Revenge Really Does Taste Sweet 234
Wizzy Wig writes "The Toronto Star is reporting on scientific experiments showing a link between revenge and the 'pleasure center' of the human brain, thus putting a nature spin on something heretofore thought of as a nurture based, or learned, emotion."
Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:5, Insightful)
It's never a matter of being right or wrong, it's that feeling of justice I suppose, the feeling that we have, in our eyes, made things right in the world
Of course, it's also immensely selfish and one sided.
Cheers,
James Carr [bluefuzion.com]
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:1, Funny)
So, did you get revenge on your English teacher?
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2, Insightful)
My 2 cents.
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, I don't see why this 'study' was necessary.
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:3, Interesting)
Humans have a strong desire for justice. I forget which one, but I saw a television show where a child was given some candy to split up between him and another child. He decided how much to give the other child, but the other child could, if he wanted to, have the adult take all the candy away if the deal wasn't fair. Now, common sense would tell you that some was better than none, even if the other had mo
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
That actually is a good point and in fact if you think about it, the laws the government makes is *based* off revenge. You speed in your car, you get a ticket and pay a fine. You murder someone, you get the death penalty or life in prison. While this is meant to control the masses and such it is basically the governments "revenge" on that person's wrong doing.
I disagree. Laws and government are based on a social contract and are about retribution and compensation. Revenge, on the other hand, is very pe
Not necessarily selfish (Score:2)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Not necessarily, at least in my view.
Consider a serial killer. Serial killers act on what is tantamount to instinct. After a lifetime of abuse, the behavior they exhibit somehow provides them with relief or a sense of sanity.
When a serial killer is caught, they should be incarcerated and every attempt should be made, in good faith, to help them deal with what's inside of them. If and when they're released, and end up killing again, one of two
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
When a serial killer is caught, they should be incarcerated and every attempt should be made, in good faith, to help them deal with what's inside of them.
When a serial killer has applied for a Darwin award, they should be rewarded. That is the point of the social compact, our society, and our laws. Remove the aberrations from the gene pool.
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Nice segue into a rambling anti-war diatribe ya got there, Simon.
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe that people who feel an overwhelming urge to murder without any specific reason why should in all good faith submit themselves to this process before they start murdering people.
How can you honestly expect people who feel an irrational urge to kill to have the cognitive capacity to: 1. Correctly identify their psychological problem (quite a feat for even normal people) 2. Submit to confinement and unpleasurable treatment for the abstract goal of the better good of society.
Here's the fallacy of your argument: the moral status of a human being does not change with respect to the world's population. In fact, the two are wholly unrelated. Murder is equally wrong if its committed upon 10th or 10 trillionth person. Besides, who decides who is "surplus" and who isn't? You? Can you point to any specific biological reason why you, as opposed to myself, couldn't be the surplus?
There are religious objections to this point of view, of course. But the religious laws were formulated thousands of years ago when there weren't many people around,it wasn't easy to bring infants into adults, people died mysteriously (from disease and accident), and no one lived very long anyway (average life span about 3000 years ago was about 35-40 years).
Ahh... but there are ETHICAL (and logical) objections to that point of view too, and no matter what your religious views, these are just as relevant today as they were 3000 years ago.
Basically the entire Iraqi war is an attempt on the part of the Christian fundamentalists who are now running the USA to force the Muslems to change and adapt to the new conditions in the world that technology has created in the past century
Christian fundamentalists run the US? Well that's news to me, both a Christian and a US resident. You're making the mistake many liberals make by confusing Bush's pandering to the "bible-belt" as evidence of his religious views. Bush may be conservative, but that shouldn't be taken as him being extremely religious. In fact, he, and the Bush family in general is quite moderate in their religious points of view. Regardless, for your thesis to be correct (i.e. Christian fundamentalists "run" the United States), you'd have to come up with some good explanations to the following: 1. prevalence of the gay marriage issue in American politics 2. The continuing practice of legalized abortion 3. The secular nature of our schooling system and public places 4. The acceptance of other religions and practices contrary to fundamentalist Christianity in both public life and legal standing. I could go on, but I think you have enough on your plate already.
For you what all the stuff above means is that since this is a stupid endless wastefull and hopeless war, it would be in your best interest not to fight in it. Don't allow yourself to be conscripted into fighting this war. Don't sign up to fight it and don't allow yourself to get drafted when conscription of the 19-year-olds begins again next year. History has shown that it is more honorable to do whatever degrading things that are necessary to avoid being forced into a stupid war than it is to suffer in a 'patriotic' manner as a result of 'serving' in a stupid war...
