The Creation of Evil Races

[DShomshak]

The Xenovores are a well-designed "evil" race because there is a reason and method to the horrible things they do. As LL said, they were genetically engineered. As Alien Wars describes, a nation created them to be the survivors of a nuclear war. That is the founding evil: Leaders who decided they could accept the mass death of a nuclear war as long as something of themselves survived afterward as a gotcha-last, right down to the Xenovores getting high from eating other sapients. They are the product of someone else's freely chosen evil.

 

Not all Xenovores carry the genetic programming to get high from eating sapients. By the time of the Terran Empire, these recessives have become dominant genotype since most Xenovores got exterminated. They have a chance to break free of their creators' will. Though some still eat other people as a point of cultural tradition; but that is their choice.

 

Dean Shomshak

[LoneWolf]

Another factor to consider is the question of what is evil.  Consuming sentient creature has been used as an example of evil, but what about eating animals.   Is eating animals or even insects an evil act?  If not at, what level of intelligence does it become an evil act?  Would a species that is measurably more intelligent than humans be evil if they eat humans?  What about a culture that believes that consuming the flesh of a loved one allows them to live on and failing to do so condemn them to the person’s soul to oblivion? From that perspective not eating someone could be considered an evil act. 

 

The idea of free will has also come up, but do all creatures have free will?  Who is to say that this is a universal trait?   In science fiction there are many intelligent species that have instincts they cannot overcome.  The Vulcan’s Pon Far is a perfect example of a race where instinct can override free will in a sentient race.  What about a race that goes berserk in battle or under stress?  Maybe they have something similar to an adrenaline rush that causes them to kill and destroy things.  What about hive minds were the individual is directed by some other creature or force?

 

What about creatures that are completely different from humans and do not share their values.  For example, humans usually are protective of their mates and offspring.   But other species do not have this instinct.  Many insects actually kill their mates after they have mated.  Not all races are going to have human instincts and motivations.  

 

Imagine an insect like alien species that is more intelligent than humans.  They live for thousands of years, and their technology is far more advanced than human. Their thought process is completely alien and incomprehensible.  They are telepathic but their class of mind is alien so they cannot comprehend human thought.   They feed off of mental energy of human and animals experiencing pain and suffering.  This is their food and without it they will die.  They reproduce by laying their eggs in the brain of a sentient host.  When the egg hatches it takes over the body of the host until it matures.   Would you consider this species evil?  

 

I think saying that there cannot be inherently evil races is extremely short sided.  I can easily see a race that does not share human like values and senses existing.   In some cases, they may have traits that we would consider evil.   But at the same time I can see that the idea of a human like race being inherently evil is distasteful and feels wrong.  There is no reason you cannot have a game where the humanoid species are not inherently evil, but species that are inherently good or evil exist.   I think the universe is big enough to have both.  
 

[DShomshak]

It may be worth remembering that Christian theology holds that humans are an "inherently evil" race. Everyone is born tainted by the Original Sin of Adam and Eve's disobedience to God. We can struggle against that evil taint, as individuals and as societies, but can never succeed completely. Fortunately, forgiveness is an option.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, DShomshak said:

The Xenovores are a well-designed "evil" race because there is a reason and method to the horrible things they do. As LL said, they were genetically engineered. As Alien Wars describes, a nation created them to be the survivors of a nuclear war. That is the founding evil: Leaders who decided they could accept the mass death of a nuclear war as long as something of themselves survived afterward as a gotcha-last, right down to the Xenovores getting high from eating other sapients. They are the product of someone else's freely chosen evil.

 

 

I must be stupid, because it never occurred to me until you wrote this that the reason the Xenovores were designed to "get high from eating other sapients" was to incentivize them to eliminate any competitive survivors. Making sure that "their side" is the only one that endures. That's... next-level evil.

 

Of course it's also next-level stupid, as the Xenovores could be expected to also put their creators on the menu.

[DShomshak]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

I must be stupid, because it never occurred to me until you wrote this that the reason the Xenovores were designed to "get high from eating other sapients" was to incentivize them to eliminate any competitive survivors. Making sure that "their side" is the only one that endures. That's... next-level evil.

