What's wrong with revenge?

What's so inherently wrong with it? Whenever the death penalty comes up for a debate, it inevitably boils down to "justice vs. revenge", those against it using this rationale as a point in their favor? But why is revenge so bad? What's wrong with bloodlust and wanting retribution? It's entirely natural. I don't buy the whole "it brings us down to their level" argument either. I believe a person's worth is not dictated by their actions, everyone is born equal as humans.

The death penalty costs a lot of money.

It doesn't prevent crime.

An innocent person might be condemned to death.

There are many, many things wrong with going for revenge.

In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with revenge. In fact, contrary to many, I think wanting vengeance can be psychologically healthy. The death penalty is not about revenge, it's about the state executing an individual after due process, and what effect that has on society.Rhazakna

I think wanting vengeance can be psychologically healthy.Rhazakna

i always felt like castration would be equally suitable...

Sorry, I should've clarified. I don't mean this to be a debate on the death penalty. I'm just wondering, when viewed by itself, is revenge such a bad thing? Like someone said, it can be psychologically healthy.

Sorry, I should've clarified. I don't mean this to be a debate on the death penalty. I'm just wondering, when viewed by itself, is revenge such a bad thing? Like someone said, it can be psychologically healthy.

MirkoS77

I find it much more refreshing to treat others the way I want to be treated.

Sorry, I should've clarified. I don't mean this to be a debate on the death penalty. I'm just wondering, when viewed by itself, is revenge such a bad thing? Like someone said, it can be psychologically healthy.

MirkoS77

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]I think wanting vengeance can be psychologically healthy.ghoklebutter

The desire to meet out retribution to those whose continued existence would be destructive is, I think, a natural thing. Now, whether actually taking revenge is healthy is another matter, but I think the desire is just a part of being human.

there is a small chance that an innocent person could be executed. that is way to large of a chance. it needs to be put to an end.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]I think wanting vengeance can be psychologically healthy.Rhazakna

The desire to meet out retribution to those whose continued existence would be destructive is, I think, a natural thing. Now, whether actually taking revenge is healthy is another matter, but I think the desire is just a part of being human.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] How?ghoklebutter

The desire to meet out retribution to those whose continued existence would be destructive is, I think, a natural thing. Now, whether actually taking revenge is healthy is another matter, but I think the desire is just a part of being human.

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

The desire to meet out retribution to those whose continued existence would be destructive is, I think, a natural thing. Now, whether actually taking revenge is healthy is another matter, but I think the desire is just a part of being human.

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]

Sorry, I should've clarified. I don't mean this to be a debate on the death penalty. I'm just wondering, when viewed by itself, is revenge such a bad thing? Like someone said, it can be psychologically healthy.

ghoklebutter

I don't think it's irrational at all. In fact, I can't think of a more rational emotion than wanting revenge. I have a hard time believing anyone, after someone had raped and murdered their mother and sister, would say to themselves, "I want to kill this ****. Wait, that's irrational." Maybe unnecessary, but not irrational.

And revenge does make you feel better. If someone's tailgating me, I'll pull over and get right on their ass in return. It feels great to make people feel what they've put upon others. And I see nothing wrong with that.

What's so inherently wrong with it? Whenever the death penalty comes up for a debate, it inevitably boils down to "justice vs. revenge", those against it using this rationale as a point in their favor? But why is revenge so bad? What's wrong with bloodlust and wanting retribution? It's entirely natural. I don't buy the whole "it brings us down to their level" argument either. I believe a person's worth is not dictated by their actions, everyone is born equal as humans.

MirkoS77

Justice (in the legal sense) is suppose to be neutral, not moved by emotions.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] Oh. Well I do agree that the feeling is natural. I just don't see any good reason to actually take revenge.Silverbond

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

[QUOTE="Silverbond"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

Rhazakna

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

And the killer's family mourns his death. Net happiness has, in fact, not increased.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

[QUOTE="Silverbond"] Killing the serial killer doesn't bring your family member back. So in the end, the source of your unhappiness is still present.worlock77

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

And the killer's family mourns his death. Net happiness has, in fact, not increased.

Part of the net happiness increase is the fact that he can't kill anyone else.

Revenge is simply to get back at the whatever or whoever you seek it upon. Its only to make you feel better and not benefit anyone but yourself. Its selfish, emotional and can be done to do horrible things. True Justice is restoring order and protecting the peace of all.

