Navigation/Menü: Links auf weitere Seiten dieser Website
|Titelzusatz||democracy and dehumanization|
|Freie Schlagwörter||Freedom; Civilization; Groupishness; Duties; Persons in Grammar; status communicativus; Neutralization; Conformity; Realistic Democratic Punishment; Rule of Weighing Freedom; Equity and Solidarity|
|DDC||100 Philosophie und Psychologie
|Abstract||The special kind of freedom of homo sapiens includes both, abiding by – normative – ethics of Humanity and contrasting ethics by using the – empirical – ability to dehumanize others. We humans are able to switch rather easily between both. The grammar of our Western languages indicates that, and Western political philosophy defines dignity of man by a similar formula.
Regarding punishment and crime, our psyche is working with techniques of neutralizing brutal acts. Even we “good ones” suppress acting inhumanely towards others by the method of neutralizing or better by collectivizing ourselves. We democrats submit blindly to the Rule of Law and the mightiness of our own Justice. Justifying easily lifelong incarceration without accepting a bit of personal responsibility for our own decisions is a kind of a collective ritual of de-individuation, sovereign democrats should be aware of.
In order to define humanity as well as its negation, inhumanity, the simple Democratic Trinity of “Freedom, Equity and Solidarity” is to be picked up.
With a set of four theses I’ll try reducing the complexity:
(1) Jurisprudence and Political Science: There might be “Three Democratic Steps of Punishment”.
(2) Linguistics and Culture: Grammar of Western languages indicate we are prepared for both Democracy in a We-group and for its Negation. Therefore Freedom might be defined as “status communicativus”, too.
(3) Psychology and Ethics: Milgram et al. prove that the majority of us cannot avoid “obedience and submission”. Therefore we have to develop both strong collective ethics and at least for leaders a “Personal Democratic Identity”.
(4) Finally Philosophical Anthropology: The favored “Rule of Weighing Political Acts Democratically” means harmonizing for each important individual case “freedom, equity and solidarity”.
I. Prologue: Ethics and Anthropology 9
II. Part 1: Democracy 15
A. The Basic Ideals 15
B. Freedom According to Hobbes 15
C. Civilization According to Locke and Mill 18
D. Including Rousseau: State and Solidarity 19
E. Western Democracies 22
F. My Background: Western Anthropology 26
G. First Thesis: Three Democratic Steps to Punishment 46
III. Part 2: Culture 48
A. Communication and Culture 48
B. Persons in Grammar of Western Languages 53
C. Grammar and Western Philosophy 57
D. Second Thesis: Freedom as “status communicativus” 60
E. A Conclusion by Anthropology 64
IV. Part 3: Psychology 65
A. Introduction 65
B. Techniques of Neutralization, Matza/Sykes 66
C. Experiments of Milgram and Zimbardo 69
D. Neutralizing in Wartimes 72
E. From Neutralization to Dehumanization 74
F. Conformity and Collective Ethics 78
G. Third thesis: “Personal Democratic Identity” 79
V. Part 4: Punishment 82
A. Three Kinds of Ethics and Cruelties of Punishment 82
B. Realistic Democratic Punishment 84
C. Parallelism of three Approaches 87
D. The State as an Actor 89
E. Consequences for Types of Punishment 91
F. “Rule of Weighing Freedom, Equity and Solidarity” 93
G. A Fourth and Final Three-pointed Thesis 96
VI. Epilogue: Anthropology and Ethics 98
|Erstellt am||28.09.2010 - 11:02:27|
|Letzte Änderung||29.09.2010 - 15:23:45|