 

Of course it's also next-level stupid, as the Xenovores could be expected to also put their creators on the menu.

And did! But RL evil *is* often deeply stupid.

 

I like a line Lois McMaster Bujold put in the mouth of her series hero Miles Vorkosigan: Monsters often are ordinary people, just a bit more confused in their thinking.

 

Dean Shomshak

[assault]

3 hours ago, DShomshak said:

It may be worth remembering that Christian theology holds that humans are an "inherently evil" race. Everyone is born tainted by the Original Sin of Adam and Eve's disobedience to God. We can struggle against that evil taint, as individuals and as societies, but can never succeed completely. Fortunately, forgiveness is an option.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

I was going to point this out too. Curse the need to sleep!

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I haven't called myself a Christian in almost 40 years, and I'm certainly no expert on the Bible, but it's my understanding that the idea of free will and choice to perform evil acts or not is pretty central to Christianity?

 

Well I wasn't trying to make a theological argument one way or another.  My point was simply that just about everyone back then had a shared ethical understanding, so no explanation was needed.  They were called evil, everyone knew what evil was, and thus no greater argument must be had.  Today that is not the case, so you have all kinds of discussions about what evil AKSHUALLY is, and how each person has their own ethical system that they insist upon, or at least presume.

[Ninja-Bear]

On 9/14/2023 at 6:33 AM, Duke Bushido said:

 

Those are called polar bears, and they are being dealt with.

Nope, there are three active human cannibal tribes to this day. 

[LoneWolf]

The better way to frame the question might be “the creation of irredeemable races”.  

[GDShore]

The Xenovores are not evil, if they are following their biological imperative then they are prosecuting a positive good for their species. The EVIL is what was done unto them. Now I do not intend to let them eat me, my family or any of my friends, thus I will hunt them unto extinction acknowledging that this is a genocide. But in a choice of my species or theirs, I choose mine. I will not call them evil and vilify them, for that will cloud my judgement, slow my reflex's and render me vulnerable to them. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

This is an example of the lack of shared  morality that we once had.  Previously, everyone believed and understood that humans were necessarily higher and better than other species, being made in the image of God and having souls.  Hence, killing a human was morally worse than killing a sloth, for example.  Thus, any creature that existed to kill us is necessarily doing wicked things, even if its doing so to survive and "follow a biological imperative".

 

That's what makes this kind of discussion challenging; a lack of shared worldview and ethical basis.

[Lord Liaden]

35 minutes ago, GDShore said:

The Xenovores are not evil, if they are following their biological imperative then they are prosecuting a positive good for their species. The EVIL is what was done unto them. Now I do not intend to let them eat me, my family or any of my friends, thus I will hunt them unto extinction acknowledging that this is a genocide. But in a choice of my species or theirs, I choose mine. I will not call them evil and vilify them, for that will cloud my judgement, slow my reflex's and render me vulnerable to them. 

 

There is an important distinction, though. The Xenovores are sapient. By the time they cross interstellar space they have advanced medical technology, which they use to genetically modify themselves to create castes suited for particular roles in their society. There's every reason to believe they could remove their dependence on eating other sapients. The fact that later generations of Xenovores overcome it through natural selection, as Dean points out above, proves that it's possible. Instead the Xenovores embrace it, glorify it, make it central to their own cultural myth of superiority. They unapologetically and enthusiastically murder untold millions. You can say that it's part of their heritage, that it's become ingrained in their civilization so that they never question it. That may be true, but the fact remains that they have a choice, and this is what they chose.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Steve]

I wonder. If you substituted orcs for the xenovores, with the orcs suffering the same horrendous losses in population that the xenovores did, would that “natural selection” leave a less inherently hostile species? I’m not so sure. They also gleefully ate other sentient species.

 

Per my understanding of Tolkien’s writings, orcs continued in Middle Earth into the Fourth Age and were eventually hunted down to the last one.

[DShomshak]

I don't know the totality of Tolkien's writings, including his commentary on his own work, so I can't say what he thought the final fate of orcs would be. (Narration in The Hobbit suggests Goblins were responsible for clever machines of torture and destruction unto the present day, but that's a toss-off and I'm reluctant to take it as definitive statement.)

