Human cruelty

[Nimos]

History suggests that as a means of ensuring political stability, it doesn't work. Indeed, when a state is built on terror, the Kings, Emperors and Dictators are generally in as much terror as their subjects, and frequently come to the same bloody ends. Think Julius Caesar and Mussolini.

I think we can only be happy about that at least

More shocking than the abuses of power by the powerful, is the fact that they never seem, throughout history, to have too much trouble recruiting individuals to do their dirty work. Maybe executioners are able sleep at night, but state sanctioned official torturers? What would that do to a man's soul?

Yeah agree, I guess you can make people do pretty much anything, if you push the right buttons. Its shockingly, but I think it's difficult to refuse as a fact.

 

[Nimos]

Still torturing people to get them to confess to something certainly does away with the innocent until proven guilty idea. (something that seems to have been in effect in the Mosaic Law).
This torturing for a confession at the very least shows extreme frustration in having a good way to determine guilt or innocence and a determination to blame and punish someone.
Some of it seems to follow the idea that God will protect the innocent idea.

I can only agree and also it tells a bit about what justice meant or didn't meant back in those days, and whether they actually cared about it that much? Or that they simply didn't see the issues with torturing someone into confession and that its probably not the best way to get to the truth. I have no doubt, that this have been misused a lot. Blame someone for something, spread some rumors etc. and chop.. problem solved.

 

[Nimos]

The use of violence to enforce control is unfortunately both toxic to humans, and highly contagious. The more fear it instills in people, the more inclined they are to employ it. And to employ it all the more viciously. It may very well prove to be the end of us, as a species. And if it does, I suppose rightly so. And yet we still just cannot grasp the deadly nature of this propensity of ours for gaining control through the force of violence. It's like a drug that, once taken, blinds us to it's innate damage.

Yeah that is certainly a way to do it, the Nazis "brainwashed" people to believe that they were the superior race, so making people feel special or better than everyone else is apparently also possible, to make them do whatever they would probably not do normally.

 

[Nimos]

It is worth noting though that the historicity of some of the more grotesque torture and execution methods is questionable. There has been a tendency to overemphasise the brutality of earlier cultures to the point of outright fabrication.* To give an example, scaphism was such a gruesome method of execution that I won't describe what it entails. However, there's very little evidence that it actually happened and it seems much more likely to have been a way of portraying the Persians as barbaric.

I agree, one should obviously take that into consideration, that it can have been used as propaganda, but even if you remove this, the others are not much better in my opinion, let's be honest it hard to choose, it's almost like crucifiction seems like the best option and that says something

 

[Nimos]

Humans are cruel to others because life is cruel to them. With the exception of psychopaths, humans have empathy, like to share and co-operate - as long as they profit. When resources get scarce, the willingness to share dwindles (because it might be the end of both of you if you share today and both of you starve tomorrow; better keep food for tomorrow and keep the chance to find food for the day after tomorrow in the gained time). Humans get "hardened" in hard times and sometimes empathy doesn't come back when times get better.
That is why people in wealthy countries with functioning social security system are often more empathic than people who live in fear.

That is not the only explanation but one that explains the big picture. As the Milgram and the Stanford prison experiment showed, people can also be cruel when ordered or incentivised to be.

I would agree with that, if you only know of misery, violence and suffering, it probably take a bit more to shock you. So I think that is probably correct, they were more used to these things than we are today in at least most societies. I could imagine that it is pretty bad in North Korea, so you can probably find countries around the world of similar nature as it was back then.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

So yesterday I for some reason thought about humans and our ability to kill each other. I mean if we can say one thing about the human species and creativity, it must be that when it comes to that, we must be close the best in the Universe, everything from sticks to bombs that can kill everything on the planet and everything in between, in such a short amount of time, is pretty damn impressive

Obviously we can't hide that we often end up killing each other due to whatever reason. But I remember reading about medieval torturing devices, which oddly seems to not only been designed to kill people, but to actually try to maximize the cruelty that you could inflict on the person. As part of the explanation for this on this page (Link below), is that they wanted to humiliate, dehumanize and get people to confess to something.

