Virtue In The Meno

Virtue In The Meno
In the Meno, Socrates finds the meaning of the word virtue in terms of human wisdom. This
definition pursues a further question which is "what makes the quest for wisdom possible?"
(Gallagher, Commentary on the Meno). In the beginning of the dialogue, Meno asks Socrates if
virtue can be taught. Socrates says that doesn't have a complete and comprehensive understanding
of virtue. This is an example of human wisdom, knowing that you don't know something.
Hannah Arendt is a very famous philosopher. She wrote a paper on Adolf Eichmann who was a
logistics specializer during the Holocaust. In short terms, he was in charge of the train schedule and
had to make sure that it was picking up people in the right places at the right times. In 1963,
Eichmann
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Adolf Eichmann: The Existential Failure
In her report of Nazi SS member Adolph Eichmann's trial in Jerusalem, first published as a series of
articles in The New Yorker, Hannah Arendt managed to spark great controversy, both in the
academy and among the general public. The primary attack on Arendt was that she seemed to
"blame the victim", in this case the Jews, for their role in their own extermination during the
Holocaust. While by no means the focus of her book, this perceived accusation in combination with
her portrayal of Eichmann as an apparently sane, ordinary man made readers uncomfortable at best
and at worst vindictive and unforgiving in their critique. In assuming the objective, detached role
she did, she risked ostracizing herself from both friends and colleagues as ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
(106) Eichmann makes such claims of being victimized, stating he stopped being the "master of his
own deeds" (136), and became the "victim of a fallacy." (248) In this way, he also denies that he is
free. The greatest human freedom is the ability to choose one's attitude and one's actions, which
Eichmann relinquished by asserting that he lacked a choice, and therefore carried no burden of
responsibility. Bound to the notions of responsibility and freedom is that of individuality, or the
ability to think for oneself. Accepting responsibility relies on acknowledgement that one is an
individual. Inability to think for oneself allows for the incorrect belief, which Eichmann possessed,
that responsibility can be thrust onto others. In passing the responsibility of one's actions to another,
one gives up the power to create one's essence and define who one is. This is the cowardly way out
and the result is a failure to realize one's humanity, as there is no real way to run from responsibility
and no real scapegoat. Our actions allow us to define who we are, or what our essence will be. It
follows, then, that by obeying orders and acting out another's will we are allowing them to tell us
who we are, and impose meaning onto our lives that ought to be created subjectively. Eichmann
lived his life always as a "joiner" of some group or another, with the distressing idea of doing
otherwise largely influencing his continued

Stanley Milgram Impact
Milgram has an enduring impact. His work has influenced society, though his work was incomplete.
In "What Makes a Person a Perpetrator? The Intellectual, Moral, and Methodological Arguments for
Revisiting Milgram's Research on the Influence of Authority" by S. Gibson, he discusses other
factors overlooked in Milgram's experiments and demonstrates certain points through the Adolf
Eichmann.
While Eichmann was on trial for his crimes in WWII, at Yale, Milgram was leading studies. He
owed a lot of his inspiration to Hannan Arendt and her book, Eichmann in Jerusalem, where she
detailed the trial. In it, she coined the phrase "the banality of evil" to describe how regular people
commit atrocities for banal reasons, like 'I was just doing what I ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The 'everyman' portrayals of the actors, the scripts, the drama of it all. There was also a conflict of
interests created, because he was the maker of the documentary and the scientific investigator at the
center of the experiments. It has been argued that the success of the experiment is because of how
Milgram handled the stagecraft, and how that in itself popularized his theories on obedience. The
documentary may be compelling at face value, but the scripted–nature of the film, and the lack of
scientific process and experiment used was not acceptable. The director himself was biased from the
beginning to one side of the 'obedience to authority' argument and it showed. And with the results of
the 'Bring A Friend' condition not adding up to his original findings, more scrutiny was added to
Obedience and it fell out of

The Banality Of Evil By Arendt Staub And Hannah Arendt
Over the years following the Holocaust, people like Ervin Staub and Hannah Arendt have shared
their different views on the idea of evil. Staub and Arendt both have very different ideas and
concepts. Arendt's concept, "the banality of evil" is a very controversial explanation, while Staub's
goes into more depth and his arguments on evil are more powerful. The causes of evil are
accessible; not ultimately mysterious and we now can predict genocide. Both people share their
explanations of National Socialist evil. According to Staub who wrote The Roots of Evil, "the
essence of evil is the destruction of human beings because of who they are (pg25)." One of Staub's
major claims discusses difficult life conditions, like economic problems and ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
With intense difficult life conditions, they give rise to powerful motives and lead to ways of
fulfilling them, in which that group can go against a subgroup. They go against other weaker groups,
diminish that group and then join new strong groups, like Nazis under Hitler and his ideology.
"People will do anything to satisfy their own interests (pg26)." People will do whatever it takes,
even if it involves killing others. Eventually this will lead the society to change and have a
continuum of destruction that will end in genocide. In the end it is shown that difficult life
conditions and certain cultural characteristics allows a society to become vulnerable, which makes it
easy to be taken over. The societal–political organization can have an authoritarian/totalitarian
system that involves mistreatment. Once again there is that concept that people follow and listen to
their new leader in hope for things, like life to get only better and they adopt a new ideology in hope
for a beneficial change. "Nonetheless, the new leaders and their followers are rooted in the culture,
frequently a homogeneous one with a limited set of dominant values (pg33)." There is a great deal
of obedience to authority with respect. Also, they join a group to be or feel connected to others, like
themselves. That plays a major role with the in–group and out–group, in which the in–group is
powerful and the out–group is inferior as well as being scapegoated. The out–group is being blamed,

