You're justifying it to your own moral boundaries, which means you are still trying to justify it.
No need to go in to depth about it.
I am not sure if you are indifferent towards it, as you said, you like how they react, where as a person indifferent towards it generally would not care.
If you mean justification as in "making it right", then you're wrong. I don't think it's wrong so there's no need to make it right. I'm also not trying to prove to others that they should see it as right. I'm not "selling" my ideas to anyone. I haven't even stated my ideas or goals.
If by justify you mean simply "give reason for" then, yes, I guess you could say that but "justification" is a rather strong word. There's a reason people do everything they do. You justify what you do in that sense of the word because you said you do it just to prove you CAN do it. For me, I do it because it's part of my larger goal. It's no different from a motivation to clean the bathroom. My justification for cleaning the toilet is "because it's dirty and it's one step in cleaning the bathroom". Same thing here. It just has to be done, it's a step in attaining the goal.
I'm indifferent towards the emotional stress I cause on a personal level (I don't care about the individual or his feelings) but since this is part of a larger goal naturally I have a vested interest in my effect (so I enjoy that I HAVE hurt them). Like when you pull a prank - You set it up, you know someone is going to get victimized but you're not concerned with sparing his feelings, you wait, you watch, they fall for it, then you enjoy the fruit of your labor, you enjoy seeing his reaction that YOU caused with YOUR work. It's the proof of your success. It doesn't mean you care about the person, it means you care about your "work".
Going to be honest, and no offense intended, but I stopped reading at the first paragraph. I'm just too ill to put enough effort in to reading and responding to this, as I can't say I care enough about putting the effort in as much as I can see it going to need if it progresses any further
It's not a new subject for me to be involved in, as I have myself been involved and talked to people with very same views on the subject as yourself, so I don't exactly feel the motivation to engage in the topic again.
Unfortunately, my curiosity has gotten the best of me, and I have seen little nips of your response, and again, no offense intended, but I think it is filled with too many contradictions. Such as, "If you mean justification by making it right, you are wrong" and "Give a reason to justify it, then yes". That mixed with what I said and how you are justifying it by your own idea of justification, it just seems too contradicting.
Same goes for the "I am indifferent towards their feelings", but you enjoy the conclusion that makes them show emotion, be it good or bad.
I think you are trying to portray yourself in a manner that isn't actually who you are, or at least not 100%. That's just my two cents. It happens on the site often.
I think your confusion would be cleared up if you fully read and understand my post. Your questions about it are already answered. There's no contradictions.
I will try to simplify the main points even more for you.
Justify definition:
1. To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid
2. To declare free of blame; absolve.
3. To free (a human) of the guilt and penalty attached to grievous sin. Used of God.
4. Law
a. To demonstrate sufficient legal reason for (an action taken).
b. To prove to be qualified as a bondsman.
5. Printing To adjust the spacing within (lines in a document, for example), so that the lines end evenly at a straight margin.
The typical use of the word "justify" is to prove something to be "right" or "just".
"If you mean justification as in "making it right", then you're wrong."
There's nothing complex about this. I don't think in terms of right and wrong so I'd never even venture into that territory of trying to make what I do "right". Nothing is right or wrong, it just "IS". If I don't think it's wrong, then why would I try to make it be right? I wouldn't, and I'm not.
If you use the term "justify" to mean validate or lend reasoning behind then I guess that could be construed as acceptable however as I said above "justify" seems a strong word for that and I don't like the ambiguity. I'm also not trying AT ALL to demonstrate my reasoning (I haven't even stated my reasoning OR goal) to anyone else so this fact makes justify even less of a proper word here.
*Basically, I think justify is the wrong word.
"Same goes for the "I am indifferent towards their feelings", but you enjoy the conclusion that makes them show emotion, be it good or bad."
*I don't care ABOUT them personally but I care that my work has had effect. Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal. It's a "paycheck". I really don't know how to simplify this any more. I put a very good analogy in the previous post to explain this. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.
Quite frankly, I am getting a bored, and my flu is getting worse.
You are trying to seperate "reason" with "justification".
Here is the definition, copy and pasted, of "reason".
rea·son
/ˈrēzən/
Noun
A cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.
"Justification".
Quite frankly, my response to you was more so to see how hard you would try convince me of this image you are showing.
I only "really" read this bit properly:
"*I don't care ABOUT them personally but I care that my work has had effect. Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal. It's a "paycheck". I really don't know how to simplify this any more. I put a very good analogy in the previous post to explain this. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that."