But what I don't really get is, that they almost seem to be design to also sort of make a show or competition out of it, like how bad or cruel can we possible make these things.
Now I don't want to turn this into a religious thing, despite a lot of them were used in regards to this, but then again, religion were the norm, and I don't really doubt for a second that even without religion that it could have happened as well due to other reasons, so please try to keep religion out of it, unless you truly believe that it could only be caused by this.

But I just can't help thinking what on Earth went through people's head back then? How their view on other humans must have been like, that they could watch these things thinking well "the ******* deserved it", or what the hell they thought. Because some of these devices/machines are designed like extreme adult toys or what to say. Where you don't really get the impression that they were even interested in a confession, compared to simply causing as much pain and suffering to the victim as they could possible imagine.

I would be very interested in knowing more about what the heck was going through people's head back then, so if anyone knows or have studied this or just have some thoughts about it, I would be interested in hearing it?

These Medieval Torture Devices and Methods That Date Back to the Ancient World

My best guess is that people were even less evolved from animals than they are now. We haven't really set the stage for that caliber of cruelty in modern times "mostly"... but evolution being a rather slow thing, and the events of today, we could "almost" go back to it - maybe not quite though due to the progress in evolution.

 

[Nimos]

You might be interested to read Letter XXIV of seneca's letter's from a stoic, volume 1. I believe it is that one, where he goes into the most detail about the imposed torture methods, of his time at least, and how they should be perceived by a stoic. As for what went on in the head of the torturer, I am getting some idea of that by reading more 1st century history about Nero, where we see that sociopathy has been selected for. It's unfortunately something that's been around for a very long time, and there are even novel methods described in the extra-canonical books of the maccabees, which take place all the way back into the greek empire. One wonders if the european dark ages were really all that much more novel with this, as likely they could only develop new things with new technology, which didn't seem to hit a growth curve until science was freed up again. Which presents new problems in that domain of course, for who knows what some modern autocrat is doing somewhere in the world.

Im not sure if this is the same you refer to or not? But I seem to remember a story also of Roman origin or maybe from somewhere else, about Christians being chained to metal chairs and then they would put fire under it and burn them, is that the one you talk about? I can't remember if it was in relationship to Nero as well and the burning of Rome and him blaming the Christians for it.

However it seems that some believe that Nero didn't actually blame the Christians, so I don't know if its true or not, simply that I saw or read it somewhere.

 

[Nimos]

My best guess is that people were even less evolved from animals than they are now. We haven't really set the stage for that caliber of cruelty in modern times "mostly"... but evolution being a rather slow thing, and the events of today, we could "almost" go back to it - maybe not quite though due to the progress in evolution.

Sure it can happen again, its not really that long ago Hitler went on a rampage and is probably top 3, if not number 1 on the list of worst people in the history of mankind. The right person/people comes along and the world is in a state that people buy into whatever idea such person might have, I see no reason to assume that it couldn't happen again.

 

[Heyo]

My best guess is that people were even less evolved from animals than they are now. We haven't really set the stage for that caliber of cruelty in modern times "mostly"... but evolution being a rather slow thing, and the events of today, we could "almost" go back to it - maybe not quite though due to the progress in evolution.

You don't see much cruelty in non-human animals, that seems to be an evolutionary by-product of human brain evolution and maybe cultural development towards hierarchical societies. That later process has fortunately reversed as we now have more security and more freedom. Maybe it had to get worse before it could get better?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

You don't see much cruelty in non-human animals

I wouldn't say that for sure. There seems to be a nurturing side to some animals, especially to their own kind. But that's not to say there aren't some pretty aggressive thoughts going on in a monkey's brain, and though some of them may have learned to get along, sometimes better than humans, we haven't introduced human speech etc. into the equation.

Actually, you're right... us evolving to be more complex socially might have had to get worse, before it could get better. Our human skills being a liability at first before an asset. A sort of beginning and unfinished part of evolution we're seeing.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It would seem that our limitless capacity for imagination and invention, applies as much to the negative as the positive aspects of our nature.

 

[Valjean]

The ability to dehumanize; to exclude The Other from moral consideration, is hard wired into our psyche. It's what enabled a weal, slow, essentially defenseless naked ape to survive on the plains of Africa, and to make it through the ice age -- minus the naked.