Kindertransport Facts
On the night of November 9–10, 1938, Jewish shops and synagogues were destroyed by the
Germans. This night was called the Kristallnacht, which was also known as the Night of Broken
Glass. Many Jewish parents decided to send their children to Great Britain, in hopes of keeping their
kids away from the danger happening around them. The Kindertransport was the transportation that
children from ages 17 and younger used to travel to Great Britain. Not all of the children were able
to get on the Kindertransport because space was limited, but about 10,000 of them made it. During
that time, many people from different countries and states helped Jewish children escape from
Germany. This is an example of the universe of obligation, which is how we determine ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He was a professor of law who worked at the Hebrew University, in Jerusalem. Bentwich asked a
Dutch Christian named, Gertruida Wijsmuller–Meijer, to go to Austria and get permission to bring
children away from Germany. Wijsmuller–Meijer was part of the Children's Refugee Committee in
the Netherlands and was fluent at speaking the German language. Wijsmuller–Meijer left papers
behind that proved she was part of the rescue committee because she rushed to Austria. Without the
papers, she had no proof. In the end, she still managed to persuade Adolf Eichmann to grant her
permission to bring children out of Germany. Adolf Eichmann was the head of the Jewish Office of
the Gestapo. The Gestapo was the secret police of Germany. Eichmann gave his approval because
his country's goal was to get rid of all the Jews, so he didn't mind helping Wijsmuller–Meijer. The
universe of obligation connects to Norman Bentwich because he helped many children escape from
Germany, even though no one asked for his help. Bentwich was determined to help and protect
Jewish children. Gertruida Wijsmuller–Meijer also connects to the universe of obligation because
she joined the Children's Refugee Committee. By joining the Children's Refugee Committee, it
shows that she was good–hearted and really wanted to help the children as much as she could. Adolf
Eichmann relates to the universe of obligation

How Did Adolf Eichmann Contribute To The Holocaust?
Adolf Eichmann was born in Solingen, Germany in 1906. Adolf was one of the most important
contributors to the Holocaust and the deportation of the collecting of European Jews during the
Holocaust. As a teen Adolf moved to Linz, Austria with his family, where he completed his
schooling and started training for mechanical engineering. Adolf moved from job to job as a day
labourer, a salesman for a vacuum oil company and a office worker.
At the age of 26 Adolf Eichmann joined the Austrian Nazi Party. Nazi's fled to Bavaria after their
party was banned in Austria which became the Austrian Legion later. Adolf later joined the SS and
then served as a corporal member of the SS at Dachau concentration camp. Nazi terrorists got
financial, logistic and material support from Germany. He studied all aspects of Jewish lifestyles
and attended Jewish meetings and later became known as a 'Jewish specialist'. Adolf was then
assigned to investigate possible solutions to the 'Jewish solution' which was to find out ways to treat
the Jews.
Adolf was the main person behind moving jewish people out of their homes and into ghettos, by
cramming thousands of people onto trains and into cars and trucks Adolf sent millions of Jews to
their death. He wanted to move the Jews out and torture them by putting them into concentration
camps
Ghettos were chosen based on how the Nazi's wanted to get rid of the Jews. Later, the leader
(führer) had ordered that the Jews would be "physically exterminated".

Jeff Eichmann Criminal Case
The trial of Adolf Eichmann took place in Jerusalem, Israel, after Eichmann was found and captured
in Argentina by several Jews and other survivors of the Holocaust. Eichmann's identity at the time,
Lothar Hermann, was discovered in 1953 when Simon Wiesenthal received a letter stating that
Eichmann had been seen in Buenos Aires. Israeli Prime Minister David Ben–Gurion decided that
Eichmann must be captured rather than extradited, and brought to Israel for trial. Eichmann was
captured near his home in Buenos Aires on May 11, 1960, where he was taken to a police station in
Yagur, Israel. In 1961, Eichmann was on trial in front of three judges: Moshe Landau, Benjamin
Halevi, and Yitzhak Raveh. In 1952, Mr. Hugo Black, an American politician who served as a
Democratic U.S. Senator, said for a unanimous Supreme Court, "Due process of law is satisfied
when one is present in court is convicted of crime after having been fairly apprised of the charges
against him and after a fair trial in accordance with constitutional procedural safeguards. There is
nothing in the Constitution that requires a court to permit a ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Aside from these problems that were faced during the trial, the judges resorted to doctrines of
domestic criminal law to decide the novel category of crimes against humanity that were committed
over an extended period of time, in different places, and by numerous actors. The Israeli court
developed a unique interpretation of the final solution as a crime that implicated different agents in
its various stages of implementation and was able in this way to attribute responsibility to Eichmann
as a principle

The Trials Of The Nazis During The Holocaust
Can the average person, when confronted by authority and ordered to hurt another human being, be
able to do so? According to the results of Stanley Milgram's famous experiments on Obedience to
Authority and the numerous testimonies from Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials, the answer is yes,
provided that the individual committing the act was ordered to do so by an authority figure and/or
believes that responsibility will be deferred to said higher authority. There is therefore potential that
the actions of the Nazis during the Holocaust can be reasonably explained by the results of
Milgram's experiments and Milgram's Agency Theory. To offer some background, the Nuremberg
Trials were a series of trials held in Nuremberg, Germany between the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
(Milgram, pg. 4) This series of experiments would end up becoming famous for its shocking results;
two–thirds of subjects, when ordered to by experimenters, were willing to shock the learner to
dangerous voltage levels. (Milgram, pgs. 6–8) This spawned numerous ideas about human nature
and whether obedience is ingrained in our DNA. (McLeod) More importantly, these results helped
Milgram to formulate a theory, the Agency Theory, in 1974. Agency theory states that there are two
states of behaviour when in a social situation: the autonomous state, where people chose their own
actions and are willing to take responsibility for those actions, and the agentic state where "people
allow others to direct their actions, and then pass off the responsibility for the consequences to the
person giving the orders. In other words, they act as agents for another person's will." (McLeod)
Milgram stated that there are two triggers that put a person into the agentic state: they must a)
believe that the person giving the orders is qualified to give such orders, and b) believe that the
authority that is ordering them to do something will accept responsibility for anything that may
happen as a result of their actions. (McLeod) Milgram's experiments gave some credit to this theory
as when subjects "were reminded they had responsibility for their own actions, almost none of them
were prepared to obey." (McLeod) This is contrasted by the fact that even the most