If you don't agree with the war, vote against it and convince others to do the same. However, you have no right to resist conscription unless you have extreme moral objections to killing in general--which, according to your earlier statements, you do not. By willingly residing within the United States, you agree to the possibility of conscription (read more of Glaucon's Social contract theory if you don't believe me). Your cowardice and/or opinions do not change your societal obligations, and failing to uphold those obligations is perhaps one of the most dis-honorable things a person can do.
-Grym
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
But it's not that simple. You wouldn't be conscripted were you not a citizen of the United States to begin with--a citizen who agreed with the possibility of conscription implicitly by living here and EXPLICITLY when you registered with the Selective Service System. If you didn't agree with the possibility of conscription, you coul
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Are you saying that it's never honourable to refuse to participate in something that you consider morally wrong?
No, I'm saying it's dis-honorable to break a serious and legitimate agreement, like the social contract with one's society.
Can you not like many of the attributes of your country, but want to change that one, and so remain there and try to change it?
Sure, you may disagree with a certain attribute, but by remaining in the country's borders, your obligations are no different from anyone el
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
The word you're looking for is error, not fallacy. A fallacy is a supporting argument which is based on an invalid claims mechanism, not an argument with ungrounded assumptions or an invalid base premise. Fallacies are things like relying on authorities or the opinion of the people to make a point, attacking
Re:Let's admint it... revenge feels good (Score:2)
Re:A minor point (Score:2)
Re:A minor point (Score:2)
Combat was a legitimate means to dispute resolution even in the US until the 20th century.
Re:A minor point (Score:2)
Mind is above rules but it's own.. (Score:2)
Science would like us to believe that we are like machines. If X happens, then we feel Y, etc. Just like a nice automaton.
But personal experience tells me, maybe I'm wrong, I'm just suggesting this for now, that we DECIDE how to feel every moment! We may not be aware of it on a daily conscious-level however, and then
Only A Month Late (Score:2, Informative)
Of course it tastes sweet.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Um and your point being? (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyway. I'm not really sure what the point of this research really was. We all knew that revenge makes us feel better to some point. I would rather see a study on the long term effect of that exacting that revenge on those who wronged us. The aftermath of it all. I didn't see anything where they followed up with those men they studied to see how they felt about it a week,
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:2)
I would say yes! Going by all the antics that happen in these forums, there is some truth to what you say. :)
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:1)
I wonder where people got it in their heads that this was learned behavior to begin with?
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:2)
If you play Beethoven for a classical music lover, it will stimulate their pleasure center; if you force them to hear the same Beethoven number 50 times in a row while giving them a painful electric shock, I predict that the 51st playing (without the shock) will now stimulate the "displeasure" center. So what does that prove about a bio
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:2)
I basically agree with you. The nature/nurture continuum here is largely irrelevant. Any experience is going to have its physical correlate in the brain- but the whole idea of nurture as it is popularly espoused is contrary to this idea. But it is a matter of course. On the other hand, one should I think resist equating nature with genes. The neural machinery for vision does not fully develop until exposure to light. Nature should be somethin
Re:Um and your point being? (Score:5, Funny)
DIE SCO DIE *stab stab stab*
ahhhhhh.
of course not.
Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:5, Funny)
The downtown luxury apartment was in his name and he wanted to remain there with his new love so he asked the wife to move out and then he would buy her another place.
The wife agreed to this, but asked that she be given 3 days on her own there, to pack up her things.
While he was gone, the first day she lovingly put her personal belongings into boxes and crates and suitcases.
On the second day, she had the movers come and collect her things.
On the third day, she sat down for the last time at their candlelit Dining table, soft music playing in the background, and feasted on a pound of shrimp and a bottle of Chardonnay.
When she had finished, she went into each room and deposited a few of the resulting shrimp shells into the hollow of the curtain rods. She then cleaned up the kitchen and left.
The husband came back, with his new girl, and all was bliss for the first few days. Then it started, slowly but surely. Clueless, the man could not explain why the place smelled so bad.
They tried everything; cleaned &mopped and aired the place out. Vents were checked for dead rodents, carpets were steam cleaned, Air fresheners were hung everywhere. Exterminators were brought in; the carpets were replaced, and on it went.
Finally, they could take it no more and decided to move. The Moving Company arrived and did a very professional packing job, taking everything to their new home...