Revenge is simply to get back at the whatever or whoever you seek it upon. Its only to make you feel better and not benefit anyone but yourself. Its selfish, emotional and can be done to do horrible things. True Justice is restoring order and protecting the peace of all.

ToastRider11

[QUOTE="ToastRider11"]

Revenge is simply to get back at the whatever or whoever you seek it upon. Its only to make you feel better and not benefit anyone but yourself. Its selfish, emotional and can be done to do horrible things. True Justice is restoring order and protecting the peace of all.

Rhazakna

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="ToastRider11"]

Revenge is simply to get back at the whatever or whoever you seek it upon. Its only to make you feel better and not benefit anyone but yourself. Its selfish, emotional and can be done to do horrible things. True Justice is restoring order and protecting the peace of all.

ToastRider11

This is an odd comment, since I'm not arguing that the current police or court system is based on revenge, just that revenge and concepts of "justice" are not inherently dichotomous, and that "justice" is more of an emotional salve for society than anything else

But let's take your example. Has order really been restored? In prison the robber will likely be raped, have to join a gang, and can very easily learn to be a better criminal. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the robber give retribution for his crimes? Restitutionary justice makes more sense to me than retributive justice.

I personally feel revenge can be a good thing. Lets ignore the large scale social implications of revenge and look at it on a personal level, as revenge is inherently a personal thing.

A way in which revenge can be a good thing is as a preventative measure in the future. Having a reputation for enacting hard revenge on someone who has wronged you can go a long way within smaller social circles. It makes most people think twice about crossing you. I've always believed in reacting to an unwanted situation with about 10 times more force that is probably required. This prevents escalation in most cases. It makes someone think twice about continuing, and thinking that maybe It's just a lot smarter (and safer) to drop it and leave each other alone.

As for the sub debate over "justice" and "revenge". Justice may not be emotional, but It is based within emotion. We make laws to prevent people from doing things we collectively don't like. That in and of itself is an emotional reaction. I would also argue morality in an emotional concept. To we pass laws preventing people from blasting loud music in their homes at 3am in the name of justice? No, we do it because we don't like it.

As for the sub debate over "justice" and "revenge". Justice may not be emotional, but It is based within emotion. We make laws to prevent people from doing things we collectively don't like. That in and of itself is an emotional reaction. I would also argue morality in an emotional concept. To we pass laws preventing people from blasting loud music in their homes at 3am in the name of justice? No, we do it because we don't like it.

keech

Thank you. To try to pretend that justice is not predicated on emotion and revenge is is disingenuous.

I suspect there is some element of revenge in justice. Otherwise, we would just incarcerate those people that we feel are dangerous and not those that wouldnt commit crimes again.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

Rhazakna

And the killer's family mourns his death. Net happiness has, in fact, not increased.

Part of the net happiness increase is the fact that he can't kill anyone else.

Net happiness? I get what you are trying to say here but I would tend the think that the greif of the killer's family would outweigh the "happiness" of the killer's would-be victims who havn't even heard of him. I have a pretty nuetral opinion. On the one hand, I would most certainly want revenge if I were wronged. However, I have the foresight to know that revenge is selfish and goes against my moral values, so it basically comes down to wether or not I will be able to control my emotions. Since I have never been in such a position, I have no idea whether or notgetting revenge would make me feel any better. Forget all of the movies you've seen about revenge.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

And the killer's family mourns his death. Net happiness has, in fact, not increased.

Tokugawa77

Part of the net happiness increase is the fact that he can't kill anyone else.

Net happiness? I get what you are trying to say here but I would tend the think that the greif of the killer's family would outweigh the "happiness" of the killer's would-be victims who havn't even heard of him. I have a pretty nuetral opinion. On the one hand, I would most certainly want revenge if I were wronged. However, I have the foresight to know that revenge is selfish and goes against my moral values, so it basically comes down to wether or not I will be able to control my emotions. Since I have never been in such a position, I have no idea whether or notgetting revenge would make me feel any better. Forget all of the movies you've seen about revenge.

Scenario 1: I kill the killer, thereby making it impossible for him to kill anyone else, making myself feel better, and deeply upsetting his family. His would be victims get to go on living, whatever their quality of life may be.