 

But Tolkien's Catholicism does emphasize free choice, both for sin and redemption, as well as Original Sin. I can only speculate what Tolkien might say, but I suspect that if we could ask him he might say that at any point, Sauron could have repented and turned back from his "ruinous path down to the Void." Though I could be wrong: Perhaps he'd say that by the time LotR starts, Sauron has made too many irrevocable choices and ruined himself too completely -- in effect, choosing to give up his free will to make new choices. Which makes him, I think, even more horrifying.

 

I think it's also worth remembering that Sauron's armies weren't just orcs. There were also hordes of Men whom he'd duped to his cause.

 

Another important distinction, I think, is how one approaches the battle against a presumed irredeemable evil. If it's reluctant resolve -- they're intelligent, they didn't ask to be what they are, it's them or us so the fight must be fought - that's heroic. If it's "Wahoo, let's go kill them sumbitches and take their stuff!" -- then the difference between Good and Evil seems that between Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

 

(I recently read a book about the Just War doctrine developed by Medieval Catholics. It isn't called out as such, but nothing done by the heroes in LotR violates it.)

 

Dean Shomshak

[GDShore]

Good point LL, but have you ever tried discussing native Americans with a hater. It is like talking to a wall, except that with a wall the worst that's coming back at you is an echo, with a hater depending on your arguments strength or your debating skills you may get a fist. I have on more than on occasion (once they pulled a knife). {sometimes I am a slow learner, but even now if I hear such crap I cannot help but call them out} The Xenoveres did not change until nearly destroyed, you see changing cultural mores is very hard. If generation A teaches B to hate, and B teaches C and C to D ect. ect. ect. it is to be expected that generation X (enovores) will hate. It takes a long time to change a cultural "truism" to find and dig out the last pockets of that behavior nearly impossible. One just has to have observed Florida for the past two years. It takes a lot of work to change a cultural truism, it can be done but there is great risk of recidivism. The bombing of a church, the kneeling on a neck these are evil acts BUT it does not make the race from which the perpetrators came from evil just the evildoers. 

[Lord Liaden]

Very interesting points! I'm enjoying this debate.   And in that spirit:

 

Steve, aggression in and of itself is not a detriment to survival. In many circumstances it can be an asset. It's only when it can't be controlled, when it descends to the level of psychopathy, that it becomes counter-productive.The Xenovores, when their defeats deprived them of sapients to consume, went berserk, turned on and devoured their own kind.

 

GDShore, I've spoken to people who were raised as you describe, to distrust and hate and fear certain groups. They talked the talk, and sometimes walked the walk. But in time, with experience, they came to recognize that what they were taught wasn't real, and they repudiated their previous stand. It absolutely can be very hard, but if one is open to learning something new, it's demonstrably possible. And not being open is a choice.

[GDShore]

LL yes people can change. Those that do however are in the extreme minority. I too, have seen change, but for each one that has changed I know 50 or more that not only will not change, refuse to even contemplate that they might be in error and that there is a need for change. There is still a lot of work to do, both north and south of the border. Today up here any government that today suggested restarting the residential school system would be metaphorically be hauled out of parliament, tarred and feathered and sent south. Their party turfed on the next election and out of power for a verrry long time. Yet not five years past a member of our senate (in Canada an appointive body) stated the the Residential School system had some positive aspects. Idiots can be found everywhere. 

[Lord Liaden]

No argument from me on the ubiquitousness of idiots. But what you describe from that senator I would be inclined to categorize as either wilful ignorance, or deliberate misrepresentation. Both voluntary. I noticed that you emphasized that those people you know "refuse to even contemplate" that they might be in error. That's also voluntary, that's a choice.

 

If the senator you mentioned had been willing and able to turn his words into actions, I would characterize him as evil.