The And Of The Nazi During The Holocaust
When you hear the words Holocaust, Nazi, Hitler, or genocide, your mind immediately thinks they
are evil, malicious, unjust, and immoral. You think the people in charge, who commanded the
encampment and death of millions of Jews are guilty of immorality and murder. Are they though? In
Hannah Arendt 's book Eichmann in Jerusalem, she discusses Adolf Eichmann one of the highest
ranked leaders of the Nazi during the Holocaust. He was behind the ordering of Jews to be taken
from their homes and put into camps or to die, yet when he was captured and put on trials for his
crimes he pled innocent. He said nothing he did was immoral according to Kantian philosophy.
Would Kant agree with Eichmann? I believe he would not, and that Eichmann misunderstood and
misused Kant's ideas. So who was Adolf Eichmann? He started out just a normal German person, in
a normal family and home. "The Israeli court psychiatrist who examined Eichmann found him a
"completely normal man, more normal, at any rate, than I am after examining him," the implication
being that the coexistence of normality and bottomless cruelty explodes our ordinary conceptions
and present the true enigma of the trial" (Arendt xv). He had some difficulties and failures in his
early career. He failed to finish high school, and then tried to work work for a mining company and
to be a salesman, both to no avail. That is when he joined the Nazi party. He started out as just a
secretary, but do to his good skills of organization,

Essay on Eichmann in Jerusalem
Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil In her book, Eichmann in Jerusalem,
Hannah Arendt uses the life and trial of Adolf Eichmann to explore man's responsibility for evils
committed under orders or as a result of the law. Due to the fact that she believed that Eichmann
was neither anti–Semitic, nor a psychopath, Arendt was widely criticized for treating Eichmann too
sympathetically. Still, her work on the Eichmann trial is among the most respected works on the
issue to date. Eichmann built a defense during his trial by arguing that he was not responsible for his
actions because he was acting under orders and in accordance with the law of his land. Since his
orders came from Adolf Hitler himself, Eichmann ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Hannah Arendt ends her book with the phrase "The Banality of Evil." This phrase encapsulates her
belief that the great evils of mankind have not been committed by sociopaths or the criminally
insane, but rather by ordinary people who have accepted the decisions of corrupt authorities without
question. Current examples of this behavior can be found internationally, specifically when looking
at the "ethnic cleansing" policies of some African nations, but also within the United States at the
corporate level. Employees of Enron, Arthur Anderson, WorldCom and other disgraced corporations
have claimed innocence due to the fact that they only acted as they were instructed by superiors.
The most alarming thing about Arendt's book is that she is able to make a compelling case that the
greatest evils of mankind are committed by ordinary people. Her work forces one to look at the
world and realize that the Holocaust was not an isolated incident committed by blood thirsty
sociopaths. One must realize that the decision making processes that created an environment
accepting of the "Final Solution" is still alive an well today as it has been throughout history. The
weight of personal moral choice

Emotion and Memory of the Holocaust Essay
In the aftermath of the Jewish Holocaust, an outpouring of eyewitness accounts by both survivors
and perpetrators has surfaced as historical evidence. For many, this has determined what modern
popular culture remembers about this atrocious event. Emotion obviously plays a vital role in the
accounts of the survivors, yet can it be considered when discussing the historical significance of the
murder of six million European Jews by the Third Reich? Emotion is the expression of thoughts and
beliefs affected by feeling and sensibility of an individual regarding a certain event or individual. In
terms of the Holocaust, emotion is overwhelmingly prevalent in the survivors' tales of their
experiences, conveyed in terms of life, death, and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
She writes that "the 'distortion' related to memory...is not so much of facts or interpretations, but a
distortion from the lack of congruity between personal experience and expectation...and the
institutional representation of the past on the other" (Crane, 1). At some point, scholars must
interpret a filtered account of the survivor's tale, searching through the layers of important facts and
emotional embellishments, and find the most important knowledge buried deep within. Yet how may
one distinguish fact from emotion? Famed Holocaust historian James Young, in his 1997 work
"Toward a Received History of the Holocaust," asks:
Is it possible to write a history that includes some oblique reference to such deep memory, but which
leaves it essentially intact, untouched and thereby deep? In this section, I suggest, after Patrick
Hutton, that 'What is at issue here is not how history can recover memory, but, rather, what memory
will bequeath to history' (Young, 1)
Clearly, this is an issue with which scholars have struggled to deal for years, however this paper will
show that it is quite possible to distiniguish the two sides.
The methodological approach undertaken in this paper confronts each account as one in which
memory and fact have merged together, through which even

The Diary Of Anne Frank
Anne Frank and Hannah Arendt are two prominent female names that arise when one thinks of the
Holocaust. Each of these Jewish woman had a very unique experience during this grim time, one a
bright–eyed, young girl who was forced to go into hiding, the other a philosopher that managed to
escape. However each pondered the workings of the brutality going on around her, and put it into
words. Frank and Arendt each discuss their views on human nature in the face of the Holocaust in
their works. In this paper, I intend to discuss each woman's view, and then discuss how such a
similar viewpoint can be supported in two very different ways.
The Diary of Anne Frank is a personal work written by the young Anne Frank herself. The book is
not a work of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Yet I keep them, because in spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart
(278)."
Frank's reasoning for her point of view does not come with any sort of logical rationalization or in–
depth analysis. Her explanation is as follows, "I simply can't build up my hopes on a foundation
consisting of confusion, misery, and death.... I can feel the sufferings of millions and yet, if I look up
into the heavens, I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and
tranquility will return again. In the meantime, I must uphold my ideals, for perhaps the time will
come when I shall be able to carry them out (279)." Frank's beliefs simply stem from her
wholehearted faith in the goodness of humanity, hopefulness for the future, and confidence in her
God. There is no deeper thinking to her viewpoint, it is purely based off of a blind hope.
While philosopher and author of the book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil,
Hannah Arendt would agree with Frank that human nature is not evil, she would certainly criticize
for her lack of reasoning to back up her beliefs. In fact, Arendt's book revolves around careful
explanation of her views about Adolph Eichmann, a man who was significantly involved in the
deportation process of the Jewish people to the concentration camps during the Holocaust. After
attending his trial in