Scenario 2: I don't kill the killer, I get no psychological retribution, and he goes on to murder several people. His victim's families are distraught, I don't feel better, and he's free to keep doing this.

I think it's clear where the net increase in happiness (and utility, let's not forget that) lies, it's scenario number 1.

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

Part of the net happiness increase is the fact that he can't kill anyone else.

Rhazakna

Net happiness? I get what you are trying to say here but I would tend the think that the greif of the killer's family would outweigh the "happiness" of the killer's would-be victims who havn't even heard of him. I have a pretty nuetral opinion. On the one hand, I would most certainly want revenge if I were wronged. However, I have the foresight to know that revenge is selfish and goes against my moral values, so it basically comes down to wether or not I will be able to control my emotions. Since I have never been in such a position, I have no idea whether or notgetting revenge would make me feel any better. Forget all of the movies you've seen about revenge.

Scenario 1: I kill the killer, thereby making it impossible for him to kill anyone else, making myself feel better, and deeply upsetting his family. His would be victims get to go on living, whatever their quality of life may be.

Scenario 2: I don't kill the killer, I get no psychological retribution, and he goes on to murder several people. His victim's families are distraught, I don't feel better, and he's free to keep doing this.

I think it's clear where the net increase in happiness (and utility, let's not forget that) lies, it's scenario number 1.

Scenario 3: The killer is locked away in prison where he is never able to murder anyone else.

Hmm. On the whole serial killer thing. I believe in retribution before vengence. I would bring him in, and let the justice system handle it. However if there is no conviction because of a loophole or evidence thrown out for some idiotic reason, and not because he wasn't guilty, then sure. If he had killed my family, went and got set free even if he was guilty, then I would take his life. Also... Screw happiness. Peace of mind is more important than being happy. It may be a in between but it can be very peaceful. I do not think you can kill to make happiness after a tragic event. All you can do is bring a sense of peace by removing the known contributions. Which, in my opinion, is very healthy.CreasianDevaili

Those "loopholes" and evidence being thrown out are there for reasons. Even if that reason is that the police didn't follow procedure. And if they didn't follow procedure in one instance who's to say they followed it in all other instances? And who's to say their evidence, or even their word is reliable. And there's your reasonable doubt.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

Net happiness? I get what you are trying to say here but I would tend the think that the greif of the killer's family would outweigh the "happiness" of the killer's would-be victims who havn't even heard of him. I have a pretty nuetral opinion. On the one hand, I would most certainly want revenge if I were wronged. However, I have the foresight to know that revenge is selfish and goes against my moral values, so it basically comes down to wether or not I will be able to control my emotions. Since I have never been in such a position, I have no idea whether or notgetting revenge would make me feel any better. Forget all of the movies you've seen about revenge.

worlock77

Scenario 1: I kill the killer, thereby making it impossible for him to kill anyone else, making myself feel better, and deeply upsetting his family. His would be victims get to go on living, whatever their quality of life may be.

Scenario 2: I don't kill the killer, I get no psychological retribution, and he goes on to murder several people. His victim's families are distraught, I don't feel better, and he's free to keep doing this.

I think it's clear where the net increase in happiness (and utility, let's not forget that) lies, it's scenario number 1.

Scenario 3: The killer is locked away in prison where he is never able to murder anyone else.

Yeah, because no one ever gets murdered in prison!

My argument is not applicable to whether revenge is preferrable to letting the "justice sytem" handle it. If we were arguing that, I would have made a different argument. I made an example (an intenionally extreme example) to illustrate a utilitarian argument for revenge vs not taking revenge. Revenge has utility, as I have illustrated. Debate the point or stop posting non-sequitors.

Well, I've never equated the death penalty with revenge. I don't support the death penalty because I don't think it is the place of the government to sanction the murder of it's own citizens (and it is expensive and an innocent man may be killed, etc). As for revenge, I've always been a supporter. A person won't stop f***ing with you until you show them that you will strike back. That being said, revenge isn't an excuse to break the law.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]Hmm. On the whole serial killer thing. I believe in retribution before vengence. I would bring him in, and let the justice system handle it. However if there is no conviction because of a loophole or evidence thrown out for some idiotic reason, and not because he wasn't guilty, then sure. If he had killed my family, went and got set free even if he was guilty, then I would take his life. Also... Screw happiness. Peace of mind is more important than being happy. It may be a in between but it can be very peaceful. I do not think you can kill to make happiness after a tragic event. All you can do is bring a sense of peace by removing the known contributions. Which, in my opinion, is very healthy.worlock77

Those "loopholes" and evidence being thrown out are there for reasons. Even if that reason is that the police didn't follow procedure. And if they didn't follow procedure in one instance who's to say they followed it in all other instances? And who's to say their evidence, or even their word is reliable. And there's your reasonable doubt.

