stand up against: hitler didn't have asperger
From the article~
"it's usually fear of repercussion that keeps us from torturing our fellow human beings. Give us absolute power over somebody and a blank check from our superiors, and Abu Ghraib-esque naked pyramids are sure to follow"
I don't agree with this at all. That's like saying that the only reason i don't steal is because I'm afraid I'll go to jail. I don't steal, because it's wrong to take the belongings of a person who has worked to earn those things, when I have done nothing to earn them. I wouldn't want someone to steal the things that I have worked hard for and I have to assume that others feel the same way. I think most people can at least identify with each others feelings when it comes to being wronged. I would never want to be the bringer of anyone's suffering on any level.
The article makes for "juicy" reading, but I'm not buying it. I'd like to believe that most people are good.
I should've picked a less amusing and more accurate article, as they don't give a great explanation of the phenomenon. I'm probably mistakenly assuming that most people are generally familiar with the Stanford Prison experiment (and the Milgram experiment).
It's not like a child stealing cookies because he knows he can get away with it; with the knowledge of the punishing authority figures being absent being the main factor. It's that when there is a great disparity in power people tend to start acting abusively without even realizing that they are. The people at Abu Grahib didn't do what they did because they thought they could get away with it. In that environment (and given what they were told), they didn't think that what they were doing was wrong in the first place. And when ZImbardo interviewed those who went to prison for AG, he didn't find any particular pathology, save being a bit more of an authoritarian follower than average.
This gets at things like, how is it that a person can work all day in the basement of the Guatamlalan State Police Headquarters, torturing people, and then go home and be a loving husband and father? Or, how could most of the soldiers who ran the Nazi death camps be "normal people" ("the banality of evil").
The difficult thing is that that kind of stuff does happen. We want to think that the 'bad people' are all slobbering maniacs who would be incapable of any normal human existence, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The people who rode in on camels and beat the Egyptian protestors didn't come from Hell, they were always there in the community, just waiting for the right conditions (the right orders from abovem, in that case) to arise. (I've always been amazed how mass beatings are never averted because there aren't enough willing participants.)
The following is about the Migram experiment. A description of the experiment is at Milgram Experiment. (I'm too tired to summarize it.)
From the Wiki page:
In Milgram's first set of experiments, 65 percent (26 of 40)[1] of experiment participants administered the experiment's final massive 450-volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so; at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment, some said they would refund the money they were paid for participating in the experiment.
Thinking about deliberately doing someone harm is one thing, but the situations that occur in the real world aren't usually like that. There's always something else going on -- a context. Milgram showed that in the context of being ordered by an authority figure (who only had assumed authority -- there actually wasn't any) a majority of people will continue beyond another person's screaming and pleading for the shocks to stop. And the SPE (which has it's criticisms) says that if you give people authority, they will tend to abuse it. Even if they are normal people.
It's not as simple as "are people good or bad"? It seems that good people can do bad things (statistically), given the right circumstances. And this seems important for humanity to know, so we can watch out for those kinds of situations.
I.e. should the guards who committed the abuse at Abu Grahib go to prison (as they did), or should the people who set the place up bear more responsibility? (Especially since some of those people specialized in intelligence, and would likely have backgrounds in psychology (which means they'd know about the SPE and ME).)
Another aspect is to be on the lookout for abuse in places where there is a great disparity in power/authority. I.e. nursing homes, institutions, orphantages, hospitals, prisons.
That's why I would never serve in the military. If your mind is malleable in the hands of another person, then you do well in service and you are a useful tool for the government machine. But I take issue with the very idea that I would be no different than a tank or an M-16...just a tool, or in the case of AG, a weapon used to degrade and demoralize other human beings.
The difficult thing is that that kind of stuff does happen. We want to think that the 'bad people' are all slobbering maniacs who would be incapable of any normal human existence, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The people who rode in on camels and beat the Egyptian protestors didn't come from Hell, they were always there in the community, just waiting for the right conditions (the right orders from abovem, in that case) to arise. (I've always been amazed how mass beatings are never averted because there aren't enough willing participants.)
Their minds are not fully formed. And when I say "mind", I don't mean intelligence. What I mean is that they have no deep relationship with their own being, no reverence for themselves as individuals. I don't think we're so far removed from being outright animals other than we have the ability to be self-aware. Unfortunately a large part of humanity doesn't put forth the effort to develop anything deeper than what is required to fit in with the pack. That mentality has use-value to them, it helps them survive. Fitting in is of utmost importance. A great example of this in the average daily life, is organized religion. People want to be spoon-fed their "salvation", rather than seeking it out for themselves on a much deeper level. They're just sort of drifting along with the current. Humans are lazy in that respect.