Hannah Arendt 's Interpretation Of The Eichmann Trial
Term Paper: A Life on Trial: What Motivated Adolf Eichmann and How Have Future Generations
Understood Him? Abstract: In this term paper, I will be focussing on the contradictory reviews on
Hannah Arendt's interpretation of The Eichmann Trial. With information from her book as well as
commentary from other authors specifically David Cesarani and Deborah E. Lipstadt, I will be
focussing on arguments in relation to Eichmann's war crimes and the role he played in the mass–
murder of European Jewry. Adolf Eichmann as a man was considered to be mediocre. The
importance of understanding who he was as a person is much more than his anti–semitic values. He
was raised in northern Austria, in a middle–class household where casual anti–semitism was nothing
out of the ordinary. In 1920 Austria, Eichmann considered Jews to be acquaintances. He was
employed by Jews as an Oil and Kerosene salesman. He had Jewish relatives through marriage.
Arendt specifically analyses that Anti–semitism was not the root cause for Eichmann joining the
Nazi Party in 1932. She stresses the reason that he was a joiner. Cesarani delves deeper into
Eichmann's personal connections and issues more, he rationalised that Eichmann admired the Nazi's
position regarding the Treaty of Versailles. But he also agreed with Arendt's opinion that anti–
semitism was not the reason that led Eichmann into the Nazi Party. "Although she was wonderfully
perceptive about the structure and working of the Third Reich and Eichmann's

Racial Cognition And The Ethics Of Implicit Bias
Self–awareness can be defined as the understanding of one's own character and actions. By being
self–aware, people can better understand their own circumstances and the circumstances of others.
However, people are often unconsciously swayed towards making biased choices because they do
not recognize external or internal factors that affect their decision making. By being self–aware of
these various external and internal factors, people can make more accurate decisions regarding a
scenario because they recognize the existence of these biases or factors. Furthermore, the ability to
be self–aware indicates that an individual has a high capacity for empathy because they can
understand other people's situations, which is the definition of empathy. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In one experiment, involving various bad smells, it was noted that the participants that had been
exposed to a mild–stink or strong–stink smell were more severe in their moral judgements than
participants exposed to no bad smell. In all four experiments, the same results were obtained,
participants that felt disgust were likely to be more severe in their judgments. This paper concludes
that participants who believe in their intuitions were often tricked by outside forces, such as a bad
smell. Noting this phenomenon, the paper suggests that self–awareness of these outside factors can
help mitigate their effect. However, they also suggest it is not wise to completely remove somatic
markers. In one study, the patients were not able to incorporate feelings and sensations into their
decision making; as a result, the patients were unable to come to conclusions on any simple subject
matter. The paper concludes that it is ok to rely on these intuitions even if they can be easily
influenced, but it also says we must be aware of factors that can distort our intuitions. By following
this methodology, one can mitigate making biased decisions due to his or her

Summary Of Eichmann In Jerusalem
Trial Background
"Eichmann in Jerusalem" by Hanna Arendt is the tale of the trial of Adolph Eichmann a mid–
positioning SS officer who had been a specialist in constrained displacement and after that later in
the all the more lethal constrained departure. Departure got to be synonymous with death as the
years of the war progressed and the Nazis were resolved to satisfy Hitler's requests for the Final
Solution of the Jewish issue.
Not at all like the high–positioning Nazis who had been attempted directly after the war in
Nuremberg, Germany, Eichmann's trial didn't happen until 1961 after he was chased down and
found living under a false personality in Argentina by Israel specialists. What was likewise diverse
about Eichmann's trial is that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For the field of international criminal justice, the Eichmann trial again left a lasting legacy, sparking
debate on what remains one of the central challenges of our time: the identification of an
individual's criminal culpability in a bureaucratic context.
Arendt theory of Eichmann
Drawing primarily on Eichmann (though you can use/refer to other material from the course e.g. the
interview/article by Jaspers), answer and discuss the following question(s):
Was "justice" done in the case of Adolf Eichmann? What does the Eichmann trial reveal about both
the strengths and limits of the trial to achieve justice in such cases? Do you agree with Arendt that
the judgment of court was ultimately justified, even if the trial itself failed to live up its promise?
In your answer be sure to discuss Arendt's theory of Eichmann as both "thoughtless" and
"terrifyingly normal" and her contention that we should understand evil as "banal". Finally,
comment on why the book might still resonate today. What might it say about how we understand
responsibility and the way we think of, and address, the broad category of "crimes against

Kant And Morality
When talking about whether or not consequences of an act have anything to do with morality, one
must think of all the ways in which an individual's acts could be considered morally wrong.
Morality relates to conduct, whereas they both involve some type of action that is partaken by the
individual, which can be mistaken as being "good" even though the consequences are considered
bad (Dewey, 1891).When a person performs an action, and the outcome of that action is a negative
one, we often find ourselves blaming anything other than the individual themselves because we
believe they had no foresight on what was going to happen. Dewey describes that when conduct and
character are involved in telling if somebody is being moral, or immoral, we are unable to say
whether or not the action was good or bad until we know how that action turns out and we know
what the consequences are. (Dewey, 1891).
In order to decide whether or not a consequence of an action is morally good, or morally wrong, one
must first recognize ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Duties and laws apply to an individual and their morality. Kant states that morality cannot be based
on man, we cannot base morality on experiences because morality is unconditioned. (Kant, 1998).
Metaphysical philosophy is pure, much as morality is unconditioned and pure. Metaphysics applies
to our efforts of understanding the world around us, it is independent from all experiences and
knowledge and applies to all, much as morality applies to all. Metaphysics cannot be compared to
the empirical because the empirical is based on our experiences, it is completely individual and
therefore cannot be applied to all morality. Kant states that you cannot understand practical morals
without metaphysics. (Kant, 1998). This is the basis of understanding whether or not Kant believes
consequences of an act have anything to do with

