Why vengeance is good

Teaching Philosophy: The Answer to Automation? Introducing: Francis on Film R. April How Many Children? The Culture Wars: Phase 2?

Should the ethics of Presidential candidates matter? Nivison The More Good the Better? Why Philosophize? Is Anarchy Possible? Why Be Moral? Does Language Affect Thought? What Might Have Been! What's on your summer reading list for ? What Are Leaders Made of? A Blog for Christmas Is it wrong to wreck the earth? Kierkegaard Is Nothing Sacred Anymore? The Extended Mind What is an adult? Too Much Information? Corporations as Persons Psychological vs. March Fear!

Live Blogging! April Journalistic Ethics? Beyond the Cartesian Moment? To blog is to forgive? Sorry folks - we had to reset our website so we lost all comments made after Sunday! This is a reposting of my blog for this week's show. Wednesday, October 16, -- PM. This show would better be entitled the immorality of revenge. Your lawyer is saying justice and revenge are the same thing. I couldn't disagree more.

YThe show demonstrated zero understanding of the unjust conditions that underly perpetration in many cases. Those are unjust conditions. Victims should not decide what happens to perpetrators. Often victims are indeed part of the dynamic. Not always. But sometimes. Your speaker lacks a sense of justice because he is so keen on revenge.

I believe the desire for revenge should not be indulged. Thursday, October 17, -- PM. Somehow, they missed protection of society as one of the principal reasons. Which makes him likely to repeat. Incarcerating is a way of society choosing to defend itself. John believes that the reason the US went after and killed bin Laden was revenge. Several other attacks had failed. The idea that killing bin Laden was solely or even primarily out of revenge strains credulity considerably.

Another reason, deterrence, is quite powerful. The problem with eye-for-an-eye or commensurate punishment is that, unless the perpetrator believes with certainty that he would be caught, commensurate punishment cannot deter. Granted there is no credible evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder compared with life-imprisonment, but only naivete could allow one to conclude that would-be criminals do not weigh potential incarceration.

Additionally, in criminal proceedings, the victim or the victim's family can become a witness, only insofar as he has something material to contribute -- material in the determination of guilty or not guilty. Otherwise, to describe the extent of the harm incites emotions in the jurors, who ought to render their judgements dispassionately. Once found guilty, then victims and their families can testify, in the sentencing phase.

Emotional decisions can too easily compound one injustice, the harm caused to the victim, with a second injustice, a wrongful conviction, because jurors will be more likely to want to search for someone to blame. Lastly, the guest's argument seems to be that since vengeance feels good and is natural, it is moral.

Yet monogamy is rare in Nature and for many does not feel good; theft feels good and is natural, particularly when the perpetrator can "get away with it.

Friday, October 18, -- PM. I think the best revenge is to turn the other cheek. But be forewarned, that kind of morality takes the most practice and strength. Saturday, October 19, -- PM. I felt that the guest came dangerously close to endorsing subjective justice - because you felt that you were wronged, you have the right to seek justice against the person you deem to be the perpetrator.

The example he gave was extreme - the murderer of a child who used legal loopholes to receive a reduced sentence for his crime. What about less clear circumstances, when guilt hasn't been admitted, when the crime isn't as heinous?

Few things seem as dangerous to me as permitting subjective justice. There's no process in it, no reason, no evaluation of the evidence. It's lawless. On a completely different note, I really disliked that the guest said of a caller, "I'm sure she's lovely, but [her ideas are ridiculous]. There are more respectful ways of disagreeing. Sunday, October 20, -- PM. I think we have to differentiate revenge first.

As the name and description implies, it is a premeditated action to return the pain that was inflicted. In nature, when a tiger bites your leg of after you've poked it with a stick, we do not call it revenge, instead it is normal behavior for the animal in question: it simply defends it's own territory and it's own life. Assuming animals do not have higher thinking -like humans and other primates- this causal relationship is almost automatic. Now when applied to humans, we can say the same.

When someone attacks you, the autonomous nervous system has only two choices: 1 release adrenaline to the muscles and prepare to run. Still, we are human and we are capable of higher thinking. We can basically override our basic instincts, we can master our bodily responses. So we can choose to defuse the situation for our own best interest, because every fight has victims on both sides. We can look into the future, and we can predict that we might get hurt, die or will be arrested if we lose our cool.

But then the question arises: what is this emotion that we call revenge? I think it has to do with our ego and the need to take action upon inflicted pain. The choice of fight or flight did not satisfy us, and in the act our ego might be bruised.

