mitchellmckain writes:
But it seems to me that Asperger syndrome effects a lack of awareness of the existence of other people as people which is not the same thing at all. You cannot call this evil...
Yes, that's right, you cannot call it evil, and that's why I called it a counterexample. You said empathy with other people is a choice, and I provided examples where it is not a choice but is under genetic influence.
The key question for you is how you tell the difference between a person who lacks empathy by choice, and one who lacks empathy due to genetic makeup. And the same question exists for telling the difference between a person who achieves empathy through conscious choice and effort, and one who possesses empathy due to genetic makeup.
The way we are as individuals is a combination of genetics and environment, and identifying the separate threads of the two influences is never an easy matter. Mozart did not write more symphonies than me or you simply because he chose to work harder at it than we did. Sure, he had to work at it, but he was able to do it because he won the genetic lottery with respect to musical ability. John F. Kennedy didn't exude charisma because he chose to. He probably worked at it, but to a large degree he was charismatic because he won the genetic lottery for whatever controls this quality, including a winning personality, good looks and a commanding presence.
There are many things over which we have control and a choice, but there are also many things over which we do not, and empathy for others is one of those things that is a choice for some and not a choice for others. You cannot conclude evil for something not under someone's control, and it is difficult to know whether it is under their control or not.
--Percy