What Is Arendt's Perception Of Evil
Arendt and the Perception of Evil Hannah Arendt, the biopic that explores her encounter at Adolf
Eichmann's trial, leading her to write the book Eichmann in Jerusalem, creates an unorthodox
depiction of the man. From the superficial mindset or the ignorant (which the film explores), it
seems that Arendt defends Eichmann–which is not remotely accurate. The novel and film both
explore Arendt's mind and what motivated her to write the novel. By looking at both the film and
the novel, we will see exactly what Arendt thought of Eichmann as a person and other observances
that she made while witnessing his trial. In the novel, Arendt writes: "In Eichmann's view, people
like Becher were corrupt, but corruption could not very well have caused his crises of conscience,
for although he was ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This is what Arendt drives at when describing Eichmann and his role in the Nationalist Party in
Germany; inherently, he wasn't evil. On the contrary, he was just described as doing his job. So, to
Arendt and others who were interested in understanding, what made Eichmann follow and commit
the atrocities that he did? Was it pressure from his environment? Would fear have compelled him to
follow without understanding what he was doing? One strong theory that Arendt steered towards is
motivation by self–interest or the possibility to live more comfortably. "The way he explained his
role in this matter, in Jerusalem, showed clearly how he had once justified it to himself: as a military
necessity that would bring him additional benefit of an important new role in the emigration
business" (Arendt, 144). This shows that there may be a balance: on one side, he may have been
forced into this

trials involving genocide or crimes against humanity
'...it is often argued that trials involving genocide or crimes against humanity are less about judging
the person than about establishing the truth of the events.'
'In nearly all the criminal prosecutions concerned with crimes against humanity committed during or
after World War II, some observers have doubted the ability of the criminal law to deal with the
events precisely in view of their enormous moral, historical, or political significance.'
Show Trial v. The Need for Justice to be Done in the Public Realm
Hausner's intention was to not only demonstrate Eichmann's guilt but to present material about the
entire Holocaust, thus producing a comprehensive record. In addition to wartime documents,
material presented as evidence ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Instead, it has been thought necessary so as to enable the commencement of the healing process in
the victim: only when the injustice to which a person has been subjected has been publicly
recognised, the conditions for recovering from trauma are present and the dignity of the victim may
be restored.'
But, arguably, this healing process had already been allowed to take place. Trials at Nuremberg,
subsequent trials by the Allies, etc.
'...if crimes against humanity really emerge from Kant labelled "radical evil", an evil that exceeds
the bounds of instrumental rationality, that seeks no objective beyond itself, then...' the deterrent
force of international criminal proceedings would be minimal.
'...fitting crimes against humanity or other massive human rights violations into the deterrence frame
requires some rather implausible psychological generalisations. Either the crimes are aspects of
political normality –

Arendt Eichmann and Anti-Semitism
Arendt, Eichmann and Anti–Semitism Introduction: The Holocaust invokes a great many emotions
based on the scale of the atrocities committed and the degree of hatred that both allowed them to
occur and that remained embedded in world culture thereafter. This is why the trial of Adolph
Eichmann, which laid out the extent of crimes committed by the Nazis and which levied them
against the alleged architect of the Final Solution, would promote so much debate. In spite of the
obviation that the Jewish people had a right to seek justice for the roughly six million that perished
in European concentration camps, the use of Eichmann as an avatar and the nature of the trials
themselves would invoke criticism. The most noted of this criticism is that offered by Hannah
Arendt's 1963 examination, Eichmann in Jerusalem: The Banality of Evil. Discussion: The text is
noted for its sharp criticism of the tactics used to embody the whole of the Nazi party's crimes in the
form of one seemingly meek bureaucrat. However, the text is also the subject of considerable
criticism itself for a tone that seems both to minimize the Jewish suffering in the Holocaust and to
purposively gloss over the truly determinant role played by Eichmann in the implementation of the
Final Solution. Indeed, though Arendt is highly critical of the tribunal, she does recognize in quoting
the prosecution in the trial that Eichmann had not only escaped judgment by evading the Nuremberg
Trials implemented by Allied

Normalizing Thoughtlessness Essay
Arendt examined and reflected upon what happens to come too passed such as conditioning and
normalizing the activity of rational people regardless of specific situational context, such as a
natural condition to man in evildoing. The face of evil portrayal the high–ranking SS official at
Eichmann's trial in Jerusalem is not necessarily that of a radically wicked neurotic mastermind, but
comes in the form of a banal and unimpressive distortion of normalcy. Arendt argues that the
banality of evil is standardizing as thoughtlessness into the unthinkable action of human's terrible
deeds in a systematic and methodical way to explain the normalization of the stupid acts of men. In
Hannah Arendt's book Eichmann in Jerusalem, I argue that the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Homogenizing the death camps at a distance from execution helps render Eichmann's boundaries to
be blurred. His understanding of responsibility "was to give justice to both parties (Arendt page
45)." For him, it was clear who set the policies. His role was to implement and his job was not to
kill anyone besides following standardizing guidelines. Eichmann clearly follow his duties in the
allocated of resources on the basis of effective contribution of a larger system, workers derive
support from interactions with others in the mutual effort, and complicity is masked by the
routineness of the work, interdependence, and distance from the results. He found ways to define
and scrutinize away the infliction of suffering and death as a consequence is to realize fear and a
sense for us to defense ourselves.
Arendt reasons that Eichmann's life give him one aspect of the concept of evil as a banal lesson
learned to show how individuals that was involved in the trail of Eichmann as the present. It
perpetrates the thoughtlessness of evil as ordinariness and is neither demonic nor monstrous, with
no foresight of the future. Arendt's insight of Eichmann as a common man is seen by his obvious
shallowness, which left Ardent in amazement of the unaccounted evil committed by him in
organizing the deportation of Jews. What Arendt had detected in Eichmann was not stupidity, she
perceived him as something entirely unconstructive and thoughtless. Eichmann

