What makes a person "fundamentally bad"?

Post Reply New Topic

Judging from the interpersonal responses I get from some people, and the direct accusations of being "fundamentally bad", I'm going to guess I'm probably a "fundamentally bad person". Now, here comes the questions: What exactly makes someone a fundamentally bad person?

Are there intrinsic memory deficits associated with it?

Are there certain intrinsic conversational abilities associated with it? (That might be linked to memory or intellectual deficits)

Are there intrinsic intellective deficits associated with it?

Certain moral directions associated with it?

Certain empathic capacities associated with it?

Certain intentions associated with it?

I'm just wondering because my intentions are usually "not that bad", but yet I get this accusation/implication quite often, it seems and I don' t know why. Note, I'm not asking about my particular situation, just in general - I'm hoping that once I've gathered a grand unified theory for what makes someone "bad", I can use my tremendously powerful abilities of deduction to pinpoint the set of qualities that makes me oooohhhh soooo bad.

Urm. I'd say someone who's "fundamentally bad" is someone who knowingly hurts others.

I think the only "bad" person would be one that enjoys watching the suffering of others. Some people that come to mind are serial killers that like to torture their victims and animal abusers like Michael Vick, who electrocuted and hung dogs for fun. This is not lack of empathy; it's empathy without a conscience. These types of people have empathy because they can respond to the feelings of others, but they lack a conscience because they feel happiness and enjoyment when their victims are suffering. I'm by no means a professional, but I have learned that torturing animals for fun is usually is a gateway to torturing humans.

People who enjoy the suffering of others need more help than any person on the spectrum. Don't worry, I've gotten similar accusations but from people who don't understand how I think. The best thing you can do is train yourself to have at least basic theory of mind. You already have a conscience, so don't let those words poison your self esteem.

To me it's simple: bad intentions, knowingly hurting others in some way for bad reasons (like personal gain).

If you're worried about whether you're bad or not, then you're not since it is a disturbance in your conscience that motivated you to wonder about it in the first place.

For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

Therefore, anything that is bad would be the converse of these things
submissive......unwilling (though that one is pertaining to the commandments)
meek......immodest
humble......prideful
patient......impatient
full of love.....full of hate

But the root of all evil is pride.

And this is my 2 cents!

Nothing. No one is fundamentally 'bad'.

I am a cynic. To me, everyone is a scumbag.

No person is fundamentally good or bad, but the human mind does sometimes become a system that gets positive reinforcement from performing unethical actions.

To me, it means to hurt people intentionally for one's own gain.

As you suggest by asking many questions about it, this is a very complex issue. You're not saying why you have been called "bad" -- I'm just guessing it is because people feel you're hurting them. I think what most complicates this issue when it pertains to interactions between autistics and nonautistics is that they and we have completely different sensitivities, i.e. what is hurtful to them is not a problem or even distinctly desirable to us (e.g. solitude and silence), and vice versa (e.g. abundant socializing and noise).

Say you have a choice between A and B. If you choose A, you don't suffer and I suffer a bit. If you choose B, you suffer a lot and I don't suffer. It would be reasonable for you to choose A then. Less total suffering. But if option A had me suffering a lot and B had you suffering only a bit, it would be bad of you to choose A over B. This would all be pretty easy to work out if everybody could make accurate estimates of everybody else's potential suffering, and then do whatever causes the least total suffering. But people, autistic and nonautistic alike, only really understand their own sensitivities.

Example you might recognize: some stranger on a bus or in a store starts chatting to me. I ignore the person. My attention, like any other part of me, is mine to give, not anyone else's to take. I think of the person as hurtful and therefore bad, because s/he took my attention, didn't respect my space and my solitude, and immodestly assumed a relationship of some sort with me, a stranger. But the person might find me hurtful and therefore "bad", because I denounced his/her "friendly intentions".
I'm not sure situations like these can ever be resolved to everybody's satisfaction, the perceptions seem too different to allow for much mutual understanding.

FUNDAMENTALLY bad... Only if you know you're causing suffering or damage and you don't care, ever. Worse if you actually enjoy causing suffering.

Peopel are not bad or good, they just do bad or good things, and that in itself is just a matter of perspective.

peace j

It's dictated by the vibrational level of the soul, to put it simply.