# data[].attributes.body
Serial killers are often sociopaths or psychopaths, in which it all stem from their fundamental way of thinking. Yes, everyone is capable of making terrible decisions, but the notorious killers often lack a moral compass or simply don't really care about consequences for their actions. They do these things for themselves and to heighten their own pleasure, which is considered evil. Another common trait is that they often have no empathy and can't really relate to other people. And of course, the way someone is raised can have a huge impact on their character, which is another factor that goes into serial killers. I believe that no one is born evil, but it's what they do later.

# data[].attributes.body
Option 2:
I believe that loyalty is important. However, I do think that self-preservation is important and you shouldn't have to be loyal to something your not passionate about. If you were helping someone, you should never abandon them or sell them out for no good reason. If they are in danger, that is a different story, and sometimes you have to do what's best for someone, even if they don't know it. But doing something that will hurt others only to help yourself is selfish. Loyalty can be very important but I think it does depend on why you are being loyal. Being loyal to a murderer is a lot different than being loyal to a friend or someone who cares about you as well. Loyalty is meant to go both ways, so I would say overall loyalty is better than self preservation, but it depends on what you are loyal to. When it comes to danger, you should never go along with something your uncomfortable with just to be "loyal". So I think its an important balance and its not the best to have too much of one.

# data[].attributes.body
I absolutely agree with Morgan Freeman. "The difference is, at least a snitch is human, but a rat is a rat, period." Loyalty is a fundamental aspect of a wholesome person. Being loyal requires a certain level of maturity and humbleness. Life is meant to be shared with others, and it can become more meaningful when your relationships are built with trust and loyalty as the foundation. "Love is just a feeling, you can love somebody just by being attached, see loyalty is the action you can love and hate me and still have my back." -21 savage

# data[].attributes.body
Option 1
The concepts of good and evil are particularly puzzling, especially as we dive into the play Hamlet, which questions what is morally "good". Claudius seems evil as he murdered King Hamlet and has taken over the thrown. Based on the events in the play, he seems to simply want power and will do anything he can to achieve and keep his influence over others, which may also explain his hasty marriage to Gertrude too. So, does power inspire evil? In looking at Hamlet himself, if he does in fact get revenge and kill Claudius, which would also make him a murderer, does that make him evil too? Or is Hamlet justified in his actions because of the situation? These questions of good and evil, right and wrong, are the essence of the play.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this question could go either way. Too much loyalty robs a person of individual thought and identity. Caring too much for one thing is never wise, especially when that "thing" is an intelligent human who could stab you in the back at any time. On the other hand, being too focused on self-preservation will only lead to isolation and a lack of trust. Humans are social creatures and being alone has dangerous side effects. Only looking out for yourself will make you extremely unlikable and untrustworthy, while being loyal will do the exact opposite. I believe that there is meant to be a balance. A person should be able to consider the lives of others without being held prisoner by them. Additionally, from a basic survival standpoint, self-preservation would probably come first in most situations, however it would never last without at least some attachment to others.

# data[].attributes.body
I do not agree with Morgan Freeman in the sense that loyalty is more important than self-preservation IF the "rat" has done nothing wrong/is not involved and does not deserve the unwarranted consequence betraying their "friends" will protect them from. Although, at that point, those "friends" are no longer their friends and are not being loyal to them in their own right. Real friends would never put you in a position that can cause you harm but expect you to take it and be "loyal" to them by not protecting yourself. Besides these differences though, I do agree with his differentiations of a rat and a snitch but I do believe there is a third category, that should not stigmatized, where it is right to "tell on people" and it does not make you a bad or nosey friend/person.

# data[].attributes.body
With the Jeffrey Dahmer documentary trending right now, many are left questioning evil. If the brain studies reveal nothing biologically different in serial killers, what inspires evil? What prevents us from behaving and thinking like a serial killer? Is evil present in all of us?

# data[].attributes.body
In the song "Snitches and Rats (Interlude)," Morgan Freeman differentiates between a snitch and a rat. "Let me break it down to make sure y'all see what I mean. A "snitch" is someone minding other folks' business
to find information they can sell for a price or trade for some other form of compensation. A "rat" is a traitor, a conceiver, planner or physical participator
He doesn't sell secrets for power or cash.
He betrays the trust of his team or his family hoping to save his own *butt*.
The difference is, at least a snitch is human, but a rat is a rat, period."

Do you agree with Morgan Freeman? Is loyalty more important than self-preservation? Would you betray the trust of someone you love to save yourself?