How far down the "Evil Baby" hierarchy do we have to go before we get to the person who is responsible for Fonzie Jumping the Shark? Is it moral to go back in time to fix horrible art?
I don't believe that there are "evil babies". Certain people might have proclivities towards certain things, but I don't think that evil is one of them.
Let's take your example of Robespierre. In the early FR, he was one of the most enlightened thinkers. He was vocally and adamantly AGAINST the death penalty--he thought it was barbaric. It was the fighting and power struggles of the FR that hardened him and turned him into what he became.
Robespierre was a well intentioned idealist who turned into everything that he once hated. He might as well have been the "real life inspiration" for Michael Corleone of The Godfather.
Babies are born neither great nor evil. The story is written as it transpires.
I should clarify that the babies themselves are not evil, but are the baby versions of people who would grow up to do evil things. Hitler baby was not evil, but grew up to be evil. The Evil Baby Orphanage is a preemptive strike against the development of this evil
The Evil Baby Orphanage operates on a number of assumptions, that (1) there are evil babies, (2) time travel is possible, (3) there is no such thing as determinism.
In the case of baby Robespierre, we would still encourage his political brilliance, but would discourage the beheading. Most of the people we seek to recondition were brilliant thinkers and political strategians, but used these talents for evil. Hitler's reign was a period of growth and prosperity for Germany, but there was concurrently the Holocaust.
Well, I suppose there was some growth and relative prosperity early on, but given the end results for Germany of the war he started -- devastated infrastructure, cities destroyed, millions of Germans killed, loss of East Prussia, decades of partition -- he clearly needed some reconditioning. He left Germany far worse than he found it, independent of the Holocaust.
I agree that standards would change on this model -- and we should watch out for the slippery slope. But this time-travel-enabled society would still have to be vigilant for top-tier evil. Logically there was, at some point, a first genocidal dictator, and so presumably even a world that had no historical ones could still give rise to a new one. The elimination of top-tier evil might change perception of the tier, but it doesn't prevent it from being re-topped at any time. Sobering!
This is one of the arguments for a non-interventionist God as a response to the problem of theodicy.
Bazmandu 1 year ago
it must be seen {joking}
HOWNIVALL 2 years ago
One of the joys of alt channels, is that you can post on them whatever and whenever you like!
You should post more videos on here
cause even if you think they're boring, we enjoy them.
simplyplainethan 2 years ago 2
How far down the "Evil Baby" hierarchy do we have to go before we get to the person who is responsible for Fonzie Jumping the Shark? Is it moral to go back in time to fix horrible art?
RockingJamboree 2 years ago
Hank's idea was that there used to be babies who were more evil than Stalin and Hitler - who would have killed more people.
I don't think that by 'non-historical evil babies' he meant 'not-famous-because-we're-less-evil' babies..
Lidespam 2 years ago
Hear, hear!
beckstraordinary 2 years ago
I don't believe that there are "evil babies". Certain people might have proclivities towards certain things, but I don't think that evil is one of them.
Let's take your example of Robespierre. In the early FR, he was one of the most enlightened thinkers. He was vocally and adamantly AGAINST the death penalty--he thought it was barbaric. It was the fighting and power struggles of the FR that hardened him and turned him into what he became.
There are no evil babies!
CousinoMacul 2 years ago
cont...
Robespierre was a well intentioned idealist who turned into everything that he once hated. He might as well have been the "real life inspiration" for Michael Corleone of The Godfather.
Babies are born neither great nor evil. The story is written as it transpires.
[/rant] *sorry*
CousinoMacul 2 years ago
Yeah, Robespierre is a poor example.
I should clarify that the babies themselves are not evil, but are the baby versions of people who would grow up to do evil things. Hitler baby was not evil, but grew up to be evil. The Evil Baby Orphanage is a preemptive strike against the development of this evil
The Evil Baby Orphanage operates on a number of assumptions, that (1) there are evil babies, (2) time travel is possible, (3) there is no such thing as determinism.
sweetafton23 2 years ago
In the case of baby Robespierre, we would still encourage his political brilliance, but would discourage the beheading. Most of the people we seek to recondition were brilliant thinkers and political strategians, but used these talents for evil. Hitler's reign was a period of growth and prosperity for Germany, but there was concurrently the Holocaust.
sweetafton23 2 years ago
Well, I suppose there was some growth and relative prosperity early on, but given the end results for Germany of the war he started -- devastated infrastructure, cities destroyed, millions of Germans killed, loss of East Prussia, decades of partition -- he clearly needed some reconditioning. He left Germany far worse than he found it, independent of the Holocaust.
mtgordon 2 years ago
@sweetafton23 I feel like the existence of determinism, a philosophical view, is not dependent on whether the beliefs therein are true.
Ungeniusman 1 year ago
Agreed, Robespierre was the Anakin Skywalker of the French Revolution.
Hmm... maybe it's all for the best of the Evil Baby Orphanage isn't run by the Jedi.
mtgordon 2 years ago
i think the notion that there are no evil babies is, ironically enough, the basic premise upon which the evil baby orphanage intends to operate.
as john said in the original ebo video, "we just need to take them out of their crappy homes and [insert rest of ebo plan here]!"
if the babies were really evil, no orphanage could change history.
emmetgirl 2 years ago
I agree that standards would change on this model -- and we should watch out for the slippery slope. But this time-travel-enabled society would still have to be vigilant for top-tier evil. Logically there was, at some point, a first genocidal dictator, and so presumably even a world that had no historical ones could still give rise to a new one. The elimination of top-tier evil might change perception of the tier, but it doesn't prevent it from being re-topped at any time. Sobering!
omnidoug 2 years ago
Works for me.
...and four shots? :] or was I just not paying enough attention?
imgonnabeatree 2 years ago
No no no! The evilest evil baby of all is baby Fergie of the baby BEP's. :-P
CousinoMacul 2 years ago
I don't understand. How is Fergie more evil than Hitler?
sweetafton24 2 years ago
Have you ever tried listening to her?
:-P
CousinoMacul 2 years ago
Yeah, but she didn't kill people. In fact, she asks, "Where is the love?"
sweetafton23 2 years ago
But she's killing music!!! Isn't that worse?!?!?! After all, people die every day and everyone dies eventually.
*You've managed to shame me into giving a serious answer. See below.*
CousinoMacul 2 years ago
@sweetafton24 Fergie is just annoying not evil
SemisonicNerdfighter 3 months ago