Which is more dangerous, a bad conscience OR no conscience? (Inspired by the @bluefish poll on AI)
No concious provides limitless evil because it requires no human purpose or cause. Bad concious implies it comes from a human notion and a human limit can be applied. I believe the universal potential for evil far exceeds the natural human capacity.
No I'm not a sociopath, simply a type A politician.
I have to go to court Monday to enforce my divorcee agreement. In thinking about it, I realized he has no conscience.
Ignorance of right v wrong is dangerous on a level that is indescribable.
More than the willful?
But sometimes it's out of willful ignorance. In that case, yes. It is detrimental.
It's a tough question supp.
For reference, Nietzsche describes "bad conscience" as the instincts of cruelty, hostility and destruction.
These characterized our pre-historic lives had to be suppressed when we entered into society. Now people have no rightful outlet for them; exercising them violated rules of civilized society.