Killing people

Why is killing people viewed almost universally as the utmost sin/crime?

It seems that most cultures have it as the ultimate prohibition, as a direct-to-hell ticket over any other kind of crime. I understand that life must be protected to keep the species, nation, whatever, but in some places it goes as far as letting your village be entirely robbed or pillaged if by that you avoid killing your enemy.

How does this prohibition, and to those levels, develop?

>inb4 edgy, sociopath, etc
I don't get why crimes that (IMO) are worse, like rape or torture are always considered lower than murder, almost in every culture AFAIK.

>I understand that life must be protected to keep the species, nation, whatever
this is why life must be protected? good god man

Would you want to be killed? Golden rule faggot.

Then why aren't rape and torture condemned in the same way, historically?

>basic foundation of life/existence is being alive
>humans have gotten to where they are today through cooperation and higher altruism compared to a lot of other animals
>murder is in direct opposition to that

>ruining a person's life/mind and making them non functional members of society is not any problem because the person is still alive

Also
>humans have gotten to where they are today through cooperation and higher altruism
TOP KEK

That's only partially

>but in some places it goes as far as letting your village be entirely robbed or pillaged if by that you avoid killing your enemy.
litrerally where and when???

what you're talking about is cold blooded murder and it is RIGHTFULLY the worst sin one can commit, but war, self-defense is OK in almost every culture

>Why is killing people viewed almost universally as the utmost sin/crime?
Jesus, what kind of autist must you be to not understand the most basic example of empathy there is?

People make bonds with others, and when those bonds are broken they feel like shit, when there isn't a single thing they can do about it, they feel even worse, and when they realize someone else is directly the cause of their loss, they completely lose their shit.

>Then why aren't rape and torture condemned in the same way, historically?
They are within the same culture, they are allowed to be done to others because people of other tribes and cultures are often seen as other animals, not as equals.

>Why is killing people viewed almost universally as the utmost sin/crime?
Because it is a bad thing, and unlike bad things such as theft where you can just transfer property back as repayment it cannot be done.
Similar reason as to why rape is seen as worse than theft.
Have no fucking clue why rape is seen as just as bad/worse than murder though. Probably feminist propaganda + human instinct.

Killin' a man is a helluva thing. You're taking away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have.

There is only one sin greater than producing death, and that is producing life.

Not only that, but a costly, unwanted life that surrounds everyone around it with suffering, and it's solution would be to incur in yet another sin which is murder, so it really is an inevitable thing as well.

You must also take in consideration the deep feelings caused by love, the symbolism of marriage as a fusion of two persons, the feeling of betrayal from both the perpetrator and the victim, the intentionality of the event and everything else that could be implied from it.

Natural selection. Societies in which everyone killed each other off have been, surprise surprise, killed off.

Yeah i agree with this
You could live with rape,its doesnt make it any less horrifying or traumatic if uou say murder is worse
You know shit what would happen after death,though i hope conciousness and soul works like the 1st law of thermodynamics so that we could still atleast have some comfort on the beyond

>You could live with rape
That's the beautiful thing of death, suffering ends there. Rape affects as much people, and it's traumatic for the victim, it's linked to an act that derives the most intense emotions and triggers remembrance in the most intimate moments of the person's life.

Well, looking at early human societies that consisted of hitler-gather groups of a few dozen people, killing off the people around you is bad because because not only are you likely killing off the guy who will help you get lunch, but if its allowed to continue to could fuck the tribe democratically. Not having a social taboo on killing would likely be the end of the tribe

...

>Rape affects as much people, and it's traumatic for the victim, it's linked to an act that derives the most intense emotions and triggers remembrance in the most intimate moments of the person's life.
That is very true but I can assure you, being friends with at least 2 rape victims, they would much rather be alive than dead and have healed over time. Not entirely, never entirely but they're happy now and can go on living their lives and pursuing their goals.

A dead person can't do any of that and murdered people usually die horrifically and suddenly with no closure.

The reason civilised societies have rules against killing people at random, or just killing your neighbours is because the societies that didn't have such rules wouldn't have lasted long.