The work was the theft, not the victim of the theft, as you said, you are indifferent towards the victim. The effect and success of theft is that you have the thing you thieved, not who you thieved from. You can't say the success of the act is how the victim acts, then say you are indifferent towards the victim. That is saying you are indifferent towards the goal and ends, which means you wouldn't care about thieving as much as you claim to care about it.
You give me definitions of justify, but I am sure you skipped the actual definition shown right at the top when you Google it because you know it complies with what I am saying. Here is the definition:
jus·ti·fy
/ˈjəstəˌfī/
Verb
Show or prove to be right or reasonable.
Be a good reason for.
To "reason".
There is nothing complex about this. You are trying to come off as sadistic and liking how people react to your bad deed, all while trying to say you are indifferent (don't care) about how they react.
You are making contradictions, how you can't see that is beyond me.
I think you care about trying to portray this image too much, as you spend a lot of time trying to convince me that what you say is true.
"Quite frankly, my response to you was more so to see how hard you would try convince me of this image you are showing."
Yes, it's pretty obvious that you were being purposely pig headed and trying to incite a pissing contest. If you'd like to continue talking then proceed as a man, not a child.
I have made no portrayal of myself as anything other than a thief. I think you're trying to create something there that isn't. I have stated NOTHING of my ideas, goals, achievements or any such thing.
Moving along.
"The work was the theft, not the victim of the theft.....The effect and success of theft is that you have the thing you thieved, not who you thieved from."
This is your opinion on your theft, not mine. We are 2 different people with 2 different motives and 2 different outcomes, you can't thrust your idea and motivations of theft to me. Remember this: --*My goal includes A LOT more than just having the item*-- Again, I have not ever stated my goal so don't make assumptions.
I'm indifferent to his feelings as a person to another person. This means I don't feel guilt or remorse for victimizing him. However his loss is my gain, in more ways than one, thus I enjoy his loss and I enjoy his distress. Part of my goal includes causing distress, hence I enjoy it when it happens. Got that now?
"You give me definitions of justify, but I am sure you skipped the actual definition shown right at the top when you Google it because you know it complies with what I am saying."
I used freedictionary because I have it on my toolbar, there was nothing underhanded going on with that. If you want to continue to use justify then that's your right. I object to it and won't use it myself because of the strong connotations of "making right" and the ambiguity. There are much more fitting and less influencing terms than justify. Motive would be a much better term.
"You are trying to come off as sadistic and liking how people react to your bad deed"
You got the wrong impression, once again you are reading more into it than is there. The reaction is crucial because it lends to the goal. It's really as simple as that but you don't know what my goal is so I wouldn't expect you to fully understand this. It has nothing to do with being sadistic (I don't believe I am sadistic), and my actual purpose of causing&enjoying distress is very far from that.
If I'm making contradictions then outline them. So far the ones you think you've noticed have just been your own misunderstandings.
You call me an idiot yet you already broke a rule. Do not discuss illegal activity. You are a Klepto. It is short for Kleptomanic. You are either that or antisocial. You certainly do fit one of those. An antisocial person will often do impulsive things with out any regard to others. You seem to think its fun to steal and do not regard anyone else’s feelings. You do not care about right or wrong and only do it to amuse yourself.
I pulled this off a website:
Self-Help Strategies
Self-help methods for the treatment of this disorder are often overlooked by the medical profession because very few professionals are involved in them. Groups can be especially helpful for people with this disorder, if they are tailored specifically for antisocial personality disorder. Individuals with this disorder typically feel more at ease in discussing their feelings and behaviours in front of their peers in this type of supportive modality. Leaders of such self-help support groups, though, must be wary of individuals who come to group just to brag about their exploits and who may seek to use the group inappropriately. Usually a group can be very helpful and beneficial to most people with this disorder, once they overcome their initial fears and hesitation to join such a group. Many support groups exist within communities throughout the world which are devoted to helping individuals with this disorder share their commons experiences and feelings.
Ok, you got my attention, because I refuse for anyone to not understand obvious contradictions.
"I am not trying to portray myself as anything other than a thief".
A thief is something that takes something that doesn't belong to them without consent. That is what a thief is.
You are trying to portray yourself as a thief that likes to view the negative effect it has one people, which is something that being a thief isn't about, viewing the reaction of the victim, it is about the thing you thieve.
By liking and caring about how the victim reacts negatively and gaining pleasure from them being stolen from, you are trying to portray yourself as a thief that likes to see people upset.
