Firstly, I don’t believe the people who have said “I don’t feel like it” are saying that in the same sense as someone might say “I don’t feel like going swimming today” or “I don’t feel like getting up early on Saturday”. I believe they’re actually saying that they don’t have any kind of inclination to cause harm. It’s not quite the same thing.
Nextly, Yes, “God told me not to” is terrifying, if the implication (as seems to be) is “I feel like it, but God says I can’t”. If “God told me not to” is the thing that’s holding you back, what happens when you suffer a crisis of faith (this happens to people quite a lot).
If God’s instruction is the only restraint, the restrained person is just an imprisoned psychopath.
For me, it’s a moral code. I’ll have to say it’s secular, because there’s no fear of getting fried by Big Juju In The Sky or anything like that. It’s based on courtesy and respect and integrity and self-control (among others), which are things that are integral to my life and my being. Sometimes I slip up on them, and when I do, I regret it and work harder to not slip up the next time.
To me, the taking of another’s life is justified only in war or self-defense. Walking into a classroom full of kids and shooting at them is the ultimate way of saying to the world that you are a totally worthless piece of shit.
I have few problems to which there is an effective and/or emotionally satisfying solution is against the law. The few exceptions require more energy than I’ll willingly put into anything, particularly factoring in not wanting to go to prison. Sooner or later, covering my tracks would require killing someone, and I’m too much of a Sadhimist to be comfortable doing that.
As others have said, empathy. I am way too good at putting myself in someone else’s shoes. Also, while I’m not religious in any way, I am a firm believer in The Golden Rule. I wouldn’t want any of those things done to me or anyone that I love, so it’s not going to happen to anyone by my hands.
Shoot, I don’t even hate anybody. I am lame. Feel free to mock me.
It’s a weird list of crimes to choose for such a question, because they’re unappealing. Why would I want to commit any of those crimes in the first place? The only one I would get something of in the list is rape and if I wanted sex that bad, paying for it would be more convenient, appealing and pleasant.
Why on earth would I want to shot a baby in the face, for instance? I guess I could find some tortuous motive for that (Revenge against the parents? Intellectual interest in knowing how babies die when shot in the face?) in which case I suppose that repulsion would be my first motive not to do it? I don’t want to see a baby being shot in the face, let alone by myself.
But again, seriously, asking what prevents me from commiting crimes that are both pointless and repugnant doesn’t make sense. You could as well ask what prevents me from indulging in coprophagia.
My general principle of how to live my life is: I can do anything at all that I want, as long as it doesn’t harm another person. And “harm” extends to messing up their life in some fundamental way.
All of the acts listed in the OP fall under causing harm upon others, so they are counter to my moral code.
I also like to be nice and considerate to other people wherever I can, in the hope that they extend the same courtesy towards me, but as I have gotten older I have come to realise I am achieving very little, and if anything am being taken advantage of, so I am not sure how long I can keep it up before I go into full hermit mode.
Does not apply. Besides, I hate rapists, so I will intervene or call for help.
Too easy, too quick, too cowardly. Besides, if someone has given me cause for so much hate, why should I put them out of their misery so quickly? Living well would be a better revenge.
Too messy. Anyway, how will that resolve the pain of emotional betrayal ? The heart has its reasons, and loving another is no crime at all.
Even if weapons were freely available, and there was absolute guarantee of no retribution, it would be very, very difficult to pull the (metaphorical) trigger. Ultimately, the best lived life is one where you succeed despite all the stresses and pains that everyone causes, and not the one where you never had any problems at all. I think most people who commit crimes of passion (like the ones described above) have very little self control but very easy access to deadly weapons.
You worked hard for a company as a loyal and honest person who helped grow the company. You get on after that is better elsewhere, so they offer you a counter offer and promotion. At the very same time, 3 of the top mngmnt, including the owner, were conspiring to hire 6 key people from a more successful competitor, by offering them unrealistic salaries and positions, providing each brings stolen intellectual property from their respective departments, such as engineering, and sales client list, pricing, etc..To make way for these 6, the same number of people were demoted and had their pay cut, in my case by 10k more than where I hired. It actually went to federal court as a RICO racketeering case. Case went on for 3 years, they lost. But during this time, you realize what really happened, thru court records and transcripts of emails. They even planned on firing many of the new mgrs after 6 months in their emails, stating they would be of no planned value.
So clearly you were wronged. But while still employed, and just before you leave, you have access to expensive tech eqpt that would even the score.
Would you take it?
FYI I did not, thou many times since I have questioned my own choice. Note that I am agnostic, and all of the guilty parties were devout Christians, plus one Muslim.
Ok not a horrible crime, on my part, if I had taken it…but it was a horrible crime that they committed, considering the company went chapter 11 and many innocent folks lost their jobs.
It’s not surprising that so many answered this with some version of Good v. Evil, but I don’t think that’s a useful way of looking at the world.
Like many here for me to comes down to a combination of empathy and lack of motive. I have no reason to commit any of the acts listed, but even if I did I am able to imagine the perspective of the victim(s). That I wouldn’t wish to be shot/stabbed/raped is enough to prevent me from doing the same to others, even in some bizarre situation where it is beneficial to me.
On the other hand I’m more than willing to shoot/stab a person if they’re threating my life or that of my family. Slightly different situation, that.
For me, I suppose you could boil it down to “lack of reason.” But, that’s simplifying things to a level that sounds more alarming than it is. A reason has to be pretty damn good for me to mow down my next door neighbor, a reason good enough that it’s hard to concoct a scenario where I would unhesitatingly do it.
I mean, part of it is empathy/golden rule, and a little self interest. I can understand that huge breaches of the social contract aren’t good for me – both if I set a precedent for the social contract to be broken, AND if I violate it in a way that would cause me to be punished (as by current precedent).
Even so though, a lot of my behavior is risk/reward combined with ethics. Obviously I won’t violate my ethical code, which is formed by the above (+ cultural conditioning, I suppose), but my threshold for breaking the law is much lower when it doesn’t match my ethical code. An example: I have no issue with breaking and entering… if it’s an abandoned building. A lot of times it’s illegal because it’s owned by the government (and because it’s dangerous), but I have no ethical problems with breaking into an old, dilapidated movie theater, and the reason I don’t do it has more to do with risk (getting arrested, encountering dangerous squatters, hurting myself on broken glass) than it does with ethical violations. So in at least some contexts, the presence of authority DOES keep me from doing “bad” things.
Yes. I’m going to be pretty much the same person tomorrow that I am today. If my internal moral code says murder is wrong today then it’s going to say the same thing tomorrow.
But if morality is imposed by an outside source, all bets are off. If God is telling you what’s right and wrong, you have no idea what God is going to tell you tomorrow. And God’s record isn’t very good: plenty of people have committed terrible crimes because God told them to.
How you know what’s wrong, and how you keep yourself from doing what you know is wrong, are two separate issues. I interpreted the OP to be asking about the latter.
So far.