Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice

[The_Universe]

Instead of shouting from a soapbox perhaps you would be better served to defend your claim that cannibalism in and of itself without regard to circumstances is definitively an evil act.

Well, human sacrifice was actually the thing that I considered "in and of itself without regard to circumstances a definitively evil act." The religious acceptance of an act (which seems to be the primary justfication) cannot make a thing good, or even not evil. I would contend that religion(s) (in a very general, nonspecific sense) are often right in their judgement(s) about whether a thing is good or bad, but nothing on earth bats 1000.

Just as I would not defend the Crusades as being good, despite their acceptance, so too would I refuse to defend any act of human sacrifice, even if the people participating believed that it staved off the destruction of the world, or whatever.

Cannibalism on the other hand, in very limited circumstance, can be considered "not-evil" particularly so long as 1) the person eaten was not killed for the express purpose of being eaten, and 2) there is no other way possible to acquire food, as necessary for survival.

I wasn't trying to get on a soapbox...but I did find it reasonably disturbing that no one has said anything other than "well, we can't possibly say that it's wrong, because people have really done it, and believed that it was right while they did!"

I think there are universal mores, but as with all things, YMMV.

 

[The_Universe]

Well, human sacrifice was actually the thing that I considered "in and of itself without regard to circumstances a definitively evil act." The religious acceptance of an act (which seems to be the primary justfication) cannot make a thing good, or even not evil. I would contend that religion(s) (in a very general, nonspecific sense) are often right in their judgement(s) about whether a thing is good or bad, but nothing on earth bats 1000.

Just as I would not defend the Crusades as being good, despite their acceptance, so too would I refuse to defend any act of human sacrifice, even if the people participating believed that it staved off the destruction of the world, or whatever.

Cannibalism on the other hand, in very limited circumstance, can be considered "not-evil" particularly so long as 1) the person eaten was not killed for the express purpose of being eaten, and 2) there is no other way possible to acquire food, as necessary for survival.

I wasn't trying to get on a soapbox...but I did find it reasonably disturbing that no one has said anything other than "well, we can't possibly say that it's wrong, because people have really done it, and believed that it was right while they did!"

I think there are universal mores, but as with all things, YMMV.

Also, I am willing to firmly state, without question or equivocation, that both practices are icky.

 

[Desdichado]

One of the ways sacrifice victims were selected was through a ball game. Two teams would compete for the opportunity to be sacrificed, which was seen as a privilege. Being sacrificed to the gods and possibly eaten by the priests was something to which many victims not only consented but fought for the chance to do.

In all the sources I've read, it's unclear if they fought for the right to be sacrificed, or the right not to be sacrificed. It's not clear if the winners or losers were sacrificed.

Besides, I'm not sure that societal acceptance of the practice makes something non-evil in D&D. After all, there is the possibility of evil societies in D&D.

 

[Turjan]

Besides, I'm not sure that societal acceptance of the practice makes something non-evil in D&D. After all, there is the possibility of evil societies in D&D.

As D&D uses Christian ethics, and this in an absolute manner, you may be right.

Hmmmm. What if you were eating something that had human DNA grafted into, but it wasn't actually human? For example, a genetically modified carrot using human DNA has been around since the 80s.

A human being is not defined by a single gene. A carrot with one human gene is still a carrot. Additionally, you should keep in mind that nature itself "performs experiments" like this all the time; just look for the keyword "lateral gene transfer".

 

[Krieg]

Well, human sacrifice was actually the thing that I considered "in and of itself without regard to circumstances a definitively evil act."

I'm inclined to give you a lot more leeway on that one.

Now if performing a human sacrifice would in fact prevent a world cataclysm, how (if at all) does that change the picture? Since that is the mindset that at least some of the historical cases were operating from.

In regards to Cannibilism I would strongly argue that the taboos surrounding it have the same source as many of our cultural taboos...societal health risks.

There is no doubt that in the long term cannibalism can be very harmful to the species, and our ancestors (being just as intelligent as we are) would have figured this out in short order & worked to eliminate (or at least severely limit) the practice.

Also, I am willing to firmly state, without question or equivocation, that both practices are icky.

Now I certainly won't argue that point!

 

[Desdichado]

As D&D uses Christian ethics, and this in an absolute manner, you may be right.

I'm totally right from a D&D point of view, but that answer just doesn't really get you very far. The rather poorly done moralistic "binning" of alignments is one of the things that detracts from D&D being a more interesting game, IMO.

Hmm... maybe I should reread the first post. What's the actual question again?

 

[Orius]

Reading through some of these "Is This Evil?" threads -- most recently about slavery -- has made me wonder how far EnWorlders are willing to push moral relativism. For example, is there anyone here who would be willing to argue that cannibalism and human sacrifice are not evil?

That depends.

Would you consider the Donner party evil?

As for human sacrifice, yes, I would say human sacrifice is not a good act in any situation. It's usually evil. For example, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom or Aztecs ripping people's hearts out to keep the rain coming. However, there've been time whens cultures resorted to human sacrifice in extremis, usually the result of natural disasters that threatened the survival of the culture itself. The people are facing extinction, and prayers and sacrifices don't work. So they go to the farthest extreme and sacrifice one of their youths, hoping to please the gods and save themselves. Not what I would consider a good act, but I really wouldn't say it's outright evil either.

 

[The_Universe]

Now if performing a human sacrifice would in fact prevent a world cataclysm, how (if at all) does that change the picture? Since that is the mindset that at least some of the historical cases were operating from.

In that highly improbable situation, I'd say that a sacrifice of one to save the many (or all) is undeniably good. The problem is that because our perceptions are limited and subjective, humans can never know if that is actually the case.

Since, at best, our ability to determine if the sacrifice could save you and others is a reasonable guess, it's not worth making the sacrifice (from a good/evil perspective).

But, if you know that killing Steve the gardener will prevent the return of Great Cthulhu (or whatever) too bad, so sad for Steve.

 

[Agback]

As D&D uses Christian ethics, and this in an absolute manner, you may be right.

I'm not sure that that is true. The D&D alignment system gives a much wider latitude to violence than the techings of Christ permit, and completely overlooks some issues that Christ taught were very important: lying, divorce (evil), forgiveness (good).

 

[Ourph]

But, if you know that killing Steve the gardener will prevent the return of Great Cthulhu (or whatever) too bad, so sad for Steve.

I think your first instinct was correct. This is an evil act. It may, in fact, be necessary (even desirable) to commit this evil act, but it remains evil.

It's why someone coined the phrase "a necessary evil".

Sometimes good people have to make choices between two evils. That's what living in an imperfect world gets ya!