The Atrocity Paradigm: A Theory of Evil
Contents:
To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about The Atrocity Paradigm , please sign up. Can i get articles or journals on this book, anyone i can lay my hands on please dearies i seriously need it for my project? See 1 question about The Atrocity Paradigm…. Lists with This Book.
This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Aug 28, Stark rated it really liked it.
I hadda return it to the library before I was through. I learned more about Stoicism and also, rape. May 15, Benjamin rated it liked it.
As the example of Hindus and Muslims in India shows, permitting different systems of family law for different religious communities in a pluralistic society respects religious liberty but is likely to exacerbate political conflict. Card's theory represents a compromise between classic utilitarian and stoic alternatives including Kant's theory of radical evil. Raises interesting points about prioritizing eliminating evils over eliminating unjust inequalities. After bringing her account of evil into conversation with some of its philosophical rivals, Card turns in Chapter 5 to what I take to be the chief practical payoff she hopes to derive from highlighting evil in her moral theorizing. Alisha marked it as to-read May 04, A Theory of Evil Review.
Raises interesting points about prioritizing eliminating evils over eliminating unjust inequalities. Stina rated it really liked it May 18, Ainsley rated it it was amazing Oct 11, Chelsea rated it really liked it Aug 27, Manuel Paradela rated it really liked it Apr 12, Paula rated it it was amazing Dec 09, Tessy rated it it was amazing Dec 23, Love Malundo rated it it was amazing Oct 01, Ben Wadham rated it really liked it Jan 11, Jenn rated it really liked it Apr 05, Melissa rated it really liked it Nov 09, Samantha Brennan rated it really liked it Feb 12, Jay Hostetter rated it it was amazing Mar 04, Libby rated it really liked it Jan 01, Matthew Trevino rated it it was amazing Dec 17, Stephen rated it really liked it Mar 08, Tracy Stewart rated it really liked it Apr 08, Kristofer Petersen-Overton rated it it was amazing Oct 15, Brad Thames rated it it was ok Feb 19, Anbird rated it really liked it Jan 15, Brandon Bykowski rated it really liked it Jul 19, Amanda rated it it was amazing Jan 07, Hannah Daykin rated it liked it Jul 19, Holley rated it liked it Aug 06, Alisha marked it as to-read May 04, Z added it Jul 29, Anne added it Dec 06, Anne added it Feb 08, Deborah marked it as to-read Aug 13, Honna marked it as to-read May 22, Yvonne added it Jul 24, Steven marked it as to-read Nov 19, Amanda added it Jan 10, Paul marked it as to-read Jan 12, Caitlin marked it as to-read Jul 16, Robin marked it as to-read Jul 19, Ochieng Dimba marked it as to-read Dec 01, Michelle added it Jan 15, Robin Alexander is currently reading it Sep 09, Galen marked it as to-read Sep 22, Jess marked it as to-read Feb 05, Matt Sautman marked it as to-read Feb 15, Mushroomprince marked it as to-read Feb 18, If the choice between endorsing and trying to disengage from an IPIR is as fundamental as the choice to adopt a supreme principle of conduct, and if it is a libertarian free choice for which the patient is accountable, as Kant insists such fundamental choices are, then it will be inexplicable to us why patients make the choices they do, whether endorsement, endeavoring to disengage, or renegotiation.
After bringing her account of evil into conversation with some of its philosophical rivals, Card turns in Chapter 5 to what I take to be the chief practical payoff she hopes to derive from highlighting evil in her moral theorizing.
2003.10.05
In the course of her discussion of feminism in this chapter, she makes the interesting point that American feminists have been divided between those who, in the majority tradition of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, have given priority to achieving equal rights and those who, in the minority tradition of Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Emma Goldman, give priority to ending oppression. The most difficult question she tackles in this chapter is explaining what it means to prioritize evils; it cannot sensibly mean neglecting lesser injustices until all greater evils have been eliminated.
In the course of spelling out this view, she points to helpful analogies with giving priority to family over work and with prioritizing research over teaching, which is an example that is sure to be salient for university professors. The next two chapters are devoted to case studies of atrocities. Chapter 6 covers war rape and the related evil of wartime sexual slavery. Card reports in this chapter some of her fantasies about penalties for rape, which she envisages being inflicted primarily in wartime.
