What do you think?
I once observed this question: "Who do you think was more evil; Hilter, or Stalin?"
I thought about it for awhile without comming to a solid, arguable conclusion. I had an opinion, of course, which in retrospect more closely resembles a hypothesis. So I descided to define my terms and settle it permanently. The following is a chain-of-thought, grammatically incorrect list of definitions:
1) Evil- Morally bad or wrong; wicked
2) Morality -Virtuous conduct
3) Virtue- Moral excellence and righteousness
(Blast! Three definitions in and I've already locked myself into a situational-synonym war. At that point, my mind had descided to just figure it out on its own. Ironically enough, this approach was to later reinforce my findings.)
New Strategy: Project Take-Up-Where-Generations-of-Philosophers-Have-Failed a.k.a. "Good vs. Evil"
Alright so what is Evil, and conversely, what is Good? They seem to somehow make up this abstract, Morality. Morality is important! Morality MATTERS (important Attention Deficit Disorder jump). Matter is composed of two major classes; living, and non-living.
4)Life- A process of self-generating action required to survive.
Non-living matter quite obviously has no use for morality, so we can rule out that category right off the bat. Living matter, on the other hand, is generally conceded to consist of two types; conscious, and unconscious. Unconscious organisms (Mold, viruses, DMV employees) tend to be completely unaware of their enviornment, sensations, thoughts, and existence; conversely, conscious organisms are. Morality obviously involves a choice or decision of some kind, because a singular human being's actions can be called either to a greater or lesser degree; therefore, we can eliminate unconcious organisms as being moral. Conciousness seems to be a key factor. If people are capable of morality, how is it that I never hear of bestial do-gooders or villains? What is the difference between humanity and beasts anyway? Alright if something is aware of its existance etc. it is perceiving its environment.
5) Perception- Recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based chiefly on memory
Yes, there we go! humans do that all the time, but then, don't animals? Ok so maybe the difference is in what we do with that perception.
6)Instinct- An inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of a species and is often a response to specific environmental stimuli
But wait, humans have minimal, at best, instincts! We know we are hungry, but no amount of instinct is going to teach you that apples are edible, and that to obtain those apples they must come from a tree. Instinct will not give you the insight to avoid submerging yourself in tar. Humanity must be capable of something that enables it to survive. We do perceive our environment, but when we do we use our experiences to conceive ideas about our environment.
7)Conceive- To apprehend mentally; understand
These conceptions we integrate into our actions and beliefs in order to survive. We humans call this rationality.
8)Rational -Having or exercising the ability to reason.
Survival obviously requires some individual, concious, mental process. It also requires the existance of an objective reality. This is true simply because an irrational action frequently leads to undesirable results. If no objective reality existed our will would create the outcome, and the desire, hunger, and NEED of the person acting would be all that was required. So, in order to survive, one can safely say that a human needs to be productive.
9)Production- The rational application of the mind to the problem of survival
Life is good. I mean that in a literal sense. Life is of the highest piority to a human being, and we place great value on ideas and actions which insure survival. Conversely, death is evil. If acting rationally is the only acceptable natural way to live; acting rationally is virtuous. This means that the removal of reason from actions is evil.
Back to the original question. Hitler was an Authoritarian Statist, while Stalin was a Socialist Statist. Hitler believed he was morally correct and so did Stalin.
10)Authoritarian- Characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to authority, as against individual freedom
11)Socialist- Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
Hitler was evil for forcing the abandonment of rational thought by replacing the thought of others with his own. He is eliminating the judgement of others and substituting his own. This is without doubt, evil. His judgements are based on a conception that the problems of the world could be solved through the violent coercion of all he perceived as his enemies, that is, all that disagreed with him. But, notice, that he at least attempted to rationalize his decisions citing a cause, and a remedy; however, his premises was so totally and completely irrational that to even act on it at all produces the picture of quite a disturbed mind.
Stalin was a parasitical product of Lenin. He held and promoted an old Marxist axiom; "From those according to their ability, to those according to their need." This means, essentially, that the needs of one man entitle him to the production of another. Or that need is a claim on the life of another, since production and life are inseparably linked in human nature. It also means that the ability to produce determines ones slavery to those who cannot, so that the extent to which you produce becomes the extent to which you are extorted. People unwilling or incapable of thinking were magically relieved of its neccessity through the implementation of this concept. In rejecting the responsibility of rational thought, they have rejected the responsibility of life. The obvious outcome of Stalin's plan would have been universal regression to pre-humanity since production would be punished in such a way that none would produce. The evil inherent here is the rejection of reality by attempting to make a non-absolute and absolute. When all of the minds had been destroyed and the alst of the producers had vanished, brute force would be all that could motivate humans to work. Welcome to serfdom, World!