This isn't rocket science. A thief isn't about the victim of your action, being a thief is about the items you steal.
You have state nothing of your ideas, goals, achievements, or any such thing.
The goal of thieving is to succeed in thieving. Trying to find a deeper meaning to thieving is looking to find deep meaning in simple things. This might not be your "Only" goal, but it is a goal none the less, unless you think successfully stealing what you want to steal is not a "goal" of thieving, in which case, I wouldn't consider thieving if I had such a belief structure.
You just said that you are indifferent towards the people you thieve from. You don't care about them, that is what indifference means.
Quote: "Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal."
If the goal, for whatever reason, needs to be validated on how the "victim" reacts, then you make how the "victim" reacts one of the goals, not just the thieving of the items. How can you be indifferent towards the victims, yet imply that that the way to tell if your work is paying off is by how the victim reacts, rather than successfully taking what you were thieving?
"I'm indifferent towards how the victims feel, but how they feel due to my theft is something I "like" to see, as it validates if what I done have "effect" on them"...You want to know how they feel due to your crime, but don't care about their feelings once finding out...?
If you can't see the contradiction, I doubt you ever will.
As for your goal having "a lot more" to do with having them, that doesn't change the point of what I was saying. I didn't say that what I explained was your "only" goal, but that it was still a goal, as you care to see how they react after you thieve from them.
You can't care about how they react, yet not care. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
So you think that not being indifferent towards the victim is not liking his "positive" reactions? It's not about "positive" reactions or "negative ones, it's if you like "ANY" of his reactions, that can be, you guessed it, his distress. "I don't care about how he reacts, I care about how reacts in distress".
Again, this just feels like you trying to have an opening to make yourself seem like some sociopathic person, when the need to explain what you explained was not needed, which makes me think that you gave me unnecessary information for the sake to give this image of yourself off to me, which makes me think you "want" to be this type of person you portray yourself to be, but aren't. If you were this person you wish to be, I wouldn't be proud, the reasoning behind this persona is not sadistic, not indifferent towards things, it's just a walking contradiction that is incapable of realizing it, which is insulting, not complimenting.
Is it normal to have the "responsibility" to steal?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
You're justifying it to your own moral boundaries, which means you are still trying to justify it.
No need to go in to depth about it.
I am not sure if you are indifferent towards it, as you said, you like how they react, where as a person indifferent towards it generally would not care.
Who knows.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
What moral boundaries?
If you mean justification as in "making it right", then you're wrong. I don't think it's wrong so there's no need to make it right. I'm also not trying to prove to others that they should see it as right. I'm not "selling" my ideas to anyone. I haven't even stated my ideas or goals.
If by justify you mean simply "give reason for" then, yes, I guess you could say that but "justification" is a rather strong word. There's a reason people do everything they do. You justify what you do in that sense of the word because you said you do it just to prove you CAN do it. For me, I do it because it's part of my larger goal. It's no different from a motivation to clean the bathroom. My justification for cleaning the toilet is "because it's dirty and it's one step in cleaning the bathroom". Same thing here. It just has to be done, it's a step in attaining the goal.
I'm indifferent towards the emotional stress I cause on a personal level (I don't care about the individual or his feelings) but since this is part of a larger goal naturally I have a vested interest in my effect (so I enjoy that I HAVE hurt them). Like when you pull a prank - You set it up, you know someone is going to get victimized but you're not concerned with sparing his feelings, you wait, you watch, they fall for it, then you enjoy the fruit of your labor, you enjoy seeing his reaction that YOU caused with YOUR work. It's the proof of your success. It doesn't mean you care about the person, it means you care about your "work".
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Going to be honest, and no offense intended, but I stopped reading at the first paragraph. I'm just too ill to put enough effort in to reading and responding to this, as I can't say I care enough about putting the effort in as much as I can see it going to need if it progresses any further
It's not a new subject for me to be involved in, as I have myself been involved and talked to people with very same views on the subject as yourself, so I don't exactly feel the motivation to engage in the topic again.
Unfortunately, my curiosity has gotten the best of me, and I have seen little nips of your response, and again, no offense intended, but I think it is filled with too many contradictions. Such as, "If you mean justification by making it right, you are wrong" and "Give a reason to justify it, then yes". That mixed with what I said and how you are justifying it by your own idea of justification, it just seems too contradicting.
Same goes for the "I am indifferent towards their feelings", but you enjoy the conclusion that makes them show emotion, be it good or bad.
