* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
EVIL, TERRORISM, TORTURE, AND OTHER BAD STUFF WHAT IS “EVIL”? Bandura: moral disengagement Zimbardo: intentionally behaving or causing others to act in ways that demean, dehumanize, harm, destroy, or kill innocent people Staub: intensely harmful actions, which are not commensurate with instigating conditions and the persistence or repetition of such acts Baumeister: threatened egotism Buss: causing reproductive harm to other and especially to those close to us TERRORISM “Politically motivated violence perpetrated by individuals, groups, or state sponsored agents (?) intended to instill feelings of terror and helplessness in a population to influence decision making and change behavior” (Moghaddam, 2005) To get political objectives, threatened or real violence (Saucier et al., 2009) “Indiscriminate use of force”, political agenda, spreading fear (Kruglanski et al., 2011) BANDURA, 2004 Moral justification Palliative comparison Euphemistic labeling Displacement and diffusion of responsibility Minimizing, ignoring, or misconstruing the consequences Dehumanization, attribution of blame Examples? “Normal” examples? BANDURA MODEL Change perception of conduct Change sense of consequences Change feelings of responsibility Change one’s view of victim ZIMBARDO, 2004 Anonymity Reduce concerns about self-evaluation Obligation/roles Semantics Propaganda, education Give justification Small steps Diffusion of responsibility Make it hard to leave How do we use these in the military? Terror alerts What are the implications of the situational view? Is evil seen differently in collectivist countries? GIBSON & HARITOS-FATOUROS, 1986 Choose normal people with appropriate attitudes Initiation rites In-group language and rules Dehumanize victims Harassment in in-group so can’t think Reward obedience Social modeling Systematic desensitization to acts Carrots and sticks Education against outgroup HOW TO MAKE A Suicide bomber Torturer Terrorist Cult member School shooter MOGHADDAM, 2005 What causes terrorism, according to M? Floor 1: perceptions of fairness, procedural justice Contextualized democracy (Arab spring) Floor 2: displacement of aggression Floor 3: moral disengagement Floor 4: categorical thinking, legitimacy of org* Floor 5: distance from outgroup, act How does religious fundamentalism have an effect on both sides? Is he only talking about Arabs? “they can’t exit alive” What does he suggest for preventing terrorism? SAUCIER ET AL., 2009 Is there a terrorist type, according to these authors? What was their methodology? Are documents and internet a good way to study these? (advantages/disadvantages) THEMES FROM SAUCIER ET AL. Necessity of extreme measures Absolve responsibility Use of military terminology Perception that group is being held back Glorifying the past of one’s group Utopianizing Catastrophizing Supernatural assumptions Feel need to purify world from evil Glorification of dying for the cause Duty to kill Use of immoral acts okay to get to goals Seeing intolerance, vengeance, and war as good Dehumanization Modern world = bad Civil government as illegitimate What do these authors suggest to decrease terrorism? How do terrorism, state-sponsored violence, and genocide differ? Are these also present in more tame politics? Global warming? KRUGLANSKI, SHARVIT, & FISHMAN, 2011 What is their main point? Individual level: Not relative deprivation Ideology, sense of duty Quest for personal significance Group level Social support, friend/family networks Shared reality/less contact with outsiders Language for own and other groups Public commitment Authority that they listen to and not think on their own Organization-level: Rational choice given their means What to do to reduce? GINGES, ATRAN, SACHDEVA, & MEDIN, 2011 What is these authors’ main point? Are they setting up a straw man? Words and concepts Sacred values Culture of honor Disgust What are ours? Causes: Not education, poverty Friendship and family networks Perceived foreign meddling Sense of national humiliation Frustrated expectations Social marginalization Commitment to ingroup and values Group cohesion, peer support “Logical” when thinking about diplomacy, not violence WAYS TO DECREASE/PREVENT EVIL/TERRORISM Empathy (Bandura) Humanization, stop us/them thinking (Bandura, Moghaddam) Better the lives of those in other countries (Bandura, Zimbardo, Moghaddam) Use only “just war”; Promote justice (Bandura. Moghaddam, Kruglanksi) Better negotiation, talk to other side (Zimbardo, Moghaddam) Reduce collateral damage (Kruglanski) Have young people share (Zimbardo) Contextualized democracy (get women involved; Moghaddam) Encourage opposite thinking (Saucier et al.) Show people that crisis isn’t so bad, mission not sacred, violations of values exaggerated (Saucier et al., Ginges et al.) Have outgroup make symbolic concessions to ingroup’s sacred values (Ginges et al.) Challenge the idea that violence is morally mandated (Ginges et al.) Challenge the idea that terrorism is effective (Kruglanski) Kill their leaders (Kruglanski) Which of these are practical? Most likely to succeed? Are there other methods not mentioned? Why are these and not those mentioned? GENERAL ISSUES Could anyone commit these acts? Are the people responsible for what they did? How can we study these issues? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msTAFlUJl5 4 How are psychologists involved in torture/terror? Is that okay?