There is no real authority though in any setting or circumstance. We all hold the same power to direct our own lives. Although It may be a good thing that most people don't question authority on that level, or we may fall into anarchy.
I.e. should the guards who committed the abuse at Abu Grahib go to prison (as they did), or should the people who set the place up bear more responsibility? (Especially since some of those people specialized in intelligence, and would likely have backgrounds in psychology (which means they'd know about the SPE and ME).)
Another aspect is to be on the lookout for abuse in places where there is a great disparity in power/authority. I.e. nursing homes, institutions, orphantages, hospitals, prisons.
I have to wonder if any of the guards at AG ever stopped to question what might happen to them if they refused to follow orders. If they ever stopped to think that in degrading those prisoners, they were degrading themselves, or if you want to get all patriotic about it...degrading their own country.
If I were in their shoes, I would think, "what can my superiors really do to me? They could Court Marshal me for refusing to obey orders. Orders to do what?? Violate the Geneva Convention, violate my fellow humans, violate my own being."
People don't spend a lot of time in their own minds sorting out their issues because it's hard work, but it's even harder when your mind doesn't even belong to you.
Why feel the need to excuse such horrors with a disorder of some kind? Evil is evil, sometimes it cannot be explained. Furthermore there is a potential for evil in everyone, not just those with certain personality disorders, or even people with autism. Diagnosing somebody posthumously like this just reeks to me of trying to make that person an 'other', something a little less than human. That way everyone can sleep soundly without having to confront the reality that anyone is capable of great evil and twisted horrors, given the opportunity. You don't have to be different mentally or neurologically, the slippery slope is already there.
...And no, I don't think hitler was autistic.
Country and culture are an important factor. I see that so much has been argued retrospectively, as an apparent influencing factor -- I think every historical event arises from a unique cultural context - religious, social, economic, and so on. Hitler has become the locus classicus of establishment-driven debasement of culture (imprudently so, on the internet). Hitler is famous and feared for diverting mass frustrations into hatred, into an aire of untouchable power, for flooding the airwaves with lies, miseducation, and attendant rationalizations... things that were at once ignorant, hateful, and popular. The vulgarization of an entire culture. There are many cultural aspects - deep religious roots also- Christian thinking, the age-old religious notions of that savage "other," non-Christian out in spiritual wilderness, mixed with the religion's central notions of cleansing, purity, and purging... This religious culture's influence which allowed the event into fruition as a consequence. It is yet only a factor. One cannot abstract Hitler, or the culture from the long history of Europe itself, by saying something like "Hitler was atheist" or "Hitler was Christian" or "Hitler had NPD" I always find arguments like this to be abstracted scapegoats which a person uses to distance themselves / disparage others, because to associate with Hitler is apparently to dehumanize, relegate to a realm of an automatic, authoritarian monstrosity. --- (In order to learn the past (not to say we ever do), the question becomes: at what point is a modern culture similar on a significant level? Not just topical comparisons as we are prone to invoke, but inwardly, mechanically similar?... )
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
well I doubt Hitler had aspergers.....but can't say for sure because he is dead and he was not tested for any mental problems or whatever during his life so there is no way for anyone to say for sure whether or not Hitler had any mental issues and if he did what they where.
However if evidence did point to hitler having aspergers(hypothetically).....should it be denied because Hitler was not a very good person? I mean we can't just claim no one who's done anything horrible could possibly have aspergers or autism and then just pin it on only people with anti-social personality disorder or whatever else...I am sure those people have feelings to and don't appreciate everyone assuming anyone who becomes a murderer has to have a disorder simular to that.
(My first post on Wrongplanet, and of course I chose a silly topic. )
The early Hitler did have some characteristics that could be regarded as Aspergian, if I understand this correctly:
He did not have friends.
He did not have women. (Obviously he visited some prostitute that gave him syphilis, but that is not the same as a relationship.)
He refused to eat some types of food.
He did not have a job.
(His appearance was rather shabby, being dirty and unkempt and malnourished and wearing rags, but I am not sure about this point.)
Later, during world war one, he had an obsession with a particular topic (Germany, in a political sense).
Why is everyone too lazy to use google?
One peer reviewed psychiatric assessment (post-historic) of Adolph Hitler identifies
Schizophrenia
Personality disorders - Antisocial, Narcissistic, Paranoid, and Sadistic
http://www.uccs.edu/~faculty/fcoolidg/H ... nproof.pdf
No mention of Aspergers.
As debated as Hitler's physical medical issues may be, his mental health is a minefield of theories and speculation. This topic is very controversial, as many believe that if a psychological cause can be found for Hitler's behavior, there would be more reasoning behind his actions.
Waite, who authored an extensive psychohistory of Hitler, concluded that he suffered from borderline personality disorder, which manifested its symptoms in numerous ways and would imply Hitler was in full control of himself and his actions. Others have proposed Hitler may have been schizophrenic, based on claims that he was hallucinating and delusional during his last year of life. Many people believe that Hitler had a mental disorder and was not schizophrenic nor bipolar, but rather met the criteria for both disorders, and was therefore most likely a schizoaffective. If true, this might be explained by a series of brief reactive psychoses in a narcissistic personality which could not withstand being confronted with reality (in this case, that he was not the "superman" or "savior of Germany" he envisioned himself to be, as his plans and apparent early achievements collapsed about him). In addition, his regular methamphetamine use and possible sleep deprivation in the last period of his life must be factored into any speculation as to the cause of his possible psychotic symptoms, as these two activities are known to trigger psychotic reactions in some individuals. However, Hitler never visited a psychiatrist, and under current methodology, any such diagnosis is speculation.
Michael Fitzgerald, an expert in autism spectrum disorders, concludes that Hitler suffered from, and met all the criteria of Asperger syndrome as documented by Hans Asperger. As evidence of possible Asperger's, Fitzgerald cites Hitler's poor sleep patterns, food fads, dislike of physical contact, inability to forge genuine friendships, and an emptiness in his human relations. His conversations in the Men’s Home in Vienna were really harangues and invited no reciprocity, for which he seemingly lacked capacity. In Munich, Hitler was distant, self-contained, withdrawn and without friends. His comrades noted that he had no humanitarian feelings, that he was single-minded and inflexible. He was obsessive and rarely made good or interesting company, except in the eyes of those who shared his obsessions or those in awe of, or dependent on him.
As far as hobbies or pastimes were concerned, Hitler spent a great deal of time examining architectural plans with Albert Speer, an activity that remained a major focus of his life throughout. His other major interest was in the music of Richard Wagner. His greatest interest, clearly, was in control of and power over people.
Fitzgerald further states that Hitler was an ideologue with unshakable convictions, and had a bed compulsion, which demands that the bed be made in a particular way with the quilt folded according to a prescribed pattern, and that a man must make the bed before he could go to sleep. He did not use language for the purpose of interaction with others, but only for the purpose of dominating others. He endlessly engaged in long-winded and pedantic speeches, with "illogical arguments full of crude comparisons and cheap allusions." He was unable to carry on a normal conversation or discussion with people. Even if only one other person was present, he had to do all the talking. His manner of speech soon lost any conversational qualities it might have had and took on all the characteristics of a lecture that easily developed into a tirade. He simply forgot his companions and behaved as though he were addressing a multitude, repeating the same stories over and over again in exactly the same form, almost as though he had memorised them. After the First World War, "his awkward mannerisms" were noted. At that time, he wore his gangster hat and trenchcoat over his dinner jacket, toting a pistol and carrying as usual his dog whip, he cut a bizarre figure in the salons of Munich’s upper-crust. But his very eccentricity of dress and exaggerated mannerism saw him lionized by condescending hosts and fellow guests. In his early days, he wore the Bavarian costume. His clothes were not clean; with his mouth full of brown, rotted teeth and his long fingernails, he presented a rather grotesque figure. His gait was a very lady-like walk; dainty little steps. Every few steps he ****** his right shoulder nervously, his left leg snapping up as he did so. He also had a tic in his face that caused the corner of his lips to curl upwards. People found his look "staring and dead."
Fitzgerald claims, therefore, that Adolf Hitler met the criteria for autistic psychopathy described by Hans Asperger, and was not schizophrenic.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 205AAHDPOI
Don't know where the person who posted that answer found that text, but I still doubt Hitler had Asperger's.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
A man at a bar had to use the restroom, but didn't |
05 Mar 2024, 3:58 pm |
These Are Three Dog Breeds You Didn't Know Are Scottish |
13 Apr 2024, 7:20 pm |
Feel bad that I didn't start working at 16, 17 or 18 |
27 Mar 2024, 4:20 pm |
A Deer Hunter's Tree Stand Is Taken Over By Barn Owls |
06 Apr 2024, 6:51 am |