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:3, Informative)
And as far as it being "common practice" to take them with you, when I recently moved out of my old apartment the owner required me to remove the shades I had put in.
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:2)
The original post is not really a joke. It's a fairly well known urban legend [snopes.com], which is an anecdote that may or may not be true yet is passed off as the truth by the narrator.
Don't believe me? Try gathering your work colleagues and say 'I've got a great joke. So this man dumps his wife for a younger girl.... yadda yadda yadda....[punchline] AND THEY TAKE THE CURTAIN POLES WITH THEM!' Think many people would laugh?
However, if you said to your friends 'I read about this revenge ta
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:2)
Sorry to rain on the parade, but urban legends are not perpetuated simply because people believe them- they're perpetuated because people tell them to other people (the Perpetuate them!), irregardless whether or not they believe them. In any case, most story tellers just like to tell stories- its not a matter of believing or disbelieving, but a matter of- will the audience like the story?-
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:2)
Two of those that come to my mind are the McChicken Sandwhich mayonnaise/ulcer legend and the Nightclub ne
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:2)
I agree. I do think that one of the reasons that they don't tend to die out is because they are difficult to disprove (not many want to spend the time doing so either). I was a little harsh on you (rain on your parade). Sorry. Sometimes on /. we tend to forget that we're talking to other people. Anonymity doesn't always bring out the best in us. You were rea
Re:Tastes sweet but smells foul! (Score:2)
What this might mean (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What this might mean (Score:5, Insightful)
I think a better solution is to find a safe outlet for these urges. Sports are a fairly common choice, but there is a wide range of activities that allow you to vent your frustrations without driving dangerously or beating spouses/offspring.
Re:What this might mean (Score:4, Informative)
Re:What this might mean (Score:2)
You don't have to do something just because you "feel like it." If you're so interested in the evolution of impulse, stop and think why we (humans) also evolved the ability to override those impulses, and how it separates us from the (other) animals.
Re:What this might mean (Score:3, Interesting)
That's a very essentialist view. (Score:2)
We're socialized to see revenge as a good thing. When was the last time you saw media that showed someone getting revenge, which was portayed as justified, and then the revenge turned out to be a thing tha
Re:What this might mean (Score:2)
It doesn't have to. Repression (what I assume you are referring to) is basically a brute force resistance against our emotions and I'm sure most slashdotters have figured out that it doesn't work. It just feeds two conflicting emotions which creates internal turmoil and - like you said - at it's extreme will drive someone to a breakdown. But repression isn't the only way to go against your basic instincts.
I've f
Re:What this might mean (Score:2, Interesting)
I think you're half right there. Once in a high school art class, I was drawing something and this jackass sitting across the table kept spinning his book, shoving it as close as possible to my paper, closer and closer each time, just to get a reaction from me. Eventually I grabbed the book and shoved it off the table, but he just continued with another book.
So I grabbed the book and threw it at his head. That r
Re:What this might mean (Score:4, Insightful)
You put up with his actions for a few minutes. That is what we call tolerance. Something is bothering you, but you don't do anything about it, you tolerate it. This doesn't work because even though you don't put out a reaction two other things happen. You are still unhappy, and the other person still gains joy. Also you bottle up whatever you would have let out.
Forgiveness is when someone does something and you say, even though you bothered me, that's ok. Instead of doing nothing you respond to the annoyance with a positive. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. Usually its an acknowledgement of your displeasure and the annoying guy still has fun. And now that you are marked as a source of fun, you will be a future target.
The real way to avoid tolerance, forgiveness and revenge is apathy. So, he's spinning his book. WHo cares? So he ruins your drawing, who cares? Let it happen and carry on. It's not enough to just carry on though, you have to legitimately not care. People can sense it if you are getting frustrated and then you've lost. I legitimately don't care what other people think about me or what other people do. It's fantastic. Because of this I say and do whatever I want and most consequences evaporate. This doesn't necessarily mean I do evil things. Whatever I want usually means trying to help people and do good. But I don't let the actions or opinions of others guide my decisions or actions.
If this guy did to me what he did to you he would have a very tough time. First when he couldn't get a reaction he would try harder. Now he's not having fun because he's putting in more effort and not getting a return out of it. Two things can happen. Either he will give up because its too much effort, or he will hit me first. If he gives up, I win. If he hits first, it's all over. I get up and send him to the hospital. I never hit first, ever. I'm almost pacifist in that way. But if I get hit, nukes come out. And demonstrating this behavior tends to make it so that people don't bother you so much anymore. Both because of fear and lack of fun.
