Yes, xForts brought that up once in a video but I thought it would be great to let everyone bring their minds into it.
Yes, xForts brought that up once in a video but I thought it would be great to let everyone bring their minds into it.
Being paranoid after doing horrendous crimes should be self-evident. And we don't know whether he is the Split Personality or Doppio, in fact, the Anime implies that it's him, so he has no excuses here.
And we don't know whether he is the Split Personality or Doppio, in fact, the Anime implies that it's him, so he has no excuses here.
still that Dissociatve Identity means he's still insane, fuck the paranoia, he's still not prosecuted.
Doppio is the insane one, we can't come to a result here cuz we don't know who was there first, but Diavolo tortured and hid their mom, killed the priest and burned down the whole village as soon as he appeared. He's a Psychopath, he is why he is not because of Circumstances or the environment, but because he was born that way. He is aware of what he does, its not like he doesn't realize it like other Criminals who end up in Mental Hospitals. So when someone's aware as they commit Mass Murder, Drug Dealing and other shit, it doesn't matter whether he got the GER Treatment or not, he would've been in Hell regardless.
Diavolo is in Italy. So let's subject him to America's laws, because Italy doesn't matter in this. Italy is just you know, the place that the entire part takes place in and where Diavolo was born and lived in for his entire life. But you know, even though America is completely unrelated, let's use their laws anyways. Because fuck Italy and their government, America is the only country with applicable laws.
You see what the problem is, and why this argument is going nowhere.
Aight let's they this out again, because you're simple minded.
1: I do not live in Italy. I live in America. THEREFORE i subject him to my country's laws.
2: Thus, by deductive reasoning, that means I don't give a shit about Italy's laws. I don't live there, they don't affect me, so I shouldn't care.
Diavolo (devil in italian), got his personal hell.
Did he deserve it? I don't think anyone would deserve something like that, regardless of religious beliefs.
many people accuse the guy of creating stand users directly or not, this does not make much sense to me if you reason like that it means you also blame who sells guns for the many deaths caused by said weapons.
he did many despicable and messed up things tough, some that make you think at times that he maybe deserved what he got. He needed to be punished and i think is quite insane not punishing him just because he had mental problems, he deserved prison for the rest of his life at the very least, eternal suffering tough? that's just too much for anyone.
Stop adding things not in the text to your statements and acting like they're true. As others have stated, the creator was never said to be a wizard, and the guy who discovered Greenland was Erik the Red, aka Erik Thorvaldson, which indicates that Thor predated the Viking colonization of Greenland. As does a lot of other archeological evidence I won't even get into.
I've also already mentioned how the Arrows and the Meteorite act different, and thus seem contradictory. Perhaps you could argue the Arrows were worked in some way to reduce the strength of the virus, but I find "they're supernatural artifacts that awaken the latent power of the soul, which can overwhelm or kill the person granted the power" to be far more consistent with the rest of what we know about them than Polnareff's meteorite/virus claim. As to their origins, who knows? Maybe they're ancient Egyptian artifacts that really did have some connection to the existence of their mythology and gods. Maybe similar artifacts also exist and explain the same thing for other ancient religions. Maybe they were made by the First Jojo, Joshua ben Joseph (this is a joke, I just love the fact that you can argue that Jesus is a Jojo). Who knows?
DeathCrisisGod wrote: Most people who sympathize with diavolo have absolutely no concept of hell, which is rather telling. The afterlife exists in jojo so it's safe to assume that heaven and hell also exist. You people complain about nobody deserve eternal damnation but don't day a thing about the good people who experience eternal paradise in heaven. If diavolo had a natural death , he would still go to hell regardless. Btw, having a mental disorder doesn't lessen his crimes in the slightest. Everyone is responsible for their own actions
Uh...no, assuming that Heaven and Hell exist just because there's an afterlife doesn't actually follow in the slightest. Hell, there's just as much reason to think it's Hades, not the Christian afterlife (in that both Mercury and Jesus seem to exist in Jojo). And, if Hell exists, how come Kira's soul seems to have escaped from it in Dead Man's Questions? If I recall correctly, he got dragged away by the Hands like Cheap Trick did, so, if there was actually a Hell, he seems likely to have gone there. Him coming back with no memories actually acts as a point in favor of the Greek afterlife and the River Lethe existing, if you really want to argue the point.
Moreover, the question is not "would Diavolo go there anyway?" The question is "does he deserve it?" To which I would answer "infinite punishment for finite harm seems unequal, mathematically speaking, but it's really up to personal judgement, and a bit of a pointless question, since it doesn't change his fate." I just have issues with some of the reasoning/evidence presented. Sometimes on both sides. Like the Insanity argument, which I kinda...look, insanity really only excuses so much. And also, not all mental illnesses are sufficient for an insanity plea, and Dissociative Identity Disorder (I think that's the current term for Split Personality Disorder?) is...controversial, to say the least. Paranoia usually isn't enough on it's own, either. Schizophrenia is, maybe Bipolar in some cases, but even then, plenty of people with those issues, even when unmedicated, aren't even remotely violent.
