Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

In your personal definition of good and evil, if you have one, are people like Ted Bundy worse than people like Adolf Hitler? Is the amount of people they are responsible for killing make them "more" evil to you? Does the fact Hitler or Stalin thought they were doing good make them less vile than serial killers?

Obviously sheer numbers makes people like Hitler worse.

In my mind a serial killer's usual mental issues should also absolve them of their crimes to some extent.
Least that's what I think.

Originally posted by Luminatus
In my mind a serial killer's usual mental issues should also absolve them of their crimes to some extent.
Least that's what I think.

Except that serial killers are in control of themselves and aware enough that what they are doing is wrong to avoid capture. Their mental issues would be pretty much the standard definition of "evil". Hitler's own issues were probably more severe than those of the average serial killer.

Of course how "bad" someone's problems are is just as subjective as what defines a "problem" in this case and how much it absolves one of murder, if at all.

But aren't serial killers "addicted" to murder? Hitler for instance didn't suffer a compulsion to ill people as far as I know. Someone like Bundy, who is the killer who made me think of this thread, was compelled to murder people because of his past. I've also heard, though I can't cite any examples, of killers who have actual physical defects in thei brain that keeps them from understanding how wrong their acts are.

From your posts you definitely seem to know more about psychology than me so whatever you say is probably right. I just am going off the bits and pieces I've picked up.

Hitler suffered from several mental illnesses.

Political killers have a much broader field of responsibility. It's difficult to say whether someone is better or worse, but their actions usually affect many more people. Assuming they are made by someone with power, and not the mayor of some hick-town.

Originally posted by Luminatus
I've also heard, though I can't cite any examples, of killers who have actual physical defects in thei brain that keeps them from understanding how wrong their acts are. Thats called Psychopathy and it's caused by environmental factors not some sort of defect in the brain. However it's only a word to describe a certain kind of person who through no fault of there own developed the traits recognized as Psychopathy. Though there are people who would argue these people are predisposed to develop in to this kind of person.

Originally posted by Magee
Though there are people who would argue these people are predisposed to develop in to this kind of person.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19825261?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

EDIT: and to extrapolate, environmental factors are said to create a defecit in the brain, resulting in psychopathy.

Numbers is one factor. I would think intent is another. Also, means.

One could argue that Hitler acted to empower Germany; and that the concentration camps were the most efficient way to kill large numbers (millions) of the enemy.

On the other hand, the BTK killer -- while taking out far less people -- deliberately inflicted on them as much suffering as possible. He was looking to empower only himself; and efficiency was defined not by numbers but by degree of suffering.

What about economic killers like drug companies that make life saving drugs for some diseases available only to the rich so those that can't afford them die?

They're the worst, they'd let a million people die just to make a few bucks.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
What about economic killers like drug companies that make life saving drugs for some diseases available only to the rich so those that can't afford them die?

If people want to not die they should go make more money. Your line of thinking will send countries straight into Communism.

Political Killers in all honesty. They normally kill a lot more people firstly, and I mean, politicians are supposed to be people one can trust (obviously this isn't true they're all lying monsters). Serial Killers normally come out with bad mental conditions, (abused as children) but then again I suppose, like Adolf Hitler, there are many exceptions to this.

But no, in my opinion, Political Killers - just because they have that dangerous ability to gather others under their wing. You want to talk about Hitler, look at how many people who brainwashed to join the Nazi party...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If people want to not die they should go make more money. Your line of thinking will send countries straight into Communism. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, i find it unfortunate that you weren't born in Africa HIV positive.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
What about economic killers like drug companies that make life saving drugs for some diseases available only to the rich so those that can't afford them die?

Drug Companies are just that, companies. Their goal is to make a profit. If there is no profit, there are no drugs.

And to the OP, obviously we all think of Hitler as one of the most evil men to ever exist because of the sheer number of people he murdered. In my opinion, a killer who kills for enjoyment or personal gain is worse than a killer that kills because they believe they are doing the right thing. Not that killing in any form is excusable, but thats just my two cents.