Re:What this might mean (Score:1)
Re:What this might mean (Score:4, Insightful)
'[I]f we want to be civilized humans, we have to go against these basic, animalistic instincts.'
'Is anyone else here thinking "Prisoner's dilemma"?'
In the iterated prisoner's dilemma [wikipedia.org], the potential for revenge is an incentive to cooperate. In light of this, your assumption -- that revenge is inherently inimical to civilization -- does not obviously hold.
Re:What this might mean (Score:2)
Correct. Criminal punishment is a form of revenge. Once a crime hs been committed, it can't be uncommitted; the damage is done, and no form of punishment or retribution or revenge will undo it. So why do we fine, incarcerate, or execute criminals?
Revenge -- righteous, justified revenge by the will of the people -- does have its place in society, because it has a deterrent effect on future crime. On the
South africa (Score:5, Insightful)
South africa had seen a very bitter and long conflict not just between white and black but between whites and whites. Brown and black. Black and black. Zulus where used by the white goverment as a way to keep the ANC down. People from india where put in a middle position. Jews were on the outside white but just as prosecuted.
So why was there no revenge? Their sure was enough on all sides to be bitter about.
Because all sides realized that revenge was not an option. Even the neo-nazis realized that either there was peace or they were going to get slaughtered.
Peace was possible because no side wanted to risk war.
An example to the world that we can rise above ourselves. And sadly one that is almost impossible to duplicate. Usually at least one side thinks that he will win the war. The person cutting you off doesn't consider that he will die horribly in an accident or that you will gun him down. The rapist does not consider he will go to jail. The troll does not consider that someone will look him up and punch his face in.
South africa didn't take revenge because they were afraid of what revenge would do to them.
So I disagree with out. I think revenge is very usefull. Most usefull when both sides fear the potential of revenge.
The extreme side of the lack of fear of revenge are terrorist attacks. Al Quada could attack because they didn't fear anything america could do back. Or do you really think Osama Bin Laden gives a damn about the people on his side killed?
On the other hand america can act like a real prick because it does not live in fear that someday the world will get revenge. Look at vietnam. America slaughtered yet lives free from ever having to face the consequences.
Revenge is sweet but the fear of revenge keeps humans "civilized" where civilized translates as "from bashing each others head in".
I wouldn't glorify fear (Score:2)
Don't glorify fear. Fear makes people make BAD decisions. They tend to panic and lose perspective. Fear has nothing to do with this, although a little fear is always good for staying alive.
It's about seeing how small we really are. What does one life matter, my life? I can go without a n
Re:What this might mean (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What this might mean (Score:3, Insightful)
What the hell are you talking about ?!? Animals don't exert revenge, it's a purely human reaction. Aniimals just roll over and get eaten or manage to flee. Period.
Lex Talionis was actually the first good law; it meant you couldn't exert more revenge onto someone than they had done to you. You couldn't have someone killed for stealing a piece of bread: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If you put criminals awa
Re:What this might mean (Score:4, Interesting)
Not so -- not so at all. Chimpanzees have been observed conducting raids on rival chimp troops, kidnapping the offspring of these rival groups and killing, frequently eating, their victims. The rival group will conduct a retributive raid, killing the offspring of the original group, and so on and so forth.
While googling around, I also found this article [dirtdoctor.com] about bluejays exacting revenge on a dog.
Finally, in a somewhat more embarrassing anecdote: My ex-husband had a cat who sometimes seemed to take his anger into her own hands (paws?). Not too long before I moved out, we'd been fighting almost constantly, and one night I woke up in bed to discover the sheets wet and stinky and the cat placidly walking away. It had jumped up on the bed and peed on me.
I have no idea what it was thinking, but it certainly didn't seem random.
Re:What this might mean (Score:2)
Social Behavior can be Evolved (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Social Behavior can be Evolved (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't you think humans form packs just to go out there to beat the crap out of that other pack of humans?
All there is to that "social" behavior...
And NO, to me humans don't look at all like ants, bees or termites. The little guys have a collective purpose. Do we?
Re:Social Behavior can be Evolved (Score:2)
Another link: (Score:2, Insightful)
It makes sense really. (Score:3, Insightful)
Damn. That's some revenge (Score:4, Funny)
He invites a couple of his buddies over and they're all sitting around having a great time eating the cookies and watching some episodes of South Park.
Right in the middle of one episode the tape cuts to a home video of his wife on her knees giving his best friend oral sex.
