It's scary how much of the population views moral problems by "what's in it for me and what are the consequences"
Very little altruism
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
728 points (98.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
9661 readers
1991 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I've had religious people ask me (am atheist) "without God what is stopping you from being evil?" and holy shit, I can't believe people think like that
A good answer is "I rape and murder exactly as much as I want to, which is none. If eternal hellfire is the only think keeping you from doing those things then I hope you never lose your faith."
I can hear Penn Jillette saying this...
That and the "without the Bible, how do you know what's right or wrong" crowd. They have become so externally reliant on direction that they dont even have an independent sense of morality anymore. Also, they must think, in turn, that that non-Christian cultures and people are inherently amoral or immoral. The irony.
Unfortunately, you hit the nail on the head there. When you're so used to having someone tell you what to do, for every little action from how to dress to how to speak, you become dependent on it for everything.
Source: Left a cult. Had to relearn 'good' and 'bad' in therapy.
Damn, that takes a lot of courage, good job. Not many people can handle it
This is a real problem we're facing.
It's part of the overarching authoritarian worldview, that fear of consequences from someone above you on the food chain is the primary motivation for anyone to be "good".
The problem comes from it being extremely time consuming to explain how "being good" benefits you personally, even if all possibility of consequences are removed. Essentially you have to explain the entire concept of the word "honor" to them. What are the benefits of being honorable, and how do these benefits (for you personally) outweigh the benefits of being dishonorable?
But if someone wasn't raised that way, then it really does need to be explained to them. Otherwise it's unrealistic to expect them to just somehow figure it out for themselves.
edit for grammar
edit2: To elaborate a little bit, the benefit of honor boils down to efficiency and the advantages of cooperation. People can perceive patterns, and when someone is dishonorable, even if people won't come attack them somehow, they'll still be reluctant to ever cooperate with that person. An honorable person thus has far more resources from their community that they can draw on in the pursuit of their own personal goals. In addition, it simplifies their lives. Instead of having to, say, track the lies you've told so you don't mess up and create inconsistencies, if you live honorably you free up all that energy to devote to your goals in other ways.
Note, my summary argument is not overly compelling just on its own. I had to boil it down too much to make it a reasonable length. You need many examples, or preferably actual life experience on how it works, for the argument to actually become somewhat convincing.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Nothing like them being flabbergasted at the response of "I don't need an external threat of eternal punishment to be a good person"
load more comments
(1 replies)
I feel like there's something wrong with me and I'm at a disadvantage for being like that when it should absolutely fucking be the other way around.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It saddens and frightens me, that so many people in the world are so open about how the only reason they don't commit violence is fear of consequences. I bummed out both by how many people like that there are, and how normal they feel uttering psychohorrors like that
It saddens and frightens me, that so many people in the world are so open about how the only reason they don’t commit violence is fear of consequences.
Christian society in a nutshell.
It's actually truly not human nature to hurt another human, but because it is forbidden people don't understand themselves at all.
Remember, in all wars since the dawn of time, we have had to first train the shit out of every single soldier to not reflexively miss with their weapons over months using sleep and agency deprivation to remove that threshold.
Very few people have disorders that makes them capable of violence of that level
load more comments
(1 replies)
Back in like 2008 I was playing the single player campaign for the first COD: Modern Warfare and I almost failed the first mission because I didn't want to kill noncombatants on a boat.
Meanwhile in 2025 that's what our military is doing these days in Venezuelan waters.
Hey to be fair "civilian collateral" has been a favorite pass-time of the US military long before 2025.
Because there's no such thing as no consequences. If I have the ability to rob a bank and get away with no consequences, there are still consequences for the bank guard that loses his job (or that I have to hurt in order to get into the vault). There are consequences for the people whose money I've taken. Just because there are no consequences on me personally, doesn't mean there are no consequences.
Doing good comes from having empathy for other people, not because you're afraid of personal consequences.
As someone who works at a bank, tbh the only consequences would be trauma inflicted on the tellers and customers. Taking money out of the vault doesn't take money out of accounts, and no decent institution would fire anyone for being robbed. Most banks don't have armed guards, so if someone comes in with a gun, we're expected to follow their demands and hit the panic button if it's safe to do so.
load more comments
(1 replies)
There’s a surprise quick time event in Assassin’s Creed 2 where Leonardo Da Vinci goes in for a hug, and if you don’t press X reasonably quickly he pulls back looking a little bummed out.