[GDShore]

You are correct LL, it is a choice. IN Canada a senator is appointed to serve until they are 75 years old, and must have attained 30 years of age, meaning a possible term of 45 years. Average term though is 11 years. The senator in question was a woman, and was initially censored by the senate, ordered to take a course on the residential schools which she started, but did not finish, was ordered to complete the course a second time, defied the order and when the senate made it clear that she would face an expulsion vote that would succeed she resigned.

     As for those who hate I have lost long term friends because of this and similar issues. The place I live could stand as the template for Rednecksville anywhere. I am not going anywhere, anyhow, at all. You see I have given up on them, I still have small hopes for their kids, at least some of them I feel sorry for some of them they have really not had much of a chance to grow or think for themselves.

[Doc Democracy]

You know, this is beginning to get very close to belonging in the political thread in Non-gaming discussion.  Possible close enough to draw the ire of Dan Simon should it go further.

[Lord Liaden]

Point taken, Bowing out.

[GDShore]

Agreed Doc, thank you, also out.

[Ermenegildo]

While the Dark Ages were a violent period and religious wars were always cruel, even at that time there was some restrain in how to deal with "evil enemies" or at least there were people that were against the mass slaughter of captured enemies for example.

For the interested reader, the Wikipedia page on the Saxon War by Charlemagne is really interesting since it provides an example of an expansion war against an enemy from a different culture and religion. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxon_Wars)

During this war, there was a huge slaughter of captured enemies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden) and the promulgation of a particularly strong law to force the conversion of the Saxons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitulatio_de_partibus_Saxoniae). Despite the low level of consideration for human rights (by modern definition) at the time, some important figures such as Alcuin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcuin) spoke against this way of conducting the war. Since he was an important figure in the Charlemagne court the Capitulatio de Partibus Sazoniae was softened.

 

TLDR: While the most common source material for fantasy, the Dark Ages societies,  were quite tolerant about the use of violence they still have limits on how much violence war right even if applied to foreigners without social or religious connection. This knowledge could help to create a more plausible interaction with the "Evil race" during the games.

[GDShore]

Yes the dark ages has a reputation for savagery but rarely was slaughter of innocents a part of the zeitgiest. Yet well into the renaissance during the 30 years war, a level of pure savage barbarity (that would not be surpassed until WW II and the Nazis) would be achieved, at Magdeburg in north central Germany. Johann Tserclaes Count of Tilly senior general of the Holy Roman Empire laid siege to the protestant (Lutheran) city. Tilly established the siege then went campaigning elsewhere leaving Graz von Pappenheim in command returning a month later with a replenished army. Pappenheim convinced Tilly to assault the city and they did so in two parts, first taking the Toll redout which exposed a portion on Magdeburgs city wall to a point blank bombardment. Tilly demanded the surrender of the city, the mayor refused believing a Swedish army was enroute. (they were but did not arrive in time) Tilly placed the assault under the command of von Pappenheim and once the army of 40,000 was thru the walls was set loose upon the city of Magdeburg. In the next 6 hours 20,000 civilians and the 8,000 garrison would be slaughtered. Towards the end of the sack, one of the last pockets of civilians was trapped at the central marketplace. Tilly was present, a large group of children (there fathers already perished trying to keep Tillys army out of the square) (estimate between 500 and 1000) marched across the square hands raised singing a Lutheran hymn and were killed to the last one, then followed the slaughter of their mothers and younger siblings. Apologists for Tilly have said that Pappenheim lost control of the army,, but Tilly sent a letter to the Emperor, I paraphrase a portion of -- Emperor you and the ladies of your court should have been here to witness the battle it was glorious. 

      You see savagery is not confined to any one period of mans history, when you vilify and make less than human your foe it becomes very easy to do any thing you may imagine unto them and justify it. 

[Doc Democracy]

There is limited value in referencing real life history as we are playing in a reality where the gods are verifiable real, where there are many different sentient species with varying modalities and some so alien that their morality may be incomprehensible.

 

The idea that there is true evil, not people doing evil acts, is difficult in our relativist normality, where we might even choose to watch a movie humanising the Joker.

 

The existence of absolute good, or absolute evil is difficult to comprehend. We tend to do poor approximations because we are stuck in our heads.

Though the telling of historical stories is interesting and a reason I keep reading!  🙂