BTW, did you ever take an introductory psychology course? If so, you will have heard about the Stanford Prison Experiment or Stanley Milgram’s experiment at Yale. Both showed that ordinary people are capable of aberrant behavior under the right circumstances.
Thank you for the recommendations. Ordering them now. I would also recommend Robert Jay Liftons The Nazi Doctors. He attempts through psychiatry to explain how men ostensibly trained to heal could be motivated to kill. Its a fascinating book and he even interviews a few doctors involved in the killings.
It says that Small Gods is the 13th of 40 books. Do I need to read the first 12 to get the most out of Small Gods?
No, only 11 of them, but not in order. You’ll catch on after a couple.
Yes, I did. But genocide on a massive scale goes far beyond anything those studies suggest. Even the Nazis knew the toll it would take on the murderers. They were issued daily alcohol rations and were allowed to opt out of the duty without punishment. Yet many still ‘did their duty’. Its inconceivable without some blanket explanation of ‘evil’.
Thank you. Its off to the library for these.
That’s a chilling book. But I don’t think “evil” as a simplistic concept really explains the actions of Reserve Police Battalion 101- that’s kind of the point of the book. Those men weren’t evil, they weren’t sociopathic, and they weren’t hardcore Nazis. They were ordinary men- middle-aged shopkeepers and tradesmen, who basically did what they were ordered- due to peer pressure and duty mostly. But they did it- that was the chilling part.
The implication is that the same thing could easily happen anywhere else- there wasn’t anything special about those German men that made them do what they did.
As for the OP, I’m not seeing why TK couldn’t have been both insane AND competent to stand trial. I mean, it’s possible to be crazy enough to want to kill people bad enough to follow through, while still understanding that it’s not the right thing to do. In a moral sense, is he culpable? Did he know it was wrong and do it against his own conscience? We don’t really know. But we don’t really care- the question is whether or not he knew it was against the law and did it anyway. The morality doesn’t really come into it.
Small Gods is kind of sui generis. There are parts of Discworld (Pratchett’s setting for most of his fantasy works: A gigantic flat disc—thousands of miles across—sitting on top of four elephants, which are walking on the back of the Turtle ‘Great A’Tuin’ as he(?) meanders through outer space) that you should read in order. Small Gods doesn’t really tie into any of the other plot lines, so feel free to start there. It’s humorous English fantasy. He explains the rules of his universe well though, and mostly colors within the lines.
A fantastic meditation on the foundation of religion and the banality of evil, to borrow that phrase. You’re in for a treat. I wish I could read Pratchett again for the first time.
Thank you and ordered.
I thought that both of those had been heavily debunked in recent years, and not merely for being unethical?
I don’t know that I would say “debunked”. People have looked at the data and drawn different conclusions than the original experimenters drew.
By the way, if we are going to abbreviate Kaczynski’s name, I propose we use “FC”. That’s how he signed his anonymous letters-to-the-editor. (I’m guessing it stood for Fedor Caczynski?)
Thomas Hobbes was a Bible-thumper, but he took a lot of flak from the religious authorities of his day for his definitions of good and evil. “That which serves men’s interests, they call Good. That which harms men’s interests, they call Evil.”
Kaczynski was evil! I am good! I would never do such a thing!
Kaczynski was mentally ill! I am healthy! I would never do such a thing!
In both cases, I think people are overestimating themselves.
Aren’t all mass murderers a bit insane? They’d have to be wouldn’t they? We just don’t want them to get off from punishment due to some mental technicality, so we protest any such defenses.
Well, that’s tough. I don’t consider him on the same level as sickos like Ted Bundy, who did stuff I won’t describe here. He was distant to his victims.
He was a serial killer of sorts, but I consider him more of a terrorist, since he had political motive. Are terrorists a bit insane? Dunno.
Don’t get me wrong, I DO think TK was quite off, but I don’t consider him insane in the legal sense.
Apparently, neither did his lawyers. In preparing for trial, they did not raise a legal defense. Instead, they were planning on trying to convince a jury that the evidence of Kaczynski’s mental problems reflect a lack of intent.
Reading the first chapter of Rhodes book and out of curiosity looking at the punishment the Einsatzgruppen leaders received, its the justice system that is insane. Most of them served less than six years before having their sentences reduced. :rolleyes: And some of them had powerful advocates in West Germany. Were those men unaware of the enormity of the crimes committed?
Jesus, that guy on the left of that picture. That’s one of the most chilling faces I’ve ever seen - especially to be smiling that way in that situation. I’m not sure I’ve seen a face that was so unnerving since the “Mystery Man” played by Robert Blake in David Lynch’s Lost Highway.
Some of his criticisms of modernity were valid, but a good number of them were rooted in the myth of the noble savage.
I find it typical of the detailed explanations by terrorists of their philosophy. They often start by making some halfway reasonable points about the flaws of the society they are in. They then slowly get further and further from anything which logically flows from their objections. Then suddenly they announce, “Hey, so let’s go kill some random people.”
But it was an effective way of conveying his message, since many heard of it when they otherwise wouldn’t have. And it’s made some people go. “Huh, it’s not completely wrong what he says.” even if they, like you and I, disagree with TK in terms of policy preferences and use of violence.
Maybe he could have chosen his targets better but if you start from the presumption that the world is doomed because of the threat he perceived, there’s nothing insane about it. I think he’s erroneous in assessing a threat but that’s not crazy. People fearing that some current trend will worsen and spoil the world is shared by Malthus (erroneous, not crazy) and many science-fiction stories.
You can click on the picture then his name. He was also one of the worst Nazis, a commander in charge of the mobile execution squads back when the Nazis were learning amateurs at it. He’s not one of those who escaped.