Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer by Oliver Behrensdorff free essay sample

What are the causes of atrocity events such as the massacre at My Lai, the abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib or the extermination of Jews during World War II? Whether groups of people bestowed with unaccountable power naturally resort to violence or not, the subject is indeed controversial. Arguably, the less restrictions that one must follow, the higher the risk becomes of one to condone violence. However, how can we explain war crimes and acts of torture? Is the most decisive factor leadership, group behavior, or culture? Psychologists Stephen Reicher and Alex Haslam assess this exact debate in the article â€Å"Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer†, and thus attempt to understand the background of war crimes and torture. In addition to this discussion, Philip G. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment depicts similar outcomes, which were subsequently endorsed by the two psychologists. Nearly everyone has the capacity to commit acts of evil, given the right conditions, but what keeps a minority of people in check even under extremely stressful circumstances is their learned sense of morality and ability to distinguish right from wrong. We will write a custom essay sample on Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer by Oliver Behrensdorff or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page People dissociate themselves from perpetrators of evil acts due to the claim that those perpetrators are monsters with disturbed minds. One of the main statements in the article is that this mistaken notion has been rebutted by a series of major studies including the Stanford Prison Experiment. This study confirmed that even well-adjusted people, when divided into groups with contrasting powers could become abusive and violent. Although every human shares the capacity to behave in evil ways, there is a variation of factors that endorses them to do so. One of the main factors is whether a given instruction is overtly or tacitly endorsed, which also explains the different outcomes of the BBC and the Stanford study. Moreover, the article underlines how groups can affect the behavior of every individual and make them do things that they would normally abhor. Essentially, the article also states that, â€Å"Evil can become banal, but so can humanism† (P. 193, l. 19), meaning the choice to condone violence rests in the hands of the individual. Thus, the promotion of bad values and abhorrent beliefs from leaders and  institutions may trigger the deviation of norms and values. Clearly the purpose of this article is to illustrate the manifestation of torturous activities by giving clear examples of how this behavior becomes accepted and praised. The scandal at the Abu Ghraib prison and even in the Stanford Study shows a direct connection to power and criminal behavior. The object is not to quantify that this behavior simply happens once bad influencers are given power. Rather, existing conditions ignite feelings of purpose for the torture. Because of the way prisoners are positioned in one’s mind, as if they are subhuman, one might forgo their moral standards when dealing with them. Those who have not lost their â€Å"moral compass† have lost their voice, allowing those with a skewed sense of morality to set the tone for such grotesque treatment. The goal is to explore on many levels how this behavior can apparently be so easily adopted within a group structure. Apparently, criminal behavior resulting in torture of others is not only an individual trait, but also something that can evolve within someone who normally would be resistant to such an activity, given the right conditions. The article’s purpose is therefore to inform us that once the above-mentioned aspects are better understood throughout all levels of authority, it is possible for a culture change to begin, â€Å"We need a psychological analysis that addresses the values and beliefs that we, our institutions, and our leaders promote† (P. 193, l. 24) The article is in many ways persuasive. Author Stephen Reicher has set out to convince the reader that given some sort of competition, groups can become abusive. Reicher makes a claim that previous theories of torturous behavior are misleading or even false. He goes on to give evidence supporting his claims of why, in fact, torturous behavior is exhibited amongst certain groups of power. The author uses symbolism to represent his ideas, thus giving examples. Furthermore, he describes the internal and external conflict that can exist in these situations. Internal conflict is described as someone who is conflicted about their behavior but continues in a negative way with the intention of getting labeled as a good follower. External conflict is used to describe how the torturer behaves in comparison to societal norms. The sentences within the article follow a basic sentence structure and are organized differently throughout the entire article. Furthermore, they are manipulated in a way that adds life and drama to the piece. The article is cohesive; references and examples complement each other to create a profound reading experience. The pictures in the web article enhance the articles presentation by illustrating and clarifying the contentment of the text. The word choice is concise, â€Å"Sadly, 50 years of social psychological research indicates that such comforting thoughts are deluded. The tone is set in the beginning and remains consistent throughout the article. The philosophical term â€Å"Banality of Evil† was coined by philosopher Hannah Arendt, who was of the opinion that all humans share the capacity to behave in evil ways. Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi SS-lieutenant known to be one of the brains behind the horrifying Holocaust was, in the eyes of Hannah Arendt, frighteningly ordinary. He had no signs of psychological damage, nor did he show any signs of anti-Semitism during his trial . Arendt’s observations were both right, and wrong. Eichmann’s moral compass was broke, he was either swept under the spell of Naziism, or his leadership convinced him that murder was acceptable. Although newer studies have replaced Zimbardo and Milgram’s experiments, they should not be invalidated. The difference between Zimbardo and the BBC project shows us that under certain circumstances some might lose their moral compass. The mentioned circumstances can allow authorities and people in leadership positions to take advantage of some people, thereby negating their moral standards. Noteworthy is that the studies did not confirm all humans could be manipulated or unintentionally swayed by leaders and groups, but that some would, and as noted above, the result for humanity can be catastrophic. There is ample evidence of the fact that bad leadership can influence people into crossing their moral standards. Leadership can influence people to believe that they will not be held to account for what they do, and even sometimes encourage them with a notion of praiseworthiness. Demands from bad leadership can evolve a mundane individual like Adolf Eichmann into a notorious architect of mass extinction. Therefore, the article reminds us, that it is crucial to ensure that people are aware of moral commitments and accountability to others for their actions. Another significant way to prevent future atrocities is to modify how the â€Å"enemy† is framed. If the language is degrading and dehumanizing it can contribute to create conditions of disrespect, at first, and can then eventually be followed by crimes, torture and even war crimes. Finally it is crucial to emphasize that when bad behavior becomes â€Å"institutionalized† in closed societies, atrocious acts could be developed. Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer By Oliver Behrensdorff free essay sample Most of the time, however, events in life are not overwhelming Joyous or sad, it all depends on your attitude towards the event and whether you choose to laugh at it or not. So, let us look over several ways to further expand your sense of humor, with the main one of them being Just to laugh at yourself. According to the article Humor Styles, Positive Personality, and Health written by Arnie Cann, the best way to do this is by thinking about the times that you did take yourself too seriously. Also, always attempt to laugh at different aspects of life that normally you would frown upon. For example, look for the good in bad situation. This will improve the mood of yourself and others around you. The most important thing that affects our sense of humor is stress (Cann 23). Try to stay stress free and when you are stressed, make sure you do things that ease the stress and make you relax. We will write a custom essay sample on Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer By Oliver Behrensdorff or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The main point of all these different tips is to allow you to take life lightly. We only have one, and you can prolong it by keeping a good attitude and working out your sense of humor. In conclusion, the ability to laugh by yourself and with others not only allows you to have a healthier, more enjoyable life, but it also helps you bond with others and olve personal problems. It is no secret that people who incorporate more humor and play into their lives end up finding their selves renewed and in better relationships. Life will always bring obstacles that we have to overcome, and humor is key in letting this happen. When you take yourself too seriously, you become your own problem, and it makes it hard to feel creative and think about how to improve yourself. But when you allow yourself to play with the problem, you can morph it into an opportunity for yourself to grow into the person you strive to be. To summarize the aper, I talked about the physical and mental benefits of humor and how it can improve our lives. Also, how to incorporate humor into your daily live and how to improve your sense of it. What I wanted to find out for this paper was how exactly humor can improve and prolong your life. However, I discovered much more and that humor is actually the key to having a productive, enjoyable life. Without it, life would be bland, boring, and unsatisfying. Humor is Nicholson 5 what makes us human, and without it life would be nothing as we know it today. Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer By Oliver Behrensdorff BY olN6330 Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer Oliver Behrensdorff What are the causes of atrocity events such as the massacre at My La, the abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib or the extermination of Jews during World War II? Whether groups of people bestowed with unaccountable power naturally resort to violence or not, the subject is indeed controversial. Arguably, the less restrictions that one must follow, the higher the risk becomes of one to condone violence. However, how can we explain war crimes and acts of torture? Is the most decisive factor leadership, group behavior, or culture? Psychologists Stephen Reicher nd Alex Haslam assess this exact debate in the article Why Not Everyone Is A Torturer, and thus attempt to understand the background of war crimes and torture. In addition to this discussion, Philip G. Zimbardos Stanford Prison Experiment depicts similar outcomes, which were subsequently endorsed by the two psychologists. Nearly everyone has the capacity to commit acts of evil, given the right conditions, but what keeps a minority of people in check even under extremely stressful circumstances is their learned sense of morality and ability to distinguish right from wrong. People dissociate themselves from perpetrators of evil acts due to he claim that those perpetrators are monsters with disturbed minds. One of the main statements in the article is that this mistaken notion has been rebutted by a series of major studies including the Stanford Prison Experiment. This study confirmed that even well-adjusted people, when divided into groups with contrasting powers could become abusive and violent. Although every human shares the capacity to behave in evil ways, there is a variation of factors that endorses them to do so. One of the main factors is whether a given instruction is overtly or tacitly endorsed, which also explains the different outcomes of the BBC and the Stanford tudy. Moreover, the article underlines how groups can affect the behavior of every individual and make them do things that they would normally abhor. Essentially, the article also states that, Evil can become banal, but so can humanism (P. 193, 1. 19), meaning the choice to condone violence rests in the hands of the individual. Thus, the promotion of bad values and abhorrent beliefs from leaders and institutions may trigger the deviation of norms and values. Clearly the purpose of this article is to illustrate the manifestation of torturous activities by giving clear examples of how this behavior becomes accepted and praised. The scandal at the Abu Ghraib prison and even in the Stanford Study shows a direct connection to power and criminal behavior. The object is not to quantify that this behavior simply happens once bad influencers are given power. Rather, existing conditions ignite feelings of purpose for the torture. Because of the way prisoners are positioned in ones mind, as if they are subhuman, one might forgo their moral standards when voice, allowing those with a skewed sense of morality to set the tone for such grotesque treatment. The goal is to explore on many levels how this behavior can pparently be so easily adopted within a group structure. Apparently, criminal behavior resulting in torture of others is not only an individual trait, but also something that can evolve within someone who normally would be resistant to such an activity, given the right conditions. The articles purpose is therefore to inform us that once the above-mentioned aspects are better understood throughout all levels of authority, it is possible for a culture change to begin, We need a psychological analysis that addresses the values and beliefs that we, our institutions, and our leaders promote (P. 193, l. 4) The article is in many ways persuasive. Author Stephen Reicher has set out to convince the reader that given some sort of competition, groups can become abusive. Reicher makes a claim that previous theories of torturous behavior are misleading or even false. He goes on to give evidence supporting his claims of why, in fact, torturous behavior is exhibited amongst certain groups of power. The author uses symbolism to represent his ideas, thus giving examples. Furthermore, he describes the internal and external conflict that can exist in these situations. Internal conflict is described as someone who is onflicted about their behavior but continues in a negative way with the intention of getting labeled as a good follower. External conflict is used to describe how the torturer behaves in comparison to societal norms.