"It was stupid, was not simply ideas. That remoteness from reality and the lack of ideas, can be much more dangerous than all the evil instincts that maybe are innate in man. " These are the words of the philosopher Hannah Arendt described the banality of evil in the Nazi genocide in the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem in 1960, became the prototype of the inhuman, as trivial, in fact, insane cruelty of the Nazi eugenics project.
Eichmann was not a fool or a madman. Eichmann was someone who now call "normopatico" simply inhabited by a dictator. A reflection of this German scholar who continued to un'imperscrutabile associative chain, turning in my head as a result of the most modern facts about the Arab world and the fall, with a domino effect, with strong connotations of authoritarian regimes, if not dictatorial.
Why, I asked myself, these little men who oppress and ridiculous (to the genocide) remind me of their people as all the other mundane homunculi dictators in history? And then, the lack of ideas makes me think not so much a cultural absolute poverty or, worse, a tare, but rather in the domain of us few, but massive, cemented, ideas that tend to expropriate the other, and become iconic.
Consider, for example, every time we kidnapped by fears (expressed or deaf), or by strong resentment or rancor, and see how our mind focuses on a single all-encompassing idea, and reduce, if not topples, our reading skills of reality. The mind shackled by negative emotions or invaded by a primary surplus of information-pounding noise, is disorganized in the blink of an eye.
But beyond that, the lack of ideas is also associated with the lack of evolution of what we psychologists call moral development. Moral development is simply the mode of thought and human action in establishing and carrying out good and evil for himself and others. It has been studied in children and adolescents by the famous psychologist Jean Piaget, and has experienced in other subsequent authors (Kohlberg, Bandura, Turiel, Gilligan, Hoffman, etc).
Without going into detail, what is important to know is that moral thought is experiencing a series of recognizable stages of development ranging from a fairly elementary stage archaic-early childhood (obedience / conformity to precepts extrinsic / fear / reward) until oriented mode to a more intrinsic to universal principles, the common good and in a trim that dilemma, adolescence, adulthood.
Obviously, the success of this development is the fundamental role of the educational environment, the dominant social values (currently the dominant value seems to be the money) and time spent by parents on these issues (lately more and more scarce). And then, the combined set of the first factor (only a few dominant ideas and obsessive) and the second factor (the non-moral development or regression of moral thought) becomes an explosive mixture of potentially active in each of us makes our reasoning very simple schematic , Automatic, Manichean, almost gibbering and blathering.
Once attacked the ability of critical thinking and the possibility of a joint and complex dilemma of reality, the individual is willing to enslave the dictatorship. On the inside first, that their needs in the meantime become mandatory, and thus to the external represented by landmarks and protective stone.
The dictator logically there is a puppet that does little to fall down (and in fact one by one they fall like bowling pins), is the projection of a people who invest in that role, is the distillate all the individual mass-minds and made unfit for trial and polarization mode oversimplified.
I knew Edward Bernays, nephew of "American" of Freud, when he invented in 1928 ropaganda p (from which the modern manipulative use of advertising media), to whom the same Goebbels was a follower. Today, among a survey and another, between reality and talk shows, we continue to pamper and nourish us (and then also outside of us) a potential dictator, mentally depleted, ready to incarnate and ask for the bill.
The condition of any democracy is therefore developed an equally critical consciousness evolved (and psychological well-being) of its citizens. 
Eichmann was not a fool or a madman. Eichmann was someone who now call "normopatico" simply inhabited by a dictator. A reflection of this German scholar who continued to un'imperscrutabile associative chain, turning in my head as a result of the most modern facts about the Arab world and the fall, with a domino effect, with strong connotations of authoritarian regimes, if not dictatorial.
Why, I asked myself, these little men who oppress and ridiculous (to the genocide) remind me of their people as all the other mundane homunculi dictators in history? And then, the lack of ideas makes me think not so much a cultural absolute poverty or, worse, a tare, but rather in the domain of us few, but massive, cemented, ideas that tend to expropriate the other, and become iconic.
Consider, for example, every time we kidnapped by fears (expressed or deaf), or by strong resentment or rancor, and see how our mind focuses on a single all-encompassing idea, and reduce, if not topples, our reading skills of reality. The mind shackled by negative emotions or invaded by a primary surplus of information-pounding noise, is disorganized in the blink of an eye.
But beyond that, the lack of ideas is also associated with the lack of evolution of what we psychologists call moral development. Moral development is simply the mode of thought and human action in establishing and carrying out good and evil for himself and others. It has been studied in children and adolescents by the famous psychologist Jean Piaget, and has experienced in other subsequent authors (Kohlberg, Bandura, Turiel, Gilligan, Hoffman, etc).
Without going into detail, what is important to know is that moral thought is experiencing a series of recognizable stages of development ranging from a fairly elementary stage archaic-early childhood (obedience / conformity to precepts extrinsic / fear / reward) until oriented mode to a more intrinsic to universal principles, the common good and in a trim that dilemma, adolescence, adulthood.
Obviously, the success of this development is the fundamental role of the educational environment, the dominant social values (currently the dominant value seems to be the money) and time spent by parents on these issues (lately more and more scarce). And then, the combined set of the first factor (only a few dominant ideas and obsessive) and the second factor (the non-moral development or regression of moral thought) becomes an explosive mixture of potentially active in each of us makes our reasoning very simple schematic , Automatic, Manichean, almost gibbering and blathering.
Once attacked the ability of critical thinking and the possibility of a joint and complex dilemma of reality, the individual is willing to enslave the dictatorship. On the inside first, that their needs in the meantime become mandatory, and thus to the external represented by landmarks and protective stone.
The dictator logically there is a puppet that does little to fall down (and in fact one by one they fall like bowling pins), is the projection of a people who invest in that role, is the distillate all the individual mass-minds and made unfit for trial and polarization mode oversimplified.
I knew Edward Bernays, nephew of "American" of Freud, when he invented in 1928 ropaganda p (from which the modern manipulative use of advertising media), to whom the same Goebbels was a follower. Today, among a survey and another, between reality and talk shows, we continue to pamper and nourish us (and then also outside of us) a potential dictator, mentally depleted, ready to incarnate and ask for the bill.
The condition of any democracy is therefore developed an equally critical consciousness evolved (and psychological well-being) of its citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment