What is the Most Immoral Act?

[Veritas Aequitas]

What is the Most Immoral Act humans can actually or possibly commit?
in contrast to the above,
What is the least immoral act humans can actually or possibly commit?

Before you give details, give your definition of what is Morality.

Views?

[Veritas Aequitas]

ETA:

My definition of Morality-proper as repeated many times elsewhere is;

• Morality-proper is the optimal inhibition toward zero evil acts to enable its related good.

What is evil is net-negative to the well-being of the individual[s] and therefrom humanity.

To me, the most immoral act based on the above definition is;
the deliberate evil acts by humans that result in the extermination of the human species by individual[s] or groups.
This would be the STANDARD by which all degrees of other evil acts are ranked.

This most immoral act is very possible given that from the present, WMDs (nuclear, biological, others) will be easily and cheaply available.
Those who are not deterred by MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION [MAD] are likely to commit such an abhorrent evil act.

This total genocide is possible via the extremist Islamists who are contractually obligated to kill all non-believers upon the slightest infraction God as commanded by their God in their holy book.
In exterminating the human species, believers as promised are highly rewarded with eternal life in paradise surrounded by virgins.

[Age]

What is the Most Immoral Act humans can actually or possibly commit?
in contrast to the above,
What is the least immoral act humans can actually or possibly commit?

Before you give details, give your definition of what is Morality.

Views?

Give your definition of what Morality is, then I will be able to answer the two questions here, more correctly.

[FlashDangerpants]

What is the Most Immoral Act humans can actually or possibly commit?

Whatever is the current top most immoral act, but this time while (random verb) a (randomly noun)...

Verb list:
punching, fucking, pissing in the face of, shitting upon, generally insulting, frowning at for no good reason, not serving a lovely cup of tea to,
contributing to the delinquency of...

Noun list:
baby, child, mother, nun, the Pope, Freddie Mercury's ghost, a confused camel wearing the wrong hat....

[Agent Smith]

I don't think so. I don't think in that way. I don't think otherwise. I don't think not. I don't think not not.

A light snack from Hindoostan, land a peacocks!

[Harbal]

What is the Most Immoral Act humans can actually or possibly commit?

Torture a blue bottle, but only if one applies the fly FSK.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Since morality is an intricate part and parcel of human nature, appreciate more views re the OP.

[Iwannaplato]

What is the Most Immoral Act humans can actually or possibly commit?
in contrast to the above,
What is the least immoral act humans can actually or possibly commit?

Before you give details, give your definition of what is Morality.

Views?

The worst thing (off the top of my head) is careful, long-term torture until the person is dead, preferably years and years after the start. Then there would be specifics around the type of torture: not just physical pain, but also killing loved ones in front of the tortured, perhaps making the tortured person hurt loved ones or think they have, or force them to choose to save one loved one and watch the others killed, and then adding in sexual torture in the whole mix. And then to make this the worst, you'd do this to as many people as possible. There are ways, surely, to add refined processes to this torture to make it even worse. But that's a gross overview.

[Veritas Aequitas]

My definition of Morality-proper as repeated many times elsewhere is;

• Morality-proper is the optimal inhibition toward zero evil acts to enable its related good.

What is evil is net-negative to the well-being of the individual[s] and therefrom humanity.

To me, the most immoral act based on the above definition is;
the deliberate evil acts by humans that result in the extermination of the human species by individual[s] or groups.
This would be the STANDARD by which all degrees of other evil acts are ranked.

This most immoral act is very possible given that from the present, WMDs (nuclear, biological, others) will be easily and cheaply available.
Those who are not deterred by MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION [MAD] are likely to commit such an abhorrent evil act.

This total genocide toward the extermination of the human species is possible via extremist Islamists who are contractually obligated to kill all non-believers upon the slightest infraction [fasadin] God as commanded by their God in their holy book.
In exterminating the human species, believers as promised are highly rewarded with eternal life in paradise surrounded by virgins.

[Iwannaplato]

My definition of Morality-proper as repeated many times elsewhere is;

• Morality-proper is the optimal inhibition toward zero evil acts to enable its related good.

What is evil is net-negative to the well-being of the individual[s] and therefrom humanity.

To me, the most immoral act based on the above definition is;
the deliberate evil acts by humans that result in the extermination of the human species by individual[s] or groups.
This would be the STANDARD by which all degrees of other evil acts are ranked.

This most immoral act is very possible given that from the present, WMDs (nuclear, biological, others) will be easily and cheaply available.
Those who are not deterred by MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION [MAD] are likely to commit such an abhorrent evil act.

This total genocide toward the extermination of the human species is possible via extremist Islamists who are contractually obligated to kill all non-believers upon the slightest infraction [fasadin] God as commanded by their God in their holy book.
In exterminating the human species, believers as promised are highly rewarded with eternal life in paradise surrounded by virgins.

Where would you place, then, on the hierarchy of evil, those who via lack of care put humanity in danger of extinction. For example, companies that know they control the government oversight of their work (IOW, they control the people who are supposed to see they carry out the work safely) and are playing with potentially global wide catastrophy products: AI, nanotech, genetically modified life forms.

[Wizard22]

Betraying yourself

[CIN]

To me, the most immoral act based on the above definition is;
the deliberate evil acts by humans that result in the extermination of the human species by individual[s] or groups.

Since all the other sentient beings on this planet that we systematically torture and kill every day would be happier after we have been exterminated, this would probably be a very good act.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Any premeditated evil act that can be determined to end with fatality, i.e. humans killed, would be placed in the 90-100 percentile; the extermination of the human species would be rated at 99/100 as the Standard of immorality.

Where humans could be potentially killed but there is NO premediated will to kill humans, e.g. corporations, groups, individual polluting the environment, then that should be placed below the 90-100 in the percentile; depending on various factors, these can be rated between the 50-90 percentile.
For example corporations who are ignorant of their impact would be rated lower while those who are very aware of their acts [educated and reminded] could potentially [not certainly] kill humans, they would be rated higher in the 70-90 percentile.

[Veritas Aequitas]

To me, the most immoral act based on the above definition is;
the deliberate evil acts by humans that result in the extermination of the human species by individual[s] or groups.

Since all the other sentient beings on this planet that we systematically torture and kill every day would be happier after we have been exterminated, this would probably be a very good act.

The point;
Morality is confined to humans only.

A Thought-Experiment;
If elephants ever achieve human-like self-awareness and intelligence, then, elephants will have elephant-based morality.
In that sense, elephants would be "happier" if humans are exterminated by their own immoral acts, i.e. no more elephant hunters and poachers.

While morality is species oriented, considerations need to be given where other species are essential to the survival of a species.
For example in the thought experiment above, it is likely humans could save elephants if there is an virus pandemic that could kill all elephants; therefore it is short-sighted for elephants to be happier, if the human species were to be extinct.

[FlashDangerpants]

Any premeditated evil act that can be determined to end with fatality, i.e. humans killed, would be placed in the 90-100 percentile; the extermination of the human species would be rated at 99/100 as the Standard of immorality.

So what's the difference between 94 and 97? What does it take to move a crime that had 94 badnesses to a 97 score? Does this shit measure something or just assign worthless, meaningless, pointless, arbitrary scores?