Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

A little

No

The what?

[Harbingerjm]

Actions can be super-villainy, but in the minds of the robbers it is for the side of good. Even skitter had to justify her actions to herself (to use fictional evidence).

Why do politicians never seem to change their minds when criticized about their policies. In fact many argue more vehemently for their policies than before.

Criticism forces an unprepared receiver to justify that their actions are good. This is so deeply en-grained in human psychology that I'm betting you've done something similar.

How can criminals live with themselves? The thieves, rapists, and murderers?
some court cases will shed light on those.

The rapists say they were seduced. The murderers say that actually they were the victims not the person they killed. The thieves? They'll tell you that the store was charging too high or that they had no choice because of how destitute they were.

Do these justify their actions to everyone? heck no.
Do these justify their actions to themselves? most definitely yes. If it didn't do so they would reject it as a bad argument and try again until they found one that worked.

And if everyone thinks that supervillains must be evil, then you might have a point.

This is semantics. I will not argue semantics. Replace "super-villain" with "evil person" if you like.

That's ridiculous, and not at all equivalent. Why don't we, instead of replacing an objective classification word with a totally different subjective values word, replace it with an unpowered equivalent objective classification- in this case, "mobsters" seems like the best fit.
"No-one wants to be a mobster, because no-one wants to be evil."
And yet, organised crime seems to disagree.

[Scood]

The only thing you have stated is that an evil person is not necessarily a mobster.

If "being a mobster" does not subjectively mean "being an evil person" in the eyes of the beholder, my argument still stands.

[Harbingerjm]

The only thing you have stated is that an evil person is not necessarily a mobster.

If "being a mobster" does not subjectively mean "being an evil person" in the eyes of the beholder, my argument still stands.

Except your "argument" is utterly irrelevant, because my point was that there are people who want to be supervillains.

[Dermonster]

What are we even discussing anymore.

[Scood]

The only thing you have stated is that an evil person is not necessarily a mobster.

If "being a mobster" does not subjectively mean "being an evil person" in the eyes of the beholder, my argument still stands.

Except your "argument" is utterly irrelevant, because my point was that there are people who want to be supervillains.

look, we seem to be discussing two different things with no differences in anticipation. Let's agree that some people might want to be mobsters and that no one wants to be an evil person.

[GreatWyrmGold]

question 4. I run by the philosophy that no one wants to be a super-villain.

Ahahahahahaha.

Harbinger is correct.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

After roughly three months of being a successful villain, Taylor had between 15 to 20 million dollars.

Spoiler: Major Spoilers! (click to show/hide)

Of course, as Weaver's original dice game explains, this was at a high risk. Taylor was good and lucky; otherwise she would have been sent to the Birdcage long ago.

question 4. I run by the philosophy that no one wants to be a super-villain. So maybe he wants to be a rogue or superhero but it may not work out since he's a pr nightmare.

I suppose it would be. Some powers just aren't suited for heroic work.

From what i've read of the wormverse (First 4 arcs now) The villains aren't all evil. I could be dead wrong here though as theres still a lot to go now, but just throwing my lot in here.

The villains aren't all evil and the heroes aren't all good.

The only thing you have stated is that an evil person is not necessarily a mobster.

If "being a mobster" does not subjectively mean "being an evil person" in the eyes of the beholder, my argument still stands.

It's more the other way around--he's saying that not all mobsters/supervillains are evil people.

Let's agree that some people might want to be mobsters and that no one wants to be an evil person.

Much of the Slaughterhouse Nine. Jack Slash (the leader) and Cherish (who really wanted to join) come to mind.

[Scood]

Much of the Slaughterhouse Nine. Jack Slash (the leader) and Cherish (who really wanted to join) come to mind.

I'm not typically one for fictional evidence, however, I would say that Jack Slash and Cherish are more than 2 standard deviations from the mean of the general population.

[GreatWyrmGold]

1. We're talking about a fictional universe at the moment, one very much like the one the S9 are in.
2. You claimed that no one wanted to be evil, not that most people do not want to be evil. Say the latter and I can't argue.

[Harbingerjm]

1. We're talking about a fictional universe at the moment, one very much like the one the S9 are in.
2. You claimed that no one wanted to be evil, not that most people do not want to be evil. Say the latter and I can't argue.

Actually, the claim he made that was disputed was that no-one wants to be a Supervillain. If he said no-one wants to be evil, I'm sceptical, but it's hardly a point that can be proved one way or another. Saying no-one wants to be a Supervillain, well, that's easily proven wrong.

[Scood]

1. We're talking about a fictional universe at the moment, one very much like the one the S9 are in.

I'm afraid that this was a originally discussion about my philosophy. I could care less about whether it applies in some particular fictional universe because a philosophy derived solely on fiction doesn't seem entirely all that useful to me.

2. You claimed that no one wanted to be evil, not that most people do not want to be evil. Say the latter and I can't argue.

I'll accept it. I would even like to be more precise and say that at LEAST 95% of people do not want to be evil.

Actually, the claim he made that was disputed was that no-one wants to be a Supervillain. If he said no-one wants to be evil, I'm sceptical, but it's hardly a point that can be proved one way or another. Saying no-one wants to be a Supervillain, well, that's easily proven wrong.

skepticism is good. If you can find evidence that contradicts me i'll at least reconsider it. no need for proof.

[GreatWyrmGold]

1. We're talking about a fictional universe at the moment, one very much like the one the S9 are in.

I'm afraid that this was a originally discussion about my philosophy. I could care less about whether it applies in some particular fictional universe because a philosophy derived solely on fiction doesn't seem entirely all that useful to me.

I always get confused when a conversation moves from its original topic to a very similar but distinct one, and I don't catch it.

2. You claimed that no one wanted to be evil, not that most people do not want to be evil. Say the latter and I can't argue.

I'll accept it. I would even like to be more precise and say that at LEAST 95% of people do not want to be evil.

I'd accept that.

[Harbingerjm]

Actually, the claim he made that was disputed was that no-one wants to be a Supervillain. If he said no-one wants to be evil, I'm sceptical, but it's hardly a point that can be proved one way or another. Saying no-one wants to be a Supervillain, well, that's easily proven wrong.

skepticism is good. If you can find evidence that contradicts me i'll at least reconsider it. no need for proof.

Frankly I don't care about that point. As I said, the claim I was disputing was that no-one wants to be a Supervillain, which is simply untrue, and even more so in context of the fictional universe you were applying it to.

[Dermonster]

When are we starting again?

[GreatWyrmGold]

Once I can collect all the information on all the characters and get some major heroes and villains in the city.

[Scood]

do you need anything from my character?