As small, hunter-gatherer bands, intense in-group solidarity was useful, but compassion for prey or competing bands was not.
Compassion for non-tribe members is unnatural for our species. It must be learned -- and it's a thin veneer, easily stripped away by, say, military training or circumstances where the familiar social order is disrupted.
We're wired for tribalism, not civilization.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I could imagine that it is pretty bad in North Korea, so you can probably find countries around the world of similar nature as it was back then.

Well in an interview I heard with Yeonmi Park, she described surgery without anesthetic, I guess for lack of supplies. Technically, that seems fairly torturous, though it be through trying to heal someone, so one can imagine what they would do if trying torture you, working outward from the apathy they apply when trying to heal you

However it seems that some believe that Nero didn't actually blame the Christians, so I don't know if its true or not, simply that I saw or read it somewhere.

Well, in real sociopathy, is it really about blaming other people, or is it about not caring about what happens to them? In any case, we are also talking about someone who, on his first attempt to execute his own mother, tried to make it look like a boating accident, and only resorted to a deceit narrative on the second attempt. So if he didn't 'blame christians,' maybe not doing so was somehow more expedient to his sociopathic mind, in his specific civilization context.

But in any case, I do find certain early christian theological material as being conspicuous. And I don't think it necessarily led to specific anti-social action, but one can imagine how Luke 12:49 for example, might castigate a movement, or various materials in the Revelation story that relate to civilizational collapse, or destruction by fire: Revelation 20:10.

 

[Heyo]

I wouldn't say that for sure. There seems to be a nurturing side to some animals, especially to their own kind. But that's not to say there aren't some pretty aggressive thoughts going on in a monkey's brain, and though some of them may have learned to get along, sometimes better than humans, we haven't introduced human speech etc. into the equation.

Apes and monkeys can be quite mischievous but I don't think they are on par with humans.

Actually, you're right... us evolving to be more complex socially might have had to get worse, before it could get better. Our human skills being a liability at first before an asset. A sort of beginning and unfinished part of evolution we're seeing.

The "skills" being able to get frustrated, building up aggression and releasing the potential. Tight packed societies increase the potential for frustration, especially if there is inequality and our norms prohibit us from releasing the aggression like an ape would with somewhat aggressive physical activity.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Apes and monkeys can be quite mischievous but I don't think they are on par with humans.

I don't know, it kind of seems to me that a lot of the primate order, specifically, seems a bit violent. Some years ago there was a story of a chimpanzee who rebelled against its owner, (or caretaker, or something) and memorably, the the thing that it did was to go for the private parts and the eyes. That seems indicate a proclivity, or instinct, to maim, and to maim where it seems to know where great suffering would be caused

 

[Mock Turtle]

As evidence for the defence I would submit:

 

[amorphous_constellation]

As evidence for the defence I would submit:

well it does seem like orangutans and bonobos seem like the nicer ones

 

[Nimos]

Well in an interview I heard with Yeonmi Park, she described surgery without anesthetic, I guess for lack of supplies. Technically, that seems fairly torturous, though it be through trying to heal someone, so one can imagine what they would do if trying torture you, working outward from the apathy they apply when trying to heal you

Yeah, I can only imagine that its probably not going to be pleasant.

Well, in real sociopathy, is it really about blaming other people, or is it about not caring about what happens to them?

Its an interesting question, I would think that unless the person is a complete psychopath, they must put more value into what other thing they believe in, compared to the value of whoever they torture right?

There seem to be a lot of information about the different devices, but not so much about how it what done in practice, how often etc. And how they even convinced people to do some of these things in the first place. Or maybe they just took the tortures, which had already beheaded lots of people, so they might have been emotionally dead already, I don't know.

 

[Brian2]

If she's a witch, she'll float; in which case, we'll drown her. Or something.

Yes that is an interesting one.
I think the real story is that whether someone sunk or floated they were connected to a rope and could be dragged out before they died, so the one who sunk and was seen as not a witch was not left to drown.

 

[Wildswanderer]

God has not a good track record of keeping people from being cruel to other people.

It's not God's track record, it's ours. Those who truly follow Jesus' command to do unto others as you would want them to do to you will have a good track record. Those who pretend God is on the side of their cruelty don't