Others have witness our shame, our guilt and dehumanization and the infliction of pain. Since humans are social animals, and do have a kind of caste system or pecking order, the social degradation in a certain situation makes want to restore our former social position. And so basic territorial behavior comes back into play. We can either let it go, and possibly satisfy yourself with a lower social ranking, or take the action of revenge to reclaim our social position.

The paradox in this, is that by the act of taking revenge, we might even get further down the social ladder. On the other hand, we also might be seen as strong leaders. In any event, it is a highly complex emotion. Monday, October 21, -- PM. As everyone is acutely aware, criminals and sociopaths are murdering unprepared bystanders at an ever alarming rate.

Thus, the increasing demand for and proliferation of firearms. My wife, long an opponent of gun culture, has finally recognized that recent changes in gun laws were long overdue.

We will be going on some shooting expeditions soon, so that she might understand and become suitably proficient with one or more handguns. Morality be damned. No one has carte blanch to take our lives without a fight. Wednesday, October 23, -- PM. I appreciate higher thinking as much as the next homo sapient. This evening, though, I encountered a paradigm not previously known.

A person new to my realm of experience was speaking of something called a Canadian Tuxedo party. Had never heard of this. Seems people show up, dressed head-to-toe in denim, and do whatever else they may do to denigrate Canada and Canadian culture. Jane not her real name is around thirty-five years of age. I asked her what she knew about Canada.

She admitted not much. I asked her what she thought about such tuxedo parties. Her response was, well, it was what we did. And so, here we go and there we are Unless someone wants something different. Friday, November 8, -- PM. Forgiveness is powerful? I must admit I had not heard that before. Many years ago well, more than ten and less than twenty , I attended an employer-sponsored, week-long training session in Maryland.

The training was conducted by notables from notable university environs. The subject: mediation. I suppose so, but never really got to find out, because after that training and expenditure of state money, I was never afforded the opportunity to exercise the skills gained: Trained to be a mediator but never given the opportunity to develop that skill set.

Never did figure that one out. So, are apology and forgiveness the same? Ethically, 21st century homo sapiens is mostly bankrupt, in my view. You may quote me, if you wish. The notion is not new. After thought: The political jackass who sent me to mediation training lost his job, only to be promoted to another political jackass positionhmmph. Thursday, July 7, -- PM.

I have heard most of the platitudes and considered the latitudes associated with this age-old question. I have also thought about what a wise former employer used to say: You've got to pay the price.

If someone wrongs you, on whatever level, there is a price to pay. You either get mad or you get even. Because if you immediately forgive or "turn the other cheek", it is your privilege to be slapped again.

But, it is not solely for yourself that you need to respond proactively to the wrongdoer. It is for the benefit of others who may suffer from his wrath when he has faced no retribution and no credible deterrence from those previously harmed. People who are allowed to get away with murder will often murder again if there has been no penalty. Old habits are hard to break, so do your fellows a favor: pay the price. Discourage the scoundrel. Display some fortitude. Do not fall prey to mis-directed magnanimity.

Or as bikers call it: pussification. Lex talionis is a maximum, not a minimum. In a philosophical discussion this should suffice, but apparently this is a room where the joke needs to be explained. That is, law is enacted amongst us to limit and eliminate revenge. Or, as Gandhi is reputed to say, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind!

And without an ethic that prevents that preemptive strike the law itself is undermined in its legitimate meaning as the suppression of revenge, and of its cause Though I have to admit a certain sympathy with the character played by Michael Palin in the movie A Fish Called Wanda, where, in the final scene, he shouts, repeatedly, the single word, "Revenge!

Saturday, July 9, -- PM. People want all sorts of things, from vengeance to happiness and security for all to sex with their children to forbidding marriages between people of different races. Civilisation is a process of deciding which are worthy or, less stridently moralistically, more beneficial, though there is of course a moral judgement there as well and which are not, and particularly which of those are worthy of being backed by the power of the locally-relevant force monopoly.

What is 'natural' may work well for vands of thirty to fifty hunter-gatherers, being they Rousseavian paragons or nasty, brutish, poor, and short, but we can do better, we have, and the better we have done, the less we've craved vengeance.

And to say that we are able to recognise proportional revenge as embodied in the law and have no long-standing feuds is ridiculous in the extreme: from the Israeli-Palestinian borders to Dallas to every wronged-feeling jerk with a gun to a U. Your guest should apologize to the lady that mentioned new brain and old brain. He called her silly, which revealed his ignorance and came across as very arrogant. It is a well known fact that our brain is structured in layers and the old brain, also known as reptilian brain, is responsible for very immediate reactions such as flight-or-fight.