What's so inherently wrong with it? Whenever the death penalty comes up for a debate, it inevitably boils down to "justice vs. revenge", those against it using this rationale as a point in their favor? But why is revenge so bad? What's wrong with bloodlust and wanting retribution? It's entirely natural. I don't buy the whole "it brings us down to their level" argument either. I believe a person's worth is not dictated by their actions, everyone is born equal as humans.

MirkoS77

Because "revenge" basically is nothing more than "he wronged me in some way, some I'm gonna get back at him even if it's just to satidfy my own lustful desires".

And taken just a tiny step beyond that, it's basically saying "everything is about me feeling good and satisfied. And I'm totally fine with getting my satisfaction, even if someone else gets ****ed over by my sense of self-entitlement."

And...I shouldn't have to say anything else.

"Revenge" is all about "me". It isn't just, it isn't fair, it's LITERALLY me saying that I'm gonna ruin someone else in order to make myself feel better.

...that effect being a sense of profound relief that another scumbag has been put out of our misery. :D

OrkHammer007

The problem being that it is SHOCKINGLY easy to morally justify doing horrible **** to someone once you've labelled them as a scumbag.

That's why I am so freaking glad that I live in a country where "being a scumbag" usually doesn't result in their rights being revoked.

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

Rhazakna

If he actually WAS a serial murderer, then he should have been in prison.

So...did you murder someone who was never convicted of murder? Or did you murder someone who either has or is serving his sentence for murder?

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

Rhazakna

And in the end, isn't everything all about YOUR happiness?

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

Let's say I kill a serial murderer because he killed one of my family members. I am psychologically sated, and the killer cannot harm anyone else. There has clearly been a net increase in happiness, and utility in this situation.

MrGeezer

If he actually WAS a serial murderer, then he should have been in prison.

So...did you murder someone who was never convicted of murder? Or did you murder someone who either has or is serving his sentence for murder?

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]

Perhaps, but taking revenge (in this scenario) has made me happier than before, knowing he is dead. Net happiness and utility has increased.

MrGeezer

And in the end, isn't everything all about YOUR happiness?

Net happiness =/= my happiness, look up the term. My happiness is a part of it, but not the whole thing. I was responding to a specific claim, that I would not be happier having killed the killer.

I am making a philosophical argument, that revenge can have utility. Either debate that, or don't, but don't post emotional screeds.

In the scenario, he wouldn't have been convicted.Rhazakna

Alright then.

He was put on trial more murder, was acquitted, and then you go and murder the **** out of him AFTER he got his fair trial.

In that situation, HE isn't the jerk.

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]In the scenario, he wouldn't have been convicted.MrGeezer

Alright then.

He was put on trial more murder, was acquitted, and then you go and murder the **** out of him AFTER he got his fair trial.

In that situation, HE isn't the jerk.

Not convicted could mean all sorts of things. He may never have been charged, for whatever reason. I may have knowledge of his guilt that is impossible to prove.

But all of that is irrelevant. The specifics of the scenario are immaterial, and you're avoiding the question at hand. I have made an argument that revenge has utility. Picking at the specifics of my analogy does not refute my point.

Net happiness =/= my happiness, look up the term. My happiness is a part of it, but not the whole thing. I was responding to a specific claim, that I would not be happier having killed the killer.

I am making a philosophical argument, that revenge can have utility. Either debate that, or don't, but don't post emotional screeds.

Rhazakna

Feel free to present to us a mathematically and scientifically sound argument showing that revenge (revenge in general, not just a specific case of revenge) OBJECTIVELY results in a net increase of happiness.

Then you'll be at least attempting to provide a compelling argument.

But you haven't even established that revenge (revenge in general) even DOES result in a net increase in happiness.