On the one hand, it may be necessary to say something shocking to get some men to appreciate how seriously Card thinks the evil of raping women should be taken. On the other, the cruelty of the fantasized punishment, which Card herself acknowledges in passing, may result in the sort of rhetorical overkill that is counterproductive. She also advocates more distributed forms of child rearing, drawing for inspiration on the idea of revolutionary parenting proposed by bell hooks and thoughts about compensated caregiving expressed by Eva Feder Kittay.
I think Card performs a valuable service in focusing attention on the way in which the institutions of marriage and motherhood raises issues in what she describes as the ethics of access and in bringing her abolitionist proposals to the table for discussion. I am willing to grant that current institutions of marriage and motherhood make it harder to detect and stop spousal and child abuse than might otherwise be the case, precisely because of the way in which they restrict access to what transpires within family units.
But she does not address the full range of issues that would need to be confronted before a rational decision to adopt some alternative to currently existing institutions could be reached.
The Atrocity Paradigm: A Theory of Evil
In the case of marriage, some of them involve religion. For a large fraction of the people of the world, marriage is an institution primarily governed by religious norms and not by the rules of civil law. As the example of Hindus and Muslims in India shows, permitting different systems of family law for different religious communities in a pluralistic society respects religious liberty but is likely to exacerbate political conflict.
- The Powers and Maxine!
- Prevention of Thermal Cracking in Concrete at Early Ages (Rilem Report).
- .
- .
- No Liver, No Shoes;
- Father Forgive?
In the case of motherhood, empirical questions about the consequences of more distributed forms of child rearing demand attention. We do not know what impact they would have on the lives of people brought up under them. Card does not assess the evidence from studies, for example, of Israeli kibbutzim. In short, her argument in this chapter gives us only an opening statement in what would have to be a complex and difficult debate. Even if we were to prioritize addressing evils, it is unlikely that we would succeed in eliminating them. Hence moral reflection on how to live with evils is important, and Card takes up this topic in the next two chapters.
Chapter 8 concentrates on the moral powers of victims, which she identifies as blame and forgiveness. Her treatment of forgiveness seems to me to be particularly insightful. She devotes a good deal of effort to reflecting on cases that depart from the ideal in various ways.
Access Check
I agree that it is good for victims eventually to endeavor to free themselves from resenting unrepentant evildoers, when this will help them move beyond being obsessively preoccupied with injuries they have suffered. When this happens, however, victims try to rid themselves of resentment wholly for their own sake, not for the sake of the reconciliation with those who have harmed them, and so I wonder whether such acts should be counted as cases of forgiveness.
But a reason to the contrary is that they need involve no transaction with, or even communication to, the evildoer. Chapter 9 is devoted to the moral obligations and burdens of perpetrators; it pays particular attention to the obligation of gratitude for forgiveness or mercy and the burden of guilt. Unlike many other contemporary philosophers, Card sees value in feelings of guilt because they can serve to motivate reparative activities.
- Additional Information.
- The Pool of Unease.
- ?
- .
- Similar books and articles?
She develops her defense of guilt by means of an interesting comparison with shame. Some of the contrasts between them that she views as morally significant are these: In expiating guilt, we seek respect and reacceptance. By contrast, the achievements that remove shame may create grounds for admiration and yet do nothing to eliminate grounds for resentment or to make reparations for harms done. Card agrees with Herbert Morris that survivor guilt so defined is a kind of blameless guilt that is not irrational.
Apparently she holds this view because she thinks that survivor guilt can motivate those who suffer from it to aid the victims of the injustice that produced the benefits or the victims of similar injustices or to struggle against the kind of injustice involved in producing the benefits.
Taking atrocities as paradigms of evil, this book develops the theory that evils ( plural) are foreseeable, intolerable harms produced by culpable wrongdoing. What distinguishes evils from ordinary wrongs? Is hatred a necessarily evil? Are some evils unforgivable? Are there evils we should tolerate? What can make.
But if he was motivated by feelings of guilt over benefiting from the injustices done by his slave-owning ancestors, then I would say he was irrationally motivated. After all, he is not blameworthy or guilty in the matter of those injustices and presumably knows this to be the case, and so it would be irrational for him to feel guilty over them. Those who think otherwise might do well to reflect that they would almost certainly not exist unless some of the great evils of human history had taken place.