3 ms·

No. It is simpler than you are making it out to be. If you say "I did the test that proves it is heroin" and you didn't, and you are smart enough to be a chemi

No. It is simpler than you are making it out to be. If you say "I did the test that proves it is heroin" and you didn't, and you are smart enough to be a chemist, and you see some poor guy get put in jail, then you are evil.

DanBC 13y ago
Okay, sure, whatever. But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay. That's the interesting bit. Why do people go along with things that they know are wrong. She wasn't alone in this, there are a bunch of other people involved too. And it's similar for other frauds and deceptions. She didn't wake up and think "Fuck it, I'm going to jail thousands of innocent people". So, what was she thinking? Can we test for that kind of thinking in other people? How do we protect against is?
- judk 13y ago
  Maybe she was thinking "the job market for PhDs stinks. I better do this job the way I am expected. And these hoodlums don't deserve to get off on technicalities-- the cops wouldn't collar someone they didn't know was a crook."
- scotty79 13y ago
  She was thinking: "I'm helping justice." I'm sure she was thorughly assured that people she helped to convict are guilty anyways. They just needed cherry on top to convince the judge and/or jury.
- yetanotherphd 13y ago
  I think you need to dig a bit deeper than the rationalizations people give for their actions. There is a difference between a person who genuinely considers what they are doing to be OK, and people who are actually rationlizing things they know deep down to be wrong. I think your implicit assumption that anyone might have acted like she did, in her position, is wrong. Both a person's innate (not necessarily genetic) moral goodness, and the circumstances a person finds themselves in, play a role in how they are act. In trying to avoid one kind of simplistic viewpoint, I think you are falling for the opposite one.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    I look at her and I think "I would never do anything like that!" But is that really true or am I just rationalising with the benefit of hindsight? There was an article on HN about a man running a family business who started defrauding money. It needed the cooperation of other people. Rather than creating any elaborate lies he simply told them, and asked them for help. (I can't remember any more about it, which is making search tricky!). But they all went along. He was a nice guy, and they were helping him, and no-one was really being hurt. Except they were all committing serious criminal offences.
    - sejje 13y ago
      If you go deep enough, some chemical reactions managed her thoughts and behaviors, and negotiated your reaction, as well. At some point people have to be held accountable and called names like evil. The idea that she can talk herself into believing otherwise is a travesty, mostly because it allowed it to continue. I think the word evil was invented to describe people exactly like this woman.
    - jackpirate 13y ago
      I don't think other folk are giving you enough credit here. It's much to easy to think we would never do something without critical thought. This reminds me a lot of espionage. No one sets out to betray their country, but by gradually making more and more compromises you go from being Uncle Sam to Aldrich Ames.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay. And Hitler, Stalin and Mao didn't? Clue time: Nobody thinks they're the bad guy.

DanBC 13y ago

Okay, sure, whatever. But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay. That's the interesting bit. Why do people go along with things that they know are wrong. She wasn't alone in this, there are a bunch of other people involved too. And it's similar for other frauds and deceptions. She didn't wake up and think "Fuck it, I'm going to jail thousands of innocent people". So, what was she thinking? Can we test for that kind of thinking in other people? How do we protect against is?

judk 13y ago
Maybe she was thinking "the job market for PhDs stinks. I better do this job the way I am expected. And these hoodlums don't deserve to get off on technicalities-- the cops wouldn't collar someone they didn't know was a crook."
scotty79 13y ago
She was thinking: "I'm helping justice." I'm sure she was thorughly assured that people she helped to convict are guilty anyways. They just needed cherry on top to convince the judge and/or jury.
yetanotherphd 13y ago
I think you need to dig a bit deeper than the rationalizations people give for their actions. There is a difference between a person who genuinely considers what they are doing to be OK, and people who are actually rationlizing things they know deep down to be wrong. I think your implicit assumption that anyone might have acted like she did, in her position, is wrong. Both a person's innate (not necessarily genetic) moral goodness, and the circumstances a person finds themselves in, play a role in how they are act. In trying to avoid one kind of simplistic viewpoint, I think you are falling for the opposite one.
- DanBC 13y ago
  I look at her and I think "I would never do anything like that!" But is that really true or am I just rationalising with the benefit of hindsight? There was an article on HN about a man running a family business who started defrauding money. It needed the cooperation of other people. Rather than creating any elaborate lies he simply told them, and asked them for help. (I can't remember any more about it, which is making search tricky!). But they all went along. He was a nice guy, and they were helping him, and no-one was really being hurt. Except they were all committing serious criminal offences.
  - sejje 13y ago
    If you go deep enough, some chemical reactions managed her thoughts and behaviors, and negotiated your reaction, as well. At some point people have to be held accountable and called names like evil. The idea that she can talk herself into believing otherwise is a travesty, mostly because it allowed it to continue. I think the word evil was invented to describe people exactly like this woman.
  - jackpirate 13y ago
    I don't think other folk are giving you enough credit here. It's much to easy to think we would never do something without critical thought. This reminds me a lot of espionage. No one sets out to betray their country, but by gradually making more and more compromises you go from being Uncle Sam to Aldrich Ames.
CamperBob2 13y ago
But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay. And Hitler, Stalin and Mao didn't? Clue time: Nobody thinks they're the bad guy.