I think there are three broad categories of abusers. All three are bad and can ruin someone's life (or many people, for that matter). However, I think there are differences in reason and limits that show up when looking for patterns.
The first category is made up of Morally Ambiguous People who are at the mercy of something they suffer from (substance abuse, mental illness, etc). They may be genuinely good people who do bad things unwillingly, and regret their actions. They may not feel any sincere shame for their actions but primarily would not repeat their actions if they were of a rational mind. They may not even be aware that they are causing harm at all (and would willingly try to change if they realized).
At the core, they do bad things primarily because they cannot control themselves, and if they sought out and practiced proper treatment/found a solution for their problem, they may have only healthy relationships (or at least, not so insidious.)
If asked why they do the things they do, they might reply 'I don't know', 'I can't control it', or otherwise express remorse. They may also have a weak justification or deny doing things.
The second category is Bad People. They consciously, willingly decide to hurt others or otherwise do things commonly considered unethical. they may feel they are an exception to the rules, but if their actions were attributed to others they'd probably see them as wrong. They harm others because they can get away with it; however, they usually have at least some sort of moral horizon and some (if not horribly skewed) limits.
This category may not perform Blatantly Terrible Actions (trying to kill someone obviously innocent) if only because it would then be obvious they are terrible. If asked why they do the things they do, they may have a pre-thought out justification for their actions, or otherwise deny they did the things.
The final category is made up of Monsters. These people very willingly inflict pain on others with the intention of causing it. They seem to have no limitations on their behavior; they may disregard rules and ethics altogether. Their tendencies tend to reflect in multiple facets of their character (such as the people they associate with, their politics, their favoured media, etc). These types of abusers are most likely to agree with and support the actions of other abusers.
Bad people may hear about this category and actually agree they are awful. They do not feel like they need justification for their actions, and while they probably have excuses for their actions, it doesn't matter as much to defend their ethics.
Obviously, there's overlap between categories, and some actions of any individual abuser may fit in some categories more than others. It's also obviously simplistic, inexhuastive, and general. However, it's hard to get any more specific without becoming scientific.
Notice empathy has nothing to do with it. Unemphatic people are not penalized in any way; it's about an understanding of and commitment to one's actions.
There are no real 'level 1' or 'level 3' behaviors. It's more about duration, intensity, and belief in the correctness of/pride in an action. For example, category 3 can definitely practice emotional abuse, though it might be much more ruthless and blatant than a category 1 or 2's version (repeated and explicit death threats in comparison to subtle manipulation or vague repeated pokes at one's vulnerabilities). However, category 3 are most likely to repeatedly perform actions that endanger someone's life.
I enjoy organizing things. Making sense of the world grounds me. Before, it was hard for me to even conceptualize that bad people could exist. Now, I have this little framework. It will probably continue to develop.
Life is good.
The first category is made up of Morally Ambiguous People who are at the mercy of something they suffer from (substance abuse, mental illness, etc). They may be genuinely good people who do bad things unwillingly, and regret their actions. They may not feel any sincere shame for their actions but primarily would not repeat their actions if they were of a rational mind. They may not even be aware that they are causing harm at all (and would willingly try to change if they realized).
At the core, they do bad things primarily because they cannot control themselves, and if they sought out and practiced proper treatment/found a solution for their problem, they may have only healthy relationships (or at least, not so insidious.)
If asked why they do the things they do, they might reply 'I don't know', 'I can't control it', or otherwise express remorse. They may also have a weak justification or deny doing things.
The second category is Bad People. They consciously, willingly decide to hurt others or otherwise do things commonly considered unethical. they may feel they are an exception to the rules, but if their actions were attributed to others they'd probably see them as wrong. They harm others because they can get away with it; however, they usually have at least some sort of moral horizon and some (if not horribly skewed) limits.
This category may not perform Blatantly Terrible Actions (trying to kill someone obviously innocent) if only because it would then be obvious they are terrible. If asked why they do the things they do, they may have a pre-thought out justification for their actions, or otherwise deny they did the things.
The final category is made up of Monsters. These people very willingly inflict pain on others with the intention of causing it. They seem to have no limitations on their behavior; they may disregard rules and ethics altogether. Their tendencies tend to reflect in multiple facets of their character (such as the people they associate with, their politics, their favoured media, etc). These types of abusers are most likely to agree with and support the actions of other abusers.
Bad people may hear about this category and actually agree they are awful. They do not feel like they need justification for their actions, and while they probably have excuses for their actions, it doesn't matter as much to defend their ethics.
Obviously, there's overlap between categories, and some actions of any individual abuser may fit in some categories more than others. It's also obviously simplistic, inexhuastive, and general. However, it's hard to get any more specific without becoming scientific.
Notice empathy has nothing to do with it. Unemphatic people are not penalized in any way; it's about an understanding of and commitment to one's actions.
There are no real 'level 1' or 'level 3' behaviors. It's more about duration, intensity, and belief in the correctness of/pride in an action. For example, category 3 can definitely practice emotional abuse, though it might be much more ruthless and blatant than a category 1 or 2's version (repeated and explicit death threats in comparison to subtle manipulation or vague repeated pokes at one's vulnerabilities). However, category 3 are most likely to repeatedly perform actions that endanger someone's life.
I enjoy organizing things. Making sense of the world grounds me. Before, it was hard for me to even conceptualize that bad people could exist. Now, I have this little framework. It will probably continue to develop.
Life is good.