Boysmith2003 wrote: 3. The whole point of evolution (assuming that it exsists) is to progress. You can't stagnate, or you die. That's Kars's whole philosophy.
Incorrect. Evolution has no point, nor is it to "progress". Evolution, in it's simplest form, is the observation that self-propagating systems that cease functioning are bad at reproducing themselves, and thus the only systems likely to last and remain for any period of time are the ones good at not ceasing to function. Thus, the ones that adapt to their changing environment survive the longest, and slowly, they become better suited to their environment. Really, it's about studying shifts in the frequency of alleles over time, but that's sort of the most basic form of it.
Funnily enough, effective stasis is actually thought to be rather common in evolution. So long as nothing in the environment shifts so much that lots of members of a given species start dying without reproducing, species often maintain the same features for long periods of time. It's less "survival of the fittest" and more "survival of the good enough".
There is a sort of progress, in that species do tend to become more adapted to their niches, but there's the counterbalance that too much adaptation tends to leave you vulnerable to major shifts. Most penguins do fine in the Antarctica, but not so well in the Nile River, whereas crocodiles fare well in the Nile (and many other places), but not so good in really cold environments. Like most optimization problems, there's usually a trade-off, rather than an absolutely and completely objective improvement. See also: revolvers don't jam, automatics do, but automatics shoot more bullets faster, or other such things.
Boysmith2003 wrote: Aight let's they this out again, because you're simple minded.
1: I do not live in Italy. I live in America. THEREFORE i subject him to my country's laws.
2: Thus, by deductive reasoning, that means I don't give a shit about Italy's laws. I don't live there, they don't affect me, so I shouldn't care.
You do realize a legal defense means jack-sh*t when we're talking about moral judgments, yes? And US laws don't apply to Italian citizens, so claiming he should be free from blame or punishment (which an Insanity Defense usually doesn't get you, it just gets you psychiatric help and a padded cell over jail) because the laws of your country say so would be laughed out of any court, beyond your own. And anyone arguing the same, but for another country, would rightfully be laughed out of a US court. Usually, anyway, unless the crime crossed borders, which is always a legal clusterf*ck, but I digress. In the same way that you don't give a sh*t about Italy's laws, Italy doesn't give a sh*t about US laws (except on rare occasions when both sets of laws could apply).
I also find it rather odd that you're using US laws as the entire basis for your moral framework, and assuming it to be that of others. It's a rare person who can't find a single law that's tricky for their morality to handle in their country, and often they can quite easily find laws they flat-out consider stupid, or even immoral or harmful. That's why laws are updated, added, altered, and repealed quite regularly, and why some laws that are on the books are really only ever enforced if you manage to really annoy the local cops and/or the DA. Like loitering, or jaywalking.
That's not even getting into the assumption that all US courts would consider Diavolo insane enough to not be responsible for his actions. I guarantee you that plenty of judges would disagree. Diavolo might be paranoid, but his paranoia seems to spring from an understanding of "right and wrong", or at least "illegal and legal", and the consequences of that. And that understanding happens to be a major factor in many determinations of whether the insanity defense is actually valid. So yeah, I could very easily see a court judging Diavolo, by himself, responsible for his actions. Doppio...Doppio complicates matters, but even he's probably aware he's breaking the law, and just doesn't really care that much. Neither of them are so insane that they're not aware of reality, at least for the most part, barring Doppio's...creative choices of "phone". That doesn't really affect his ability to determine if he's breaking the law, or if what he's doing is right or wrong, though.
1: I do not live in Italy. I live in America. THEREFORE i subject him to my country's laws.
2: Thus, by deductive reasoning, that means I don't give a shit about Italy's laws. I don't live there, they don't affect me, so I shouldn't care.
I think you might be the one that's simple minded, since you are just ignoring all of the world's other countries and their laws.
Now, the only problem with figuring out the true and actually relevant answer to the question of "would Diavolo be punished for his actions?", is that I found the place where that law might be contained; it being the Italian penal code. The problem is I can't find an english version of it or the three volumes. So, the mental disorder part is tricky to answer. The closest parallel I could find to Diavolo was Paolo Di Lauro, who was the head of an organization in the Camorra, a mafia group in Naples. He was sentenced to 30 years for drug trafficking and extortion from what I've read, and that is my final verdict for what Diavolo would get. To be fair, 30 years of prison sounds better than a lifetime of dying.