Comparing Eichmann In Jerusalem 'And Lady Macbeth'
I am going to explore the similarities between Adolf Eichmann in the book Eichmann in Jerusalem
and Lady Macbeth in the book Macbeth. Both characters go through similar situations where they
make plans to kill people. Eichmann kills millions of Jewish people and it doesn't seem to phase
him at all. He even said that "he would leap laughing into the grave because the feeling that he had
five million on his conscious would be for him a source of extraordinary satisfaction." On the other
hand Lady Macbeth plans for her husband to kill a good family friend King Duncan. This plan of
killing King duncan may have stemmed from Lady Macbeth as well as Macbeth himself being
dissatisfied with their lives. Perhaps mirroring the Faust Legend. When the King is murdered Lady
Macbeth keeps very calm even when Macbeth is falling apart. She tries to console Macbeth by
telling him to not think too deeply about what he did. This is how Lady Macbeth and Adolf
Eichmann are similar, they lack remorse and keep very calm after planning peoples death.
Franklin, Cynthia G. "Eichmann And His Ghosts: Affective States And The Unstable Status Of The
Human."
This article basically talks about how Eichmann's feelings, or lack of feelings affected the way he
acted. Because ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He questions how it would work and how they would get away with it. After a little while Lady
Macbeth talks him into killing King Duncan. Before Macbeth is supposed to kill King Duncan he
tries to back out. This infuriates Lady Macbeth and she says When you durst do it," then says "then
you were a man"(Macbeth p.49). Basically saying that he would be more of a man if he stuck to his
word and went through with killing King Duncan. He eventually gets the courage and kills King
Duncan. When Macbeth comes back with the blood on this hands he starts to freak out saying that
his hands look pitiful. Lady Macbeth stays completely calm and tells him to not say such foolish

Critical Analysis Of Eichmann In Jerusalem By Hannah Arendt
According to Hannah Arendt, the author of Eichmann in Jerusalem, the ability to think for oneself is
having internal dialogue about one's actions(contemplation). Now, in my opinion, being able to
think for oneself is a moral requirement, and actions should not be judged immoral if free thought is
absent. Moreover, I analyze the case of Eichmann with the interpretation that moral requirement
may relate to good or bad actions. Furthermore, there are many difficult situations in which
someone may not have the option to think for themselves. For example, in the case of someone who
is cognitively impaired, or possesses a low IQ, the law tends to be lenient with punishments, and
most are placed into rehabilitation instead of facing severe consequences. Thus, if a person is
mentally ill, or cognitively not present to understand what they did was wrong, then society does not
consider them as immoral beings. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that a person must be able to
effectively control their own thoughts, or even actions, in order for them to be deemed moral or
immoral. Restrictions on someone's ability to maintain their own thoughts include indoctrination, a
commanding moral authority(God), and/or an intense circumstances. An example that includes two
of those three is the Biblical story of Abraham's binding of his son Isaac. In the story, Abraham
manifests an inability to think for himself due to the overpowering command of God to sacrifice his
son, Isaac, as an offering.

Banality Of Evil In The Brothers Karamazov
Banal Evil A villain fighting the hero is usually the way we envision evil in media such as
television, music, and books. In real life however evil is not as clear but the definition we can best
use is about evil being the inverse of good. For example if giving is good stealing is evil because it
is the opposite of giving. Another example would be more complicated such as white collar crimes.
These crimes are nonviolent and financially motivated in which the criminal is seemingly normal
but is evil because the criminal steals from their victims. This is the banality of evil in which
because the criminal does not look like a monster they are not inherently evil, if anything the
normality in their dress makes the crime even more wicked. The banality of evil is pervasive in the
way it can hide the real evil behind a mask of a common person. Evil is also the suffering of
children especially because we take their innocence away. It seems easy to have the suffering of one
in order to prevent the suffering of many but this is a twisted form of logic if the one suffering is a
child. This type of evil is indefensible and I do not mean disciplining children I mean the excerpt of
The Brothers Karamazov. Both evils are essentially the result of a corrupted good in Mr. Eichmann's
case he followed the wrong orders, and for Ivan children's happiness was turned into children's
suffering. The reason evil is difficult to pin down and list is because it is not a real demon creating
world

Banality of Evil and Adolf Eichmann Essay
"It was as though in those last minutes he was summing up the lesson that this long course in human
wickedness had taught us––the lesson of the fearsome, the word–and–thought–defying banality of
evil" (252).
The capture and trial of Adolf Eichmann, which evoked legal and moral controversy across all
nations, ended in his hanging over four decades ago. The verdict dealing with Eichmann's
involvement with the Final Solution has never been in question; this aspect was an open–and–shut
case which was put to death with Eichmann in 1962. The deliberation surrounding the issues of
Eichmann's motives, however, are still in question, bringing forth in–depth analyses of the aspects
of evil.
Using Adolf Eichmann as a subject and poster–boy ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"The sort of person that Eichmann appeared to be did not square either with the deeds for which he
was being tried or with the traditional preconceptions about the kind of person who does evil"
(Geddes). Throughout the trial, Arendt is conflicted by what she wants to seen when she analyzes
Eichmann, and struggles greatly when she finds he does not embody the crude and inhumane
thoughts she associated with the history of the Holocaust. It is this absence of the profound hatred of
Jews, along with the normalcy he possesses, that creates the emblematic role of banal evil for Adolf
Eichmann.
A man who does not seem to be filled with rage, Eichmann can not been depicted as a satanic
monster, clearly separate from citizens who fall under terms such as normal or sane. In fact, he was
a man who's goals were similar to all working class people. Eichmann's desires to be an idealist and
a successful businessman may draw sympathy, even though it is clearly taboo to consider someone
normal if capable of participating in a genocide.
Studying Eichmann's relationships with Jews previous to his involvement in the Final Solution
become counterintuitive when looking for any sign of hatred he embodied toward the Jewish
culture. "It is obvious there is no case of insane hatred of Jews, of fanatical anti–Semitism or
indoctrination of any kind" (26). Furthermore, he was related to Jews, as his mother had Jewish
relatives.