After a few seconds, he does his business in her mouth and she turns and spits the load right into the mixing bowl of cookie dough. She then looks at the camera and says, "By the way, I want a divorce."
Ellison vs. Gates (Score:1)
Well now... (Score:4, Funny)
FPS (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a little George Costanza in all of us (Score:5, Funny)
GEORGE: Revenge.
JERRY: Oh, the best revenge is living well.
GEORGE: There's no chance of that.
Not only revenge (Score:5, Interesting)
Many things can give pleasure. Take a look at computer games, their aim (let's say DOOM3) and realize the fact, that this - not "winning" the whole game itself (as it's impossible in most multiplayer games) - is pleasant.
Killing, destroying, burning, making money in not-always-legal ways, ruining other people. Yes, that can give pleasure. Thanks to computer games everyone can do these things without harming anyone.
Reciprocity Promotes Cooperation (Score:4, Interesting)
After I read the book in college, I actually employed the strategy in everyday life. My experience also suggests tit-for-tat works. One guy did a bad deed; and I responded in kind. It did feel very satisfying to get revenge-- like an intrinsic form of justice. He didn't do it again.
As long as you respond proportionally third parties don't look down on you and you don't have to worry about the same person screwing with you again because they learn the lesson of reciprocity.
ONE CAVEAT: Don't use tit-for-tat on crazy / unstable people. They're liable to respond again disproportionately. There the strategy doesn't work so well.
That's my experience.
Re:Reciprocity Promotes Cooperation (Score:2)
Thank god I'm fucking crazy.
Re:Reciprocity Promotes Cooperation (Score:2)
Hmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Revenge is a deterrent factor. If you fear revenge, you either have to be less of a bastard or a total bastard. It raises the bar for bad behavior.
It's far from a perfect control on bad behavior (a certain percentage of people will interpret the rule as "try to ensure the victim cannot get revenge"), and perspectives are often skewed on who started what, but there is a form of control here that at least works sometimes.
This pleasure response is there for a reason. Revenge works. Sometimes.
Revenge is only unethical to the extent that the target gets more that it deserves (or you get the wrong target, or you deserved what you got in the first place).
Now, being quite imperfect, we get the "system" screwed up a lot. Which is why a lot of people want to avoid the principle at all.
But like the "violence never works" crowd, as long as they insist on platitudes that are demonstrably untrue (and they deny basic physiological/psychological principles), they will have a big fight on their hands.
On the other hand, the better you understand your behavior, its causes and results, the more control you can have over it.
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
Please give examples. You may be right, but giving this statement as fact without providing any concrete examples to show its factual correctness (or mentioning what these basic physiological/psychological principles or demonstrably true facts are) does not help in furthering your argument. "Vi
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
It worked for Saddam Hussein as a way of getting power.
It worked for Saddam Hussein as a way of keeping power.
It worked for the US as a way of removing Saddam Hussein from power, though to be sure it failed spectacularly at all the other stated goals.
If violence doesn't work, why do we have police equipped with pepper spray, batons and even fi
Re:Hmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
And what about self-defense? No one has ever protected themselves, their family, their country using force?
This is a strange world you live in, what is it called?
I don't mean to mock, I just find it odd that there is
Depends on pecking order (Score:5, Interesting)
Sadly evolution has probably coded that revenge is sweet, as long as it is somebody lower in the pecking order.
Re:Depends on pecking order (Score:5, Interesting)
In dogs, where the individual dog ranks in the pack's social hierarchy is inherited, not made.
An alpha NEVER has to enforce its position -- the alpha (of which there may be several in a pack) is the natural leader, and all the beta and "nobody" dogs *avoid* giving offense. The alpha will graciously allow other dogs to take its toys or food (unless it REALLY wants them, in which case it need merely "ask") and will generally not act dominant at all -- but no beta EVER challenges a true alpha. Alphas do not fight with other alphas, either. Alphas train easily but are go-getters, so can overwhelm the inexperienced.
Betas (which come in several gradients, from top-rung outright aggressive types to bottom-rung sneak-fighters) DO fight among themselves, but the winner is *always* the dog that was socially higher to begin with, and occasionally the loser is killed since *everyone* will gang up on any dog that goes down (tho fights to the death happen much more often with females than with males). An alpha WILL participate once the loser goes down, but will not fight with anyone else. Betas are much like a human with "short man's complex" or "a chip on their shoulder", and are often difficult to train since their first thought is usually "you can't make me". Low-end betas have a relatively high incidence of juvenile-onset psychosis.