I ripped my power cord out of the wall to make sure it didn’t save.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I'm glad I'm not the only one who just can't do evil playthroughs because I feel like such a monstrous dick
In Fallout NV I tried to do a Caesar's legion playthrough, it made me feel to bad and I quit halfway through :c
Me, every time I try to do an evil run:
When I first played GTA 4, and hit an NPC with a taxi... The ragdolling was so realistic, I felt bad for the old grandma... But only for a moment. Soon after, I was running people over, shooting people in the face, mowing them down with the helicopter...
The only “evil power fantasy” I would want would be to continue doing good, while breaking the no-killing/bring them to courts rule; especially if it could be shown that the bad guys ignore/pay off courts.
It’s not fitting for Superman, but it’s basically why the Yakuza series feels compelling.
“…Who said that? Who told you I never kill?”
The problem with taking people's lives is that it erodes your soul. Once you submit to the grisley work of judge, jury, and execution, you lose the ability to see people as people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Trigun also has this vibe
Me in my second run through KCD2: "I'm gonna make Henry a real bastard this time."
Ignatius the Knacker: "Kill that dog."
Me: "Noooooooo!"
Whenever I've played an evil character in any RPG, I've always decided what their code is, and their internal motivation for their actions. Makes it more fun in my opinion.
Hitler loved his dog, and was obviously a piece of shit.
I see no reason why your playthrough of Henry can't be a real bastard to everyone except for dogs!
(Never played the game and don't know who Henry is)
load more comments
(1 replies)
In a world of no consequences, my 'helping' people would inevitably result in hurting others, because there are some people out there that deserve to be hurt. As a result, I would make for a terrible Superman. I don't like being the villain in games, but I'm 100% certain if I got power IRL, I would abuse it and use it to destroy people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Besides it feeling nice to do good, it also fosters a better world around you. It'll be paid back to you in subtle ways you might not even realise.
This is why I can be a fairly good person without believing in eternal damnation for one
load more comments
(1 replies)
If you can't let your dark-side out to play in a safe environment, you risk not knowing it well enough to keep it coming out in ways you didn't plan for.
Reference : The majority of murder and violent crime.
Some people just genuinely don't have those kinds of dark impulses and actually are repulsed to take such actions even in a simulated environment. But I'll grant you, non-destructive, safe outlets for those impulses and frustrations is, indeed, healthier than the alternative.
load more comments
(10 replies)
Are you suggesting murders and violent crime would be reduced if the perpetrators had s safe outlet for this?
I’m not sure I believe that. I’d guess most murder and violent crime in the US is gang related. Those people have plenty of opportunity to play GTA and COD as a safe outlet. I think it has more to do with the environment they grow up in, and the culture it fosters. Which mainly relates to poverty and lack of opportunity.
Similarly, cops who abuse their power have access to the same games and media.
Some will argue it’s the games and media that contribute to causing this, but I’m not sure I believe that either. That always seemed a bit pearl clutchy.
Coincidentally, violent crime has been going down ever since the release of Mortal Kombat. Before then video games were less violent IMHO.
At least in the similar case of porn, it's been around long enough to be studied and has no significant casual/preventative effect on sex crimes.
load more comments
(1 replies)
~~The reverse is true. If you train your brain to give in to the urges, you're more likely to do so IRL too.~~
I would say that depends:
-
I can blast opponents to bits in a fast paced shooter without becoming a homocidal maniac
-
I would probably be affected negatively by being cruel as a habit in a story driven game environment
Ok, i agree, it depends.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Disagree. Not everyone has horrible urges that need safe outlets, and some actions in games are repugnant, even virtually. I remember reading a comment on reddit about someone who played RDR 2 and just randomly decided to kidnap a civilian by hog tying them and loading them up on a horse. They took them to a cliff bound, and tossed them off. For no reason whatsoever. And expected people to relate. It was repulsive, and made me feel extremely uncomfortable even reading about.
I love video games, but I don't like realistic violence generally. It's why I don't play games like GTA and Manhunt, and why I only enjoy FPS games that involve fictional stuff like aliens and monsters (Doom, Halo).
Plus, multiple studies have proven that indulging in violent urges in games like Call of Duty and such actually leads to more aggression and violent impulse, not less.
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6790614/
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563224002097
- https://www.center4research.org/violent-video-games-can-increase-aggression/
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6790562/
Your suggested "safe outlet" is anything but. Young people need to be taught empathy and how to engage with their emotions and address them in a healthy fashion. Not indulge in virtual depravity when they feel bad.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is so DCentric. Gosh we cant even get a daredevil reference....
"I'll take 'Things a Billionaire Would Certainly Say' for two billion dollars, Alex."
view more: next ›