard of that murderers (who murdered for sexual desire or greed) get less than ten years of sentencing and are on day parole after a couple of years. How would you feel about that? What "good" comes from that? Do you maybe even wish that person a happy life? > to expand, if (god forbid) someone did that to my daughter, my instinct would not be to kill them, it would be to find them, talk them, to understand why they did it. You want to ask the guy "Why did you rape and kill my daughter?"? Are you kidding yourself? What would you expect for an answer? Also in this hypothetical situation you'd have to use force to even ask that question. You think you'd get an honest answer? "Sorry, didn't know it's your daughter." "I was just so horny - didn't know what else to do." What would you expect for an answer that even has the slightes potential of being meaningful to your pain? > to make them truly understand the consequences of what they had done. People who rape and kill don't tend to be the "understanding" type ... just think about how f'ed up someone has to be to do that. > I don't feel like killing them would achieve any of that. How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too.
- xenophonf 6y ago
  > One bad person less. Reform is better than revenge. Not only would society lose a bad person, we'd gain a good one. > How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too. This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn.
  - imwillofficial 6y ago
    “Reform is better than revenge” Cite your sources where a rapist and murderer is a benefit to society after reform. “This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn” How is the murder and rape of an innocent comparable to the punishment of a murderer and rapist? How do you measure reform? Are their limits to what should be reformed? Do the risks of relapse ever outweigh the benefit of reform? An example to consider are the France Shooters or the Boston Marathon Bomber.
    - xenophonf 6y ago
      I explained my logic in the previous comment and don't feel the need to go into further detail. Demanding sources isn't really a logical argument, anyway.
    - nicoburns 6y ago
      IMO the limits lie where someone isn't interested or can't be reformed. If I could turn the Boston Marathon Bombers into adovcates against extremism I would. And if successful they'd likely be very good at it because they'd understand the motives of other extremists better. It doesn't work with everyone (that's why we have prisons), but AFAIK it's not that uncommon for people to tunr their lives aeound in this way. Most criminals are not inherently sadistic: they do care about other people. Their upbringing and circumstances just lead them to a bad place and they ended up taking that out on someone else. That doesn't mean they aren't repsonsible for their actions or that they shouldn't be punished, but it doesn mean that they can often be rehabilitated with the right support. And that's generally a win-win scenario where it is possible.
  - 6y ago

btilly 6y ago

For the full book length explanation of why your attitude is bad for everyone, read Enlightenment Now. The short version is that in a society where justice relies on the strength of the individual, there is more conflict, more injury, and more murder. In areas of the USA with more of an honor culture, the murder rate is 10x what it is in areas without one. The problem is that in an honor culture, people have a need to demonstrate how capable they are so that they will not be considered potential targets. This demonstration takes the form of proving that you will be willing to seek to right any perceived injustice, and are capable of doing so. But these demonstrations tend to involve violence, and lead to conflict. Up to and including murder. In a law and order society, by contrast, people's safety is based on the continuation of law and order. Which means that justice is available to all, regardless of strength. Consider. The strength difference between the average man and average woman is the difference between the average NFL linebacker and the average man. Do you think it right that the average woman's ability to obtain justice is dependent on whether some man stands up for her? And yet that is how things tend to work out in an honor culture. I want to live in a law and order society. A place where potential rapists are deciding whether to worry about the police, and not whether to worry about me.

TurkishPoptart 6y ago
Prison is often described as an honor society. So it seems like those that won't tolerate a law and order society and commit violent crimes are placed involuntarily into prison (an honor society).
- 74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
  Your comment is of course facetious. Nonetheless I'd like to express that most interpretations of honor are of the perverted kind. This is especially true for professional criminals.
  - TurkishPoptart 6y ago
    what's facetious about it?

anoonmoose 6y ago

A Utilitarian would argue against your point by pointing out that the utility created by the revenge murder is less than the utility created by not doing so. With the revenge murder you add another corpse to the pile and probably end up removing yourself from the utility pool. Without it, perhaps the rapist-murderer adds something of value to the world before their death, and you don't remove yourself from the utility pool. Utilitarianism is simplistic, but then again, so is "I'd feel morally obligated to do it, and I'd be a coward if I did otherwise." Point being, this is not a hard point to argue against, using almost any philosophical framework created in the last couple thousand years.

conanbatt 6y ago
From this I would conclude that it is utilitarian-bad to revenge, but utilitarian good to murder
- anoonmoose 6y ago
  Huh? Revenge murder would have the same net utility as regular murder.
74d-fe6-2c6 6y ago
My stance is based on a society which isn't able to protect its citizens. Why would I care about utility for this society with respect to the described scenario?

RankingMember 6y ago

You murder this rapist/murderer, and now you're in prison, and for what? Because you were mad, because you feel you'd lose face if you don't? Who benefits from this macho bullshit? The rapist is dead, your daughter is dead, and now your life is over. You've basically amplified the rapist's impact on your life- in a very real way, you let the rapist control you and ruin your life even more than it was when your daughter was murdered. What's so brave and manly about that?

rossvor 6y ago

I did not downvote you. But you haven't actually argued the point, you just said that you find it irritating. Why? What benefit do you envision revenge would provide you or society?

zajio1am 6y ago

> For example if I was a father and somebody killed and raped my daughter. I'd like to think of myself as someone who'll kill that person if he receives anything less than a life sentence And then some relative of that person would kill you, and some your relative would kill your killler and so on. Hopefully, after several generations and few tens of dead such cycle of vendetta would end.