In closing, you are free to rationally examine my conceptualizations and form your own ideas, I know I had fun. Here are the median death tolls attributed to each man. (source: Twentieth Century Atlas)
Hilter- 15.5 million for the entire reign
Stalin- 51 million for the entire reign
I thought about it for awhile without comming to a solid, arguable conclusion. I had an opinion, of course, which in retrospect more closely resembles a hypothesis. So I descided to define my terms and settle it permanently. The following is a chain-of-thought, grammatically incorrect list of definitions:
1) Evil- Morally bad or wrong; wicked
2) Morality -Virtuous conduct
3) Virtue- Moral excellence and righteousness
(Blast! Three definitions in and I've already locked myself into a situational-synonym war. At that point, my mind had descided to just figure it out on its own. Ironically enough, this approach was to later reinforce my findings.)
New Strategy: Project Take-Up-Where-Generations-of-Philosophers-Have-Failed a.k.a. "Good vs. Evil"
Alright so what is Evil, and conversely, what is Good? They seem to somehow make up this abstract, Morality. Morality is important! Morality MATTERS (important Attention Deficit Disorder jump). Matter is composed of two major classes; living, and non-living.
4)Life- A process of self-generating action required to survive.
Non-living matter quite obviously has no use for morality, so we can rule out that category right off the bat. Living matter, on the other hand, is generally conceded to consist of two types; conscious, and unconscious. Unconscious organisms (Mold, viruses, DMV employees) tend to be completely unaware of their enviornment, sensations, thoughts, and existence; conversely, conscious organisms are. Morality obviously involves a choice or decision of some kind, because a singular human being's actions can be called either to a greater or lesser degree; therefore, we can eliminate unconcious organisms as being moral. Conciousness seems to be a key factor. If people are capable of morality, how is it that I never hear of bestial do-gooders or villains? What is the difference between humanity and beasts anyway? Alright if something is aware of its existance etc. it is perceiving its environment.
5) Perception- Recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based chiefly on memory
Yes, there we go! humans do that all the time, but then, don't animals? Ok so maybe the difference is in what we do with that perception.
6)Instinct- An inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of a species and is often a response to specific environmental stimuli
But wait, humans have minimal, at best, instincts! We know we are hungry, but no amount of instinct is going to teach you that apples are edible, and that to obtain those apples they must come from a tree. Instinct will not give you the insight to avoid submerging yourself in tar. Humanity must be capable of something that enables it to survive. We do perceive our environment, but when we do we use our experiences to conceive ideas about our environment.
7)Conceive- To apprehend mentally; understand
These conceptions we integrate into our actions and beliefs in order to survive. We humans call this rationality.
8)Rational -Having or exercising the ability to reason.
Survival obviously requires some individual, concious, mental process. It also requires the existance of an objective reality. This is true simply because an irrational action frequently leads to undesirable results. If no objective reality existed our will would create the outcome, and the desire, hunger, and NEED of the person acting would be all that was required. So, in order to survive, one can safely say that a human needs to be productive.
9)Production- The rational application of the mind to the problem of survival
Life is good. I mean that in a literal sense. Life is of the highest piority to a human being, and we place great value on ideas and actions which insure survival. Conversely, death is evil. If acting rationally is the only acceptable natural way to live; acting rationally is virtuous. This means that the removal of reason from actions is evil.
Back to the original question. Hitler was an Authoritarian Statist, while Stalin was a Socialist Statist. Hitler believed he was morally correct and so did Stalin.
10)Authoritarian- Characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to authority, as against individual freedom
11)Socialist- Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
Hitler was evil for forcing the abandonment of rational thought by replacing the thought of others with his own. He is eliminating the judgement of others and substituting his own. This is without doubt, evil. His judgements are based on a conception that the problems of the world could be solved through the violent coercion of all he perceived as his enemies, that is, all that disagreed with him. But, notice, that he at least attempted to rationalize his decisions citing a cause, and a remedy; however, his premises was so totally and completely irrational that to even act on it at all produces the picture of quite a disturbed mind.
Stalin was a parasitical product of Lenin. He held and promoted an old Marxist axiom; "From those according to their ability, to those according to their need." This means, essentially, that the needs of one man entitle him to the production of another. Or that need is a claim on the life of another, since production and life are inseparably linked in human nature. It also means that the ability to produce determines ones slavery to those who cannot, so that the extent to which you produce becomes the extent to which you are extorted. People unwilling or incapable of thinking were magically relieved of its neccessity through the implementation of this concept. In rejecting the responsibility of rational thought, they have rejected the responsibility of life. The obvious outcome of Stalin's plan would have been universal regression to pre-humanity since production would be punished in such a way that none would produce. The evil inherent here is the rejection of reality by attempting to make a non-absolute and absolute. When all of the minds had been destroyed and the alst of the producers had vanished, brute force would be all that could motivate humans to work. Welcome to serfdom, World!
In closing, you are free to rationally examine my conceptualizations and form your own ideas, I know I had fun. Here are the median death tolls attributed to each man. (source: Twentieth Century Atlas)
Hilter- 15.5 million for the entire reign
Stalin- 51 million for the entire reign