What are you babbling about ? “Personal opinions” ? Which ?
And since this isn’t supposed to be about me, why not chime in with your position, instead of criticising mine with a claim so vague it can’t be argued against ? Afraid it’ll get ripped to shreds ?
For those wandering in this thread and wondering what it’s all about, here’s Wiki on Leopold of Belgium:
Yes, actually. You claim your personal emotions are the true test of the validity of a moral proposition, and that they are self-evidently true for everyone.
:dubious:
I made it clear that I was not aware of any Christian principle which actually claimed any sort of intrinsically just world here and now.
To expand: Christians do believe that justice will come, but not untl humankind itself is made whole and pure. We believe in a just eternity, not a just world. That does not absolve us of being as just as we can be here and now, simply that we are forewarned our successes will be necessarilly limited in a world still corupted by the power of evil. There are Christians who do sort of believe in a just world, but these are not theologically inclined. Sadly, it includes a number of preachers and so forth who often don’t like to listen to the passages which pretty clearly say what they don’t want to hear. Such as the Book of Job. In fact, Christianiy and its Judaic precurser explicitly avow that this world is unjust.
I don’t have a “position,” because this is not an issue upon which opinion has any bearing. The world is not intrinsically just in any way we can determine. No serious Christian* says otherwise. Those Christans who do seem to believe in a vague karma concept, which is not really Christian and directly oppose by every source we have on the subject.
*I am not particularly making a No True Christian statement here. I am differentiating what you might call opinion from serious thought. Every man on the street has an opionion, but that doesn’t mean most of them give serious though to particular issues. I have never, ever seen any serious theologian or philosopher or thinker claim the world was inherently just except in a vague and probablistic fashion, which is not currently under discussion. A random schoe’s opinion, or even a preacher’s, doesn’t necessarily mean they ever really explored the issue. I have little knowledge of chemistry and atomic phsyics and don’t much think of them. My opinion on how electrons do there stuff has no weight at all.
I agree, he was (as another ruler put it) “a thoroughly bad man”.
One brief passage in the Wikipedia article is weird, though.
Huh? Sleeping sickness (trypanosomiasis) was King Leopold’s fault? Did he train and equip a battalion of tsetse flies? 
Or become stock brokers, lawyers, cops, doctors, presidents, senators, bankers, real estate developers etc…
If we try to answer the question in the OP, without stepping into moral or theological terrain, we could rephrase the question as: what happens, on average, in modern society, to subset of “evil” people we can, to the best of our knowledge, and in hindsight, diagnose as sociopaths? What are the odds and defining factors of these people thriving in society, or getting their come-uppance?
One of the best books on the subject of psychopathy/sociopathy, IMHO (and I’m a psychologist) is the book The Mask of Sanity: An Attempt to Clarify Some Issues About the So Called Psychopathic Personality by Hervey M. Cleckley. The book is such a standard, and unfortunately out of print, or very expensive, so that it has been scanned as a PDF and put on the Internet as a free download. .
According to the book, Der Trihs and mswas are both right. Cleckley estimates that 5 % of the population will have some psychopathic tendencies. Badly adjusted psychopaths follow the path illustrated by Der Trihs and die early or end up in prison; well adjusted psychopaths can become the doctors and stockbrokers mswas mentions.
Was Leopold II was a psychopath/sociopath? I see no evidence for that.
I don’t know either. It’s hard to tell. As I said, psychopaths are a subset of what “we” may regard as evil people, and the better defined the term psychopath is, the more useful it is.
I was examining the larger issue by looking at a specific example. If you want to claim that the world is just and claim that evil behavior is wrong because it hurts the group, you have to show why the evil person should care about the group if he does not. And in this case even if you can show that you have to show how Leopold II’s actions hurt Belgium society.
Tell me, what were the negative effects for Athenians as individuals and for Athenian society for the murder, rape, and enslavement of the Melians during the Peloponnesian War?
Why don’t you find an example of anyone who truly believes the world is just, first. Without that keystone, this entire discussion is frivolous.
If you want to have a discussion regarding ethics or morality that are natural as opposed to handed down from on high or arising from the social compact, we can close this thread and you can open a new one to discuss that. However, basing an entire argument on a false claim that no one believes and then drawing conclusions from that error in order to have a discussion founded on vapor is pretty silly.
Perhaps not, but the guy was a complete asshole. Like I said, read the book I suggested above.
(IIRC, he had his daughter committed because she wanted to marry someone he didn’t approve of-I’ll look it up later, if you want)
Asshole is too nice a word for him. An asshole cuts you off in traffic. Leopold II was evil.
No argument there.
I looked it up-he didn’t commit any of them, but I don’t think he was the ideal father.
(His own father, though, was a pretty decent ruler-and he was Queen Victoria’s and Prince Albert’s mentor).
Like I said before it is a point a view a come across quite often. But if you want a famous person that holds this position, how about Gregory Garcia (creator of My Name is Earl)?
Has he actually said that, or has he just made a TV show investigating what it would be like if it were so? I mean, we don’t take E.T. to mean that Steven Spielberg believes there are strange looking aliens with glowing fingers running around.
Here is a quote:
I also saw an interview where he said he believed that you get back what you put out in the world.
http://www.mynameisearlclub.com/2006/11/15/interview-with-earl-creator-greg-garcia/
Well, I’m convinced. Obviously this means he’s talking about it in exactly the same way as you are. :dubious:
If you did, it’s not this one.