On top of that brain the mammalian brain was developed and is responsible for social behavior to oversimplify again on top of it the neo-cortex which enables rational thinking. This is what she was clearly referring to and it is surprising that your guest was ignorant of it. It would have suited him better to be less condescending with people that call in. Your guest today "Revenge" is an absolute jerk and a sexist PIG. Referring to a caller as "Lovely" and "Silly" was outright condescending and the comment of coupling her with the other caller was downright reprehensible.

You guys really should have taken him to task. Reflect Philosophize on your inability to confront such horrible sexism. Monday, July 25, -- PM. It's a matter of which polity people feel most aligned with. Revenge is never doing justice. It is unhelpful to think positively about what justice, right and wrong, is. As long as our goal is to "do justice" we will fall into the trap of finding ways of legitimizing revenge and retribution. Or, for that matter, of being rude or taking offense at it.

It is a very dubious business to set up systems justifying punitive measures of any kind. Restoring peace is the only rational meaning to the law, as to customs and good manners which are not supercilious. Injustice is never an isolated event.

It requires social support. People must feel that the polity they are allied to has their back. One person cannot enslave another alone, or throw the first stone in a riot. It requires a polity. The point of justice, then, is to deny that polity by opening avenues of resolution between all divisions in the community.

Ethos, that is, must be inclusive, and never exclusive. People must feel embraced and never shut out. And that means the violator must be made to find a polity that will naturalize him or her to that embrace rather than to the exclusion of the other.

Revenge, retribution, and even punishment, is never doing justice. But how hard it is to convince any polity that peace is the only just response to political division, any more than that reconciliation is the only just response to acts of violence or insult, or just bad manners!

Thursday, August 5, -- AM. The uploading or posting, or threat of posting, of sexually explicit photographs or videos online, without the consent of those depicted, is used to threaten, control, abuse, bully and humiliate those in the images or film. The explicit nature of the images is simply the method or vehicle through which the revenge is exacted. Skip to main content. Search form Search. The Morality of Revenge. Laura Maguire. The Psychology of Cruelty Sep 16, Throughout history, people have committed all kinds of cruel, degrading, and evil acts toward other people.

Good, Evil, and the Divine Plan May 05, A theodicy is an explanation by a philosopher or theologian about why a world created by a kind and all-powerful God contains so much suffering. Bargaining with the Devil Oct 24, Compromise is the condition of peace and progress. The Psychology of Evil Jul 17, True evil seems easy to recognize: the killing of innocent children; assigning whole populations to death by gassing, or napalm, or aerial bombing.

Blog Archive November Socially Intelligent Robots. Persons, Community, and the Akan. Why Is Math So Useful? On Awesomeness. Is Facebook Morally Responsible? Microaggressions and Intention.

The Slow Miracles of Thought. Literary Minds. Summer Dylan Reading. Unnecessary Necessities. The Philosophy of the Vienna Circle. Cracking Down on Disinformation. What Montaigne Knew. Is Meritocracy Possible? A Solution. What Makes A Man? Replacing Freud. What Tech Says. The Mathematics of Democracy. When Do False Beliefs Exculpate? Gaining Knowledge without Learning. December The Year in Poetry. Finding Minds in a Material World. Should the Arts Be for All? Whose Fault Is It Anyway?

Why We Argue About Fiction. Why Games Matter. Reasons to Hate. Abortion and Humanity. Skepticism and Trust in Science. Philosophy for the Apocalypse. Who Gets to be a Citizen? Does Meritocracy Have Merit? Discriminating Streets. Abortion and Dehumanization. On Jerks and Ethicists.

A Cat's Life. The Value of Metaphor in a Pandemic. Benjamin and Modern Enchantment. The Ethics of Pet Keeping. Celebrating Our th Episode. Covid and the Veil of Ignorance.

Your Racist Mental Habits. Demonizing Black Men. Listener Covidundrums. Puzzle 3: Kant on Lying to Robots. Can Philosophy Help in a Crisis? Narrative Burnout. A Pandemic of Dreams. More Money Matters. FrancisOnFilm: Crip Camp. Money Matters. Proust and Social Distance. Puzzle 2: What is an Identity? Philosophy and the Superhero. Trying to Let Go of the Past. Thinking and Mental Action.

Puzzle 1: Are Beliefs Voluntary? Viral Xenophobia. Sorry, Critics: Parasite is a Good Movie. Anti-Sacred Spaces. Is the Self Real? FrancisOnFilm: Dionysus for Docs. Rough Humor. Comedy on the Edges. What the Future Holds. How Much Thought Is Inactive? A Tribute to Ken Taylor. Nonhuman Persons, Nonhuman Rights. Francis-on-Film: Parasite. Sanctuary Cities.