I think you are trying to portray yourself in a manner that isn't actually who you are, or at least not 100%. That's just my two cents. It happens on the site often.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I think your confusion would be cleared up if you fully read and understand my post. Your questions about it are already answered. There's no contradictions.
I will try to simplify the main points even more for you.
Justify definition:
1. To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid
2. To declare free of blame; absolve.
3. To free (a human) of the guilt and penalty attached to grievous sin. Used of God.
4. Law
a. To demonstrate sufficient legal reason for (an action taken).
b. To prove to be qualified as a bondsman.
5. Printing To adjust the spacing within (lines in a document, for example), so that the lines end evenly at a straight margin.
The typical use of the word "justify" is to prove something to be "right" or "just".
"If you mean justification as in "making it right", then you're wrong."
There's nothing complex about this. I don't think in terms of right and wrong so I'd never even venture into that territory of trying to make what I do "right". Nothing is right or wrong, it just "IS". If I don't think it's wrong, then why would I try to make it be right? I wouldn't, and I'm not.
If you use the term "justify" to mean validate or lend reasoning behind then I guess that could be construed as acceptable however as I said above "justify" seems a strong word for that and I don't like the ambiguity. I'm also not trying AT ALL to demonstrate my reasoning (I haven't even stated my reasoning OR goal) to anyone else so this fact makes justify even less of a proper word here.
*Basically, I think justify is the wrong word.
"Same goes for the "I am indifferent towards their feelings", but you enjoy the conclusion that makes them show emotion, be it good or bad."
*I don't care ABOUT them personally but I care that my work has had effect. Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal. It's a "paycheck". I really don't know how to simplify this any more. I put a very good analogy in the previous post to explain this. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Quite frankly, I am getting a bored, and my flu is getting worse.
You are trying to seperate "reason" with "justification".
Here is the definition, copy and pasted, of "reason".
rea·son
/ˈrēzən/
Noun
A cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.
"Justification".
Quite frankly, my response to you was more so to see how hard you would try convince me of this image you are showing.
I only "really" read this bit properly:
"*I don't care ABOUT them personally but I care that my work has had effect. Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal. It's a "paycheck". I really don't know how to simplify this any more. I put a very good analogy in the previous post to explain this. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that."
The work was the theft, not the victim of the theft, as you said, you are indifferent towards the victim. The effect and success of theft is that you have the thing you thieved, not who you thieved from. You can't say the success of the act is how the victim acts, then say you are indifferent towards the victim. That is saying you are indifferent towards the goal and ends, which means you wouldn't care about thieving as much as you claim to care about it.
You give me definitions of justify, but I am sure you skipped the actual definition shown right at the top when you Google it because you know it complies with what I am saying. Here is the definition:
jus·ti·fy
/ˈjəstəˌfī/
Verb
Show or prove to be right or reasonable.
Be a good reason for.
To "reason".
There is nothing complex about this. You are trying to come off as sadistic and liking how people react to your bad deed, all while trying to say you are indifferent (don't care) about how they react.
You are making contradictions, how you can't see that is beyond me.
I think you care about trying to portray this image too much, as you spend a lot of time trying to convince me that what you say is true.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
"Quite frankly, my response to you was more so to see how hard you would try convince me of this image you are showing."
Yes, it's pretty obvious that you were being purposely pig headed and trying to incite a pissing contest. If you'd like to continue talking then proceed as a man, not a child.
I have made no portrayal of myself as anything other than a thief. I think you're trying to create something there that isn't. I have stated NOTHING of my ideas, goals, achievements or any such thing.
Moving along.
"The work was the theft, not the victim of the theft.....The effect and success of theft is that you have the thing you thieved, not who you thieved from."
This is your opinion on your theft, not mine. We are 2 different people with 2 different motives and 2 different outcomes, you can't thrust your idea and motivations of theft to me. Remember this: --*My goal includes A LOT more than just having the item*-- Again, I have not ever stated my goal so don't make assumptions.
I'm indifferent to his feelings as a person to another person. This means I don't feel guilt or remorse for victimizing him. However his loss is my gain, in more ways than one, thus I enjoy his loss and I enjoy his distress. Part of my goal includes causing distress, hence I enjoy it when it happens. Got that now?
"You give me definitions of justify, but I am sure you skipped the actual definition shown right at the top when you Google it because you know it complies with what I am saying."
