E
Epiphany
Guest
It is simply that the individual is unable to perceive other people as beings with which to empathise (whereas he has no difficulty finding traits within animals with which to empathise). Probably because he sees himself as a victim (and feels he has this in common with animals that are preyed upon). There is no doubt that such people suffer from a kind of persecution complex which legitimises their actions (in their own heads). Most people are unable to empathise with those sentiments, but there are those who can.
It is not uncommon for people (who are not considered psychopathic) to suspend empathy for certain groups of individuals and not others. In fact, this is probably more rule than exception.
This accounts for pedophiles, rapists, misogynists, racists, homophobes, religious fanatics, all the way down to schoolyard bullies. In one sense, this is unsurprising. Our "empathy circuits" evolved in an environment of competition, where we might have a maximum of 150 people in our "in-group". Empathy was not extended beyond those limits, as a rule. It has always been alarmingly easy for humans to suspend their "natural" empathy for the suffering of other beings, especially when that suffering is in their own interests / for their own protection.
Indeed, selective empathy seems to be at play here. What astonishes me is the extreme at both ends. A person who abstains from meat because of animal suffering, yet finds nothing in a helpless child to empathize with. His mother vented before about how much she hated him. I'm curious what behaviors led those feelings to fester, but her animosity toward him undoubtedly had an effect on his perceptions and interactions with others, in addition to autism.
Baron-Cohen defines evil as "zero degrees of empathy". I'd say zero degrees of empathy provides the environment in which evil can flourish, rather than being a definition of evil. (Which is perhaps the more important point than getting too hung up on definitions.)
Very interesting video. A lack of empathy is fertile soil for abusive behavior.
I can't access the video now, but agree with your comment. The OP is asking a question that has no definitive answer because it is too ill-formed.
The OP asked two questions. Do you care to elaborate on how they do not conform to the rules of grammar or is your use of the word "ill-formed" rather ill-formed, itself?