Part II. Hobbes and the Absolute State. Real Horror. Machine Consciousness. FrancisOnFilm: Downton Abbey. Should We Trust Polls? The Appeal of Authoritarianism. Music as a Way of Knowing. Explanation at Its Best. What's In a Picture? Changing Minds on Climate Change. Against Introspection. Self Knowledge on Trial. The Doomsday Doctrine. A Simple Test for Fake News. Postmodernism: The Decline of Truth.

How to Think Two Thoughts at Once. JS Mill and the Good Life. Letting Go of Human Nature. Tolerance and Radical Disagreement. A Licentious Lannister? Working for Faith. What Is Reading? Anti-Semitism is Racism. FrancisOnFilm: Shazam! Philanthropy vs. Authority and Resistance.

Wanting to Want for Its Own Sake. Hacking Our Sense Perceptions. Sexy Beasts. Ken's Big Announcement. FrancisOnFilm: Green Book. Your Question: Integrate or Assimilate? Controversy About Climate Denial.

Immigration and Multiculturalism. Mind the Gaps! FrancisOnFilm: Minding the Gap. Five Types of Climate Change Deniers. Finding Yourself in a Virtual Fiction.

FrancisOnFilm: Aquaman. The Puzzle of the Unconscious. Is Envy Always a Vice? FrancisOnFilm: Brexit. Getting Clear on the Replication Crisis. How Not to Fall Asleep. Freud's Philosophical Challenges. December The Examined Year: — Uncut. On Morally Condemning the Past. Philosophical Freud. Foucault on Power. The Creative Life. Does Reputation Matter?

Anti-Semitism The Wrong Abortion Question. How MeToo Helps Men. Can Reason Save Us? The Philosophy of Westworld. Do They Believe in God? The Psychology of Cruelty. Lessons from Lobsters. Athletics and the Philosophical Life. Should Algorithms Decide? Failing Successfully.

He became associated with Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation, a Massachusetts-based group that helps families cope with the loss of slain loved ones. To the anger of some Oklahoma City victims' families, Welch strongly opposed the execution of Timothy McVeigh in and warned his execution would not bring anyone true peace of mind. Two years after McVeigh's execution, Welch says some families are still searching for the sense of closure they thought his death would bring.

He just went to sleep. Two objectives of the criminal justice system are to obtain retribution for the crime victim while also rehabilitating the offender — goals which can seem to clash at times. Some states have adopted victim offender reconciliation programs, where convicted offenders admit wrongdoing, have a supervised encounter with the people they've victimized and, under the guidance of a counselor, work out a restitution agreement.

Under these programs, criminals pay for their crimes while having the chance to earn the forgiveness of their victims. The pilot — or pilots — who dropped the bomb that killed Ali Abbas' parents and took away his arms have never been identified publicly and do not face any criminal charges.

Pentagon officials have said it is very difficult to match individual soldiers with the targets they hit in combat, especially when multiple strikes are involved. But perhaps an approach similar to a victim offender reconciliation program could help Ali deal with his own need for vengeance.

It's hard to say, but if the process was made clear to the boy, the pilot is making serious steps to fully understand how he impacted him, it might be easier. Although there's no way of restoring what Ali lost, Claassen said the boy probably needs an acknowledgement of his wrongs, and a chance to respond. This boy suffered a horrible loss and there's not much that could be done to make it up to him.

For now, Ali is under the care of his uncle and is living as a guest of Britain's Limbless Association in a suburb of London. He has said he is looking forward to returning home to Iraq as he undergoes occupational therapy and gets used to his new limbs — a daily reminder of his painful loss.

Maybe someday they won't remind him of desire for revenge. We'll notify you here with news about. Turn on desktop notifications for breaking stories about interest? Comments 0. An awesome community filled with like-minded people and trained support mentors to help you through the tough stuff. Create a free, confidential account and join the conversation in seconds.

Revenge is the action of hurting or harming someone in response to a grievance or wrong suffered at their hands. Spend your time on positive thoughts and experiences. We post daily positive quotes on our Instagram. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.

This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information. Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website. Close Menu Bullying.

Mental Health. StopAsianHate Support Hub. Coronavirus Support Hub. Here are 7 reasons why seeking revenge is a bad idea: 1. In fact, it might make you feel worse. It could backfire.

You are wasting precious time. How can you make way for new, positive experiences if you are preoccupied with wreaking havoc? Because, karma. Whether you believe in it or not, karma makes a much better friend than a foe — make sure to keep on the right side of it: 6.

You could get caught in an endless revenge loop. So, is revenge worth it?