The Power Of Adolf Hitler
In his book Mein Kampf, (My Struggle), Adolf Hitler wrote "the more unified this use of of the
fighting will of a people, the greater will be the magnetic attractive force of a movement" (365). In
1933, the National Socialist German Workers' (Nazi) Party took hold of Germany at a vulnerable
point in the nation's history after losing World War I. Hitler, leader of the Nazi party and the Fuhrer
of the Third Reich, convinced people of the radical "truths" he proposed, promising to lead
Germany to utopia and ultimate international power. Although the Nazi ideals were radical and
outrageous, Germans obeyed the Nazi Party because of their power to instill fear, to create a false
sense of beneficence, and to persuade masses to their side through crowd theory. Throughout the
Third Reich, the Nazis coerced many citizens by engendering a subconscious sense of fear––fear of
the consequences of not outwardly siding with their ideals and fear of judgement. In nature, humans
desire to be liked and to fit in. In his memoir, Defying Hitler, Sebastian Haffner recounts becoming
an SS recruit unwilling despite despising the Nazis. Even though he did not want to be on the Nazi
side, out of fear, he too wore "jackboots and a uniform with a swastika armband... Now we were the
ones embodying an implicit threat of violence against all bystanders. They greeted the flag or
disappeared. For fear of us. For fear of me" (1, Haffner, Defying Hitler). What he describes as an
"implicit" fear, drove the

Hannah Arendt on the Banality of Evil
Hannah Arendt is a German Jewish philosopher, born in 1906 and died in 1975. She studied
philosophy with Martin Heidegger as Professor. Her works deal with the nature of power and
political subjects such as democracy, authority, and totalitarianism. She flew away to France in
1933, when Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in Germany. She flew away from Europe to the United
States after escaping from the concentration camp of Gurs. She became a Professor in New York
city, in which she became an active member of the German Jewish community. In 1963, she was
sent to Jerusalem to report on Eichmann's trial by The New Yorker. Hannah Arendt's thoughts on
Eichmann's trial were expected to be harsh, considering the philosopher's roots. However, her ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This complete absence of thinking is what attracted the philosopher's interest and that is how she
started to question the problem of the eventual inner connection between the ability or inability to
think and the problem of evil. Hannah Arendt elaborated on the notion of banality of evil through
the case of Eichmann. She argues in Eichmann in Jerusalem that Eichmann, far from being a
monster, was nothing less than a thoughtless bureaucrat, passionate only in his desire to please his
superiors. She describes him in these words: "the unthinking functionary capable of enormous evil"
who revealed "the dark potential of modern bureaucratic men". According to Hannah Arendt, evil
would not come from wicked individuals, but from the "nobodies", from those who do not have the
ability to think, and thus cannot tell what is wrong and what is right. As she was influenced by the
sociologist Max Weber, who wrote concerning bureaucracies that "It is horrible to think that the
world could one day be filled with nothing but those little cogs, little men clinging to their jobs and
striving towards bigger ones", she elaborates on the danger of bureaucracy and its possible
responsibility when it comes to evil. Bureaucracies assign very specific tasks to each individual and
these specific tasks cannot be seen as right or wrong by the ones accomplishing them, it is when
they are all together that they can be examined this way. Eichmann was simply obeying the rules,

The Milgram Experiment
The banality of evil expression was coined by Hannah Arendt (1906–1975), German political
theory, in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem, whose subtitle is a report on the banality of evil. In
1961, in Israel, Adolf Eichmann 's trial for genocide against the Jewish people during World War
begins. The trial was involved in a controversy and many disputes. Almost all the world's
newspapers sent reporters to cover the sessions, which were made publicly by the Israeli
government. In addition to crimes against the Jewish people, Eichmann was charged with crimes
against humanity and belonging to a group organized criminal purposes. Eichmann was convicted of
these crimes and hanged in 1962, near Tel Aviv. One of the correspondents present at the trial, ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
If today there were new concentration camps, dominated by the figure of a tyrant or other forms of
authoritarianism, there would be more than 75 % of citizens, at least only in the US, they would be
willing to join the staff thereof and punish other human beings. The Milgram experiment is strong
evidence in supporting Arendt's point, which is that someone like Eichmann was just following
orders and had nothing to do with Anti–Semitism. These people who went through the experiment
without knowing the ethnical background of whoever was in the other room so it them continuing
with the shocks had nothing to do with ethnicity. Most of these people went along through the
experiment the whole way knowing they were harming the life of someone else but luckily in reality
they were not. Eichmann was still not the perfect man because following orders or not it goes
against morals values but there is a sense of where he is coming from and where Arendt's argument
is coming from. Eichmann and Arendt claim it was about obedience over Anti–Semitism and the
law over

Anne Frank And Hannah Arendt: A Look At Human Nature
Lauren Czolgosz Anne Frank and Hannah Arendt: A Look at Human Nature The Diary of Anne
Frank is a personal work written by the young Anne Frank herself. The book is not a work of
fiction, rather, it is Frank's real life account of her experiences during the atrocities of the Holocaust
as a Jew. She tells her story through entries in her diary, which she refers to as her best friend
throughout the book. Because of their Jewish beliefs, Frank and her family had to go into hiding in
order to escape harm from the Nazi party, and the majority of entries revolve around this time spent
in what they called "the Secret Annex". Frank's diary was published by her father after her death in
the concentration camp at Bergen–Belsen in Germany because in her ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In fact, her book revolves around careful explanations of her views of a man who was significantly
involved in the deportation process of the Jewish people to the concentration camps during the
Holocaust. This man's name is Adolph Eichmann. After attending his trial in Jerusalem on April 11,
1961 in order to write a report on it for the popular news source called the New Yorker, Arendt
became a very controversial name both in everyday households and among philosophers. Arendt's
first version of this book, Eichmann in Jerusalem: the Banality of Evil, was not a book at all, it was
a series of news stories that appeared in the New Yorker, which was later formed into a book.
Eichmann in Jerusalem is a radical work that resulted in much hatred from the public when it was
taken as a defense of the heinous acts committed by Adolph Eichmann during the Holocaust.
However, once a deeper, more thorough look is taken into the book, Arendt's belief becomes clear.
She is not defending or supporting Eichmann in any way, she is simply looking at his justification
for his deeds from a face value