I used freedictionary because I have it on my toolbar, there was nothing underhanded going on with that. If you want to continue to use justify then that's your right. I object to it and won't use it myself because of the strong connotations of "making right" and the ambiguity. There are much more fitting and less influencing terms than justify. Motive would be a much better term.
"You are trying to come off as sadistic and liking how people react to your bad deed"
You got the wrong impression, once again you are reading more into it than is there. The reaction is crucial because it lends to the goal. It's really as simple as that but you don't know what my goal is so I wouldn't expect you to fully understand this. It has nothing to do with being sadistic (I don't believe I am sadistic), and my actual purpose of causing&enjoying distress is very far from that.
If I'm making contradictions then outline them. So far the ones you think you've noticed have just been your own misunderstandings.
--
RomeoDeMontague
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
You call me an idiot yet you already broke a rule. Do not discuss illegal activity. You are a Klepto. It is short for Kleptomanic. You are either that or antisocial. You certainly do fit one of those. An antisocial person will often do impulsive things with out any regard to others. You seem to think its fun to steal and do not regard anyone else’s feelings. You do not care about right or wrong and only do it to amuse yourself.
I pulled this off a website:
Self-Help Strategies
Self-help methods for the treatment of this disorder are often overlooked by the medical profession because very few professionals are involved in them. Groups can be especially helpful for people with this disorder, if they are tailored specifically for antisocial personality disorder. Individuals with this disorder typically feel more at ease in discussing their feelings and behaviours in front of their peers in this type of supportive modality. Leaders of such self-help support groups, though, must be wary of individuals who come to group just to brag about their exploits and who may seek to use the group inappropriately. Usually a group can be very helpful and beneficial to most people with this disorder, once they overcome their initial fears and hesitation to join such a group. Many support groups exist within communities throughout the world which are devoted to helping individuals with this disorder share their commons experiences and feelings.
Ok, you got my attention, because I refuse for anyone to not understand obvious contradictions.
"I am not trying to portray myself as anything other than a thief".
A thief is something that takes something that doesn't belong to them without consent. That is what a thief is.
You are trying to portray yourself as a thief that likes to view the negative effect it has one people, which is something that being a thief isn't about, viewing the reaction of the victim, it is about the thing you thieve.
By liking and caring about how the victim reacts negatively and gaining pleasure from them being stolen from, you are trying to portray yourself as a thief that likes to see people upset.
This isn't rocket science. A thief isn't about the victim of your action, being a thief is about the items you steal.
You have state nothing of your ideas, goals, achievements, or any such thing.
The goal of thieving is to succeed in thieving. Trying to find a deeper meaning to thieving is looking to find deep meaning in simple things. This might not be your "Only" goal, but it is a goal none the less, unless you think successfully stealing what you want to steal is not a "goal" of thieving, in which case, I wouldn't consider thieving if I had such a belief structure.
You just said that you are indifferent towards the people you thieve from. You don't care about them, that is what indifference means.
Quote: "Who doesn't want to know that their work is paying off? The emotion shows the effect, it proves success and lends to the ultimate goal."
If the goal, for whatever reason, needs to be validated on how the "victim" reacts, then you make how the "victim" reacts one of the goals, not just the thieving of the items. How can you be indifferent towards the victims, yet imply that that the way to tell if your work is paying off is by how the victim reacts, rather than successfully taking what you were thieving?
"I'm indifferent towards how the victims feel, but how they feel due to my theft is something I "like" to see, as it validates if what I done have "effect" on them"...You want to know how they feel due to your crime, but don't care about their feelings once finding out...?
If you can't see the contradiction, I doubt you ever will.
As for your goal having "a lot more" to do with having them, that doesn't change the point of what I was saying. I didn't say that what I explained was your "only" goal, but that it was still a goal, as you care to see how they react after you thieve from them.
You can't care about how they react, yet not care. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
So you think that not being indifferent towards the victim is not liking his "positive" reactions? It's not about "positive" reactions or "negative ones, it's if you like "ANY" of his reactions, that can be, you guessed it, his distress. "I don't care about how he reacts, I care about how reacts in distress".
Again, this just feels like you trying to have an opening to make yourself seem like some sociopathic person, when the need to explain what you explained was not needed, which makes me think that you gave me unnecessary information for the sake to give this image of yourself off to me, which makes me think you "want" to be this type of person you portray yourself to be, but aren't. If you were this person you wish to be, I wouldn't be proud, the reasoning behind this persona is not sadistic, not indifferent towards things, it's just a walking contradiction that is incapable of realizing it, which is insulting, not complimenting.