Is this person considered civilized?

Question

1. he is very well dressed.
2. his voice is very refinined (meaning the way he speaks is well educated).
3.he lives in the finest private luxuries.
4.he owns a butler.
5.lives in a mansion on an island.
6.a former aristocrat.
however.
7. he is cosmopolite (can handle situations very well)

1.he hunts men down because he loved to hunt animals as a sport . wanting to hunt animals with a even more challenge, he soon grew tired of hunting animals and finally hunted humans.

2. he intentionally traps humans and trains them to be strong so he can hunt them on an island.

Answer 1

One definition of civilized states : To raise from barbarism to an enlightened stage of development; bring out of a primitive or savage state.

However, another definition states: To educate in matters of culture and refinement; make more polished or sophisticated.

If the person in question was brought up in a culture that accepted such behavior, then yes, he would be civilized. Our culture frowns upon such actions so the majority of people would consider the man uncivilized despite his classy exterior.

Answer 2

Similar to the Romans and Gladiators? Slave owners? Feudal systems? Jousting of Knights? Prize fights? Football games? Mercenaries? Nazis? The genocide of 3.5 million Indians by the East India Trading Company? The genocide of 8 million Irish people supported and bragged of by British Parliament? The murder of the entire Tasmanian population? The nuking of the civilian population of Hiroshima?

What is the difference between this guy and civilization? Civilized people often do the most uncivilized things.

Answer 3

Another definition of "civilized" is as follow:

"The word "civilization" comes from the Latin word for townsman or citizen, civis, and its adjectival form, civilis. To be "civilized" essentially meant being a townsman, governed by the constitution and legal statutes of that community."

So, if he is the governing body on the island and the laws of the island permit him to do so (hunt down humans), then yes.

If your question is of a moral nature - then, no.

Answer 4

The ground for civility is in family. This man has fallen to a caprice of ego and can not face his own alien nature. Apparently he believes this activity to be the meaning in life for him. It is certainly not family in the human sense, but subhuman, yes.

Answer 5

He seems to be civilized but very underneath his civilized nature he has this real animal/brutal/ uncivilized culture. Men killing down men are insane and uncivilized to the extent of being an animal.

Answer 6

i imagine for the most section, certain, I evaluate myself civilized adequate. i'm no longer rude to all of us [or atleast attempt no longer to be], i attempt to be pleasant, polite [even tho often times it supplies off the incorrect which skill, yet nonetheless]. i do not choose human beings devoid of understanding them first. I attempt no longer to stereotype [& it often times receives me into worry], i attempt to be affected man or woman, & attempt no longer to enable my anger get the finest of me. i do not shout/yell at human beings for no reason in any respect. I attempt no longer to create a large fuss out of smaller issues. I gown decently. yet technically, i became born right into a civilized international. So it became only that a lot a lot less complicated for me lol.

Answer 7

I see you have an answer from a cultural relativist; spouting that nonsense of cultural superficiality. The person you describe above, in your question, is a psychopathic barbarian. ( of course, all psychopaths are barbarians, by definition, and the person you describe is a psychopath by the psychopathic check list )

Answer 8

Good question. I have read this story before and I would say no, he is not civilized. It reminds me of The Lady or the Tiger question though.

Answer 9

hunting and hurting fellow human beings is not a civilized act.

Answer 10

No, complete opposite of civilised