Sadism or not WAS: Re: Lack of re-examination

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 186611

> > Alla:
> > 
> > Are you saying that Snape does not **practice** inflicting emotional pain and that is why he cannot be called a sadist or are you saying something different? 
> 
> a_svirn:
> I am saying that if someone, let say Snape, needs and finds an outlet for his inner needs, so much so that it's become a habit even, then the whole in heart/in practice thing is totally redundant and only obfuscates the matter at hand. If he's cruel that's because he chooses to *act* cruelly. Is heart as cruel as his actions? More cruel? Less cruel? Does it matter? Would it matter if he had a heart of gold if he still bullied Neville mercilessly?
>


Alla:

Ah, ok, sorry I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that Snape is not a sadist because he does not practice it.  And while I acknowledge that to make a case for Snape as sadist enjoying physical pain is hard, I think that to make a case for him as sadist enjoying emotional pain is a piece of cake, for me of course.

I am following the thread, but do not know if I want to get involved into a whole "murderer at heart" thing. Partly because yes I think it does matter when the person slips and does something bad say once under stress, I would still think that person who is not predisposed to do something has less chance to slip up next time if any.

However, sure if person does bad things repeatedly, I do think that in heart/in practice thing becomes redundant.