(Betas are a PITA in a kennel, which is why I've bred most of the "beta crap" out of my own dogs
Nobodies don't "count" in the social order, and are ignored by alphas and by most betas, tho a few low-end betas will pick on nobodies. They train easily for anyone, as they are purely followers and never "argue". A nobody is essentially an alpha without the go-gettum (initiative).
There are pack behaviour thresholds at 5-6, 12-15, and around 25, where some behaviours change. Once you get more than ~25 dogs that can all *see* one another (it does not matter if they are together, separated, or how much personal space each one has, only if they can SEE the others), there is some social breakdown and you get more aggression than from the same dogs in smaller pack units.
Now, look around at the human race, and you'll see pretty much the same social sets: leaders with no need to bully to get their way (alphas), average joes who sometimes feel a need to show off how tough they are (high and middling betas), varying degrees of misfits (low-end betas), and people who just live their lives and keep their heads down (nobodies), with aggressive tendencies sometimes exacerbated by population pressures.
"He was a leader because he did not look back to see who was following him." -- from Mr.Roberts
Revenge is a dish that's best served cold (Score:2)
EVERYTHING we do is pleasure center based (Score:2, Interesting)
theory: the joy of revenge (Score:3, Insightful)
so revenge is an act who increasess self-esteem which gives satisfaction (this is clear, I think).
therefore it's not an instinctive thing, rather a "point-of-view"-thing which comes out of rationality.
I myself think, I am superior if I stay with my ethics and do not hurt people in revenge. That doesen't mean I wouldn't hurt people at all, but not in revenge.
This gives me satisfaction, too.
behavior != feeling (Score:2)
Will this new light cause us to rethink our ideas about "nature" v. "nurture"?
Not True (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not True (Score:2)
Not at all. I enjoy watching "World's Wildest Police Chases" and "Cops" on TV because the crooks generally get what's coming to them. It's a form of revenge, only in this case through the proxy of the long arm of the law. This has nothing to do with my personal egocentricity overcoming the boundaries of right and wrong - in fact, it stands solidly on the side of right in getting revenge on those who obviously have done something wr
Whoda Thunk? (Score:2)
Revenge vs Justice, Pleasure vs Happiness (Score:5, Insightful)
It's too bad that in many western societies Justice is almost equivalent to Revenge.
This may be a little offtopic...
Justice should never appeal to the "lower" human feeling, but rather be designed to prevent crime from happending in the first place. Revenge has no place in Justice as it does nothing to "undo" the crime after it happened.
Crimes are prevented by:
- Eliminating the reason (for example poverty and social inequalities).
- Education (for example learn to deal with jealousy, envy, and other desires and feelings in a non-violent way)
- Deterrance (if you commit a crime, face the consequences).
- Reparation (not preventing anything, but necessary to repair the damage caused - this is not revenge!)
This is a big difference, although in practise the differences are subtle; i.e. are you locking somebody up because of revenge or deterrance?When somebody is punished for a crime, there should be no pleasure and no feeling of revenge or even accomblishment! Rather there should be the urge to understand why the crime happened and the understanding that this is necessary to deter the next.
A Christian Perspective (Score:2, Interesting)
Revenge in the Christian religion is right out, in all circumstances. In no case should an individual take revenge in the case of being wronged. The reason is two-fold: Christians should forgive, just as they have been forgiven in Christ's atoning sacrifice, and revenge is God's prerogative. All harms done against other people are ultimately seen as attacks on God.
In this l
Revenge (Score:2, Insightful)
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
This was known a while ago (Score:2)
-Genghis Khan (greatest conquerer)
Re:But (Score:1)
Re:But (Score:4, Funny)
Repeat joke from submission, get modded funny. Got it.
Re:But (Score:1)
Re:But (Score:1)
Re:Revenge stories? (Score:2)
The lord was so incensed that he drove into the spot anyway and crushed the young man's car.
He got out, asked the yound man how much his car cost and promptly wrote him a cheque and walked away, big smile on his face.
Re:Revenge stories? (Score:2)
Re:Revenge stories? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Revenge stories? (Score:2, Insightful)
So I walked away, maintained contact with the people who used to work for me and my peers, never badmouthed the guy who sacked me, and went on to have a good life.
Re:Revenge stories? (Score:2)
Re:i sent this to the journalist (Score:2)
Now I double dare you to send that same e-mail to the scientist who was the author of the study. [stanford.edu]