BUT user RAPE IS LITERALLY THE WORST THING IN THE WORLD HOW DARE YOU SUGGEST OTHERWISE

evolution

dumb chimps kill eachother on a whim, never populate the planet as we did

smart humans have built in mechanism to stop killing eachother unless something, become ruler of the planet

Proscriptions against killing are proscriptions against anti-social killing
if it's gonna help your tribe or country and such, killing is a-ok. The why answers itself.

>why is killing seen as worse than ____

The finality of it. You can heal (to varying degrees) and live a fulfilling life after rape, torture, injury in general. You can have your money and possessions recovered, repaired, or replaced after theft and vandalism. You cannot do anything after being killed because you are DEAD.

>how does this prohibition and to those levels develop

Usually a result of a complete delusional disconnect from reality, i.e. religion.

When killing in self defense different rules apply.

Because most people don't want to be killed themselves.

only white knight little beta bitches think rape is worse than murder

every single last fucking slut on this earth needs a solid, thorough fucking raping

beta little bitch

>You could live with rape,its doesnt make it any less horrifying or traumatic if uou say murder is worse
Nigga, I don't think that Abu Ghraib prisoners feel like this

Insult for men:
>I bet you're still a virgin
Insult for women:
>I bet you're not even a virgin
:thonkang:

1. All people are made by God, in his image.
2. All people have in them some of God in that sense.
3. Destroying what God created, or parts of God, is wrong.

Basically this is the one single sole only argument for the inherent worth of humans.
If you are an atheist, there is absolutely zero reason to not kill low utility humans, and you are ethically obliged to kill people who are a drain on society.
It is also why many people dislike atheists, and don't want to see atheism in control, and is also why the only flavor of atheism that has received any popular support is the neo-liberal "all people matter, even though we can't explain why" narrative.

>if it's gonna help your tribe or country and such, killing is a-ok.
>"turn the other cheek"
Really jogges the nogges

Humanity has a "do unto others" policy. Why is this hard to understand?

Kant and Nietzsche wisely asked: How the fuck do you know how the other person wants to be treated?
inb4 asking them, most people don't know the answer, its not a trivial question.

Kant also noted difference in situations, giving example of a prisoner asking the judge to note the Golden Rule, and do unto him as he would want in return. Thus the judge should not sentence the guilty prisoner, because he of course would not want to be sentenced himself.

The fallacy is strong in these parts.

>quoting Kant
>lol ur a fallacy retard :D

Is it really so hard for you people to understand that there are fates worse than death?

Like living on a bed for 3 years, puking your guts out, in constant pain, having your wife quit her job to take care of you, getting the whole family into debt, ensuring that everyone remembers you as a rotting corpse and not as the man you used to be?

Because chemotherapy for cancer is still recommended by all doctors. And it is still illegal to get euthanized when a brain degenerative disorder makes you barely conscious.

At least you're not dead.

Morality is based upon survival strategies

Murder harms group survival

>tribe has a guy that eats babies
>murder him
>tribe does much better

>he was the only one that knew how to make fire
>everyone dies next winter

Your tribe was dead anyways then, and nothing changed.

That's bullshit and you know it. A prisoner is sentenced because he acted in a way that wasn't following the common law, which is based on the do unto others system.

We're talking about the grand scale of things here too, as in murder and theft, not minor laws.

If you aren't able to comprehend by yourself why killing is wrong then it's pointless explaining it to you. It's like teaching math to a two year old.

Why are people acting like punishment doesn't exist

>starving
>walk past an orchid
>if i had an orchid, i wouldn't want bums stealing from me
>keep walking
>die soon after

Its retarded in so many situations.

What the fuck are you even saying

Because, deep down, you genuinely want to kill people, but you also don't. So you have to expel the wish to kill outside yourself and also erect external censors prohibiting such wishes.

Flowers are edible?

Meant orchard, clearly.

>get caught eating flowers
>get sent to prison because this is dystopian 18th century england
>get fed and have a roof
Win win situation.

Not clearly at all. The point isn't relevant anyway. Soldiers kill out of necessity, just as someone who is starving may steal out of necessity. That doesn't make it right.

>everyone would do it
>and you should do it
>but its not "right"

Spooky as fuck.

>the concept of "exceptions" is complicated

I don't see what's hard to understand about that.

...