Reaction Paper On Hannah Arendt
Hannah Arendt is a 2013 bio–pic directed by Margarethe von Trotta; about an important episode
form the life of German–Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt (1906–1975) who was one of the most
influential political theorists of the twentieth century. She was born in a German–Jewish family and
was forced to leave Germany in 1933. Actress Barbara Sukowa plays the role of Arendt as a
complicated woman, who is a brilliant philosopher and also stubborn at times. This film revolves
around Hannah's controversial stand during the trial of ex–Nazi Adolf Eichmann, while she offered
to report hearing for the New Yorker in 1961. This film was able to make an impression on
audiences worldwide and won few awards as best feature film (2013, German film awards) ... Show
Her main focus was to comprehend this new category of evil which is committed by thousands of
common people without intellect but who are excellent followers, much like robots. Also she never
once disagreed that not every Nazi involved in the holocaust was banal. Some of them were acting
out of pure hate and projecting it on the Jews (Adorno, projection theory). Of course, there were
exceptions like Oscar Schindler who had his own ideology unlike Eichmann who was part of the
process whereby ugly, degrading, murderous, and unspeakable acts become routine and are accepted
as normal. Hannah willingly engaged in the path of enlightenment knowing the bitter consequences
she might face. Although Arendt started Eichmann in Jerusalem as a trial report, it became a literary
masterpiece and still influences the intellectual community all over the

What Is Hannah Arendt Brave
Hanna Arendt was a political philosopher and thinker whose writings and political views on a series
of radical issues and topics were not only considered controversial but also undoubtedly left an
impression in her attempt to repair a community scared by Hitler and his Nazi followers. Although
her efforts were not on a physical nature, as she obviously could not mend the wounds of all those
affected by the holocaust, but merely to right the wrong established by the Nazis by seeking justice
– particularly from one man, Adolf Eichmann. Arendt, a reporter for The New Yorker, was sent to
Jerusalem to cover the trail of Eichmann. While there, Arendt tackled the issues on collective
responsibility, morals and ethics, and totalitarianism. Issues that only the brave would dare to
address, only the brave could attempt to answer.
Before any of these issues can be undertaken, a brief biography on Arendt's life would certainly be
practical. Hanna Arendt was born October 14, 1906 in Hanover, Germany in 1906 to Jewish parents.
She studied Philosophy at the University of Marburg where she met Martin Heidegger, her professor
and mentor with whom she began an affair (Berkowitz, Roger.). Heidegger later began a heavy
affiliation with the Nazi. He not only supported Hitler's ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
She remarried Heinrich Blucher, a philosophy professor in 1940. During this time the Nazis reign
over Germany grew more powerful. As a member of the Jewish community Arendt was required to
abscond to Paris as the Nazis began their genocidal mission against the Jews. "She again became a
fugitive from the Nazis in 1941, when she and her husband immigrated to the United States."
(d'Entreves, Maurizio

Eichmann In Jerusalem: A Report On The Banality Of Evil
be described as an act that would be considered unethical or immoral. Evil had different meaning
back in the 1800's compared to what it means today. Even in the 1600's, almost 1700's, which was
when the witch trials began in colonial Massachusetts when more than 200 people were accused of
practicing witchcraft, the devil's magic, and 20 were executed because of these trials Lets take for
example Hannah Arendt's situation when she was listening in on Eichmann's testimony and wrote
her essay: Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. One thing Arendt certainly did
not mean was that evil had become ordinary, or that Eichmann and his Nazi cohorts had committed
an unexceptional crime. She thought the crime was exceptional, if not

Analysis Of The Book ' Hannah Arendt '
In "Eichmann in Jerusalem," Hannah Arendt analyzes Adolph Eichmann while he is on trial in
Jerusalem for the crimes that he committed while being a Lieutenant Colonel in the SS during the
Nazi Regime. In the book Arendt talks about how Eichmann's actions were "banal" in the sense that
he seemed to be an ordinary person who just committed acts that were evil. Italian–Jewish Writer
Primo Levi, a Holocaust Survivor, states that SS officers like Eichmann lived in their own self–
deception that made them believe that their actions were caused by just following their orders in the
SS. In this paper, I will analyze the views that both Arendt and Levi had about the Eichmann trial
and then compare and state the differences of their views. I will then explain the reasons why both
Hannah Arendt's and Primo Levi's analysis of Adolph Eichmann that show that the actions that he
committed were all truly evil actions. I'll first talk about Hannah Arendt's analysis of the Adolph
Eichmann and also talk about how his motives for committing the crimes were a "banality of evil".
Viewing the trial first hand, Arendt bases her analysis of Eichmann of the criminal charges that he is
indicted on, his motives for the crimes, and how he tried to defend himself during the trial. The way
that Arendt perceives Eichmann is by the fact that he was aware of the seriousness of the crimes that
he committed at the trial, but he did not have the "evil" motives that would usually be seen in the
type of heinous

Hannah Arendt Motivation
Hannah Arendt has been widely recognized as both one of the most major thinkers and top political
philosophers of the 20th century. Arendt was born on October 14, 1906 in Hanover, Germany as the
only child of a middle–class Jewish–German family. She grew up in Königsberg, In 1913, her father
passed away and her mother persuaded her into strong academic studies, and it is quite evident she
did well in motivating her as Arendt's academic background is quite large. In 1933, Arendt was
arrested for having gathered information regarding the Nazi army and anti–semitism. Afterward,
Hannah Arendt, being a Jew in a city under nazi regime,was forced to flee the country and began a
new life in Paris, France. She began working with Youth Aliyah, which was an organization that
primarily helped rescue Jewish children from most of eastern Europe. In 1940, she married a
philosophy professor named Heinrich Blücher and and soon became interned at Camp Grus, and
escaped before the Germans arrived, once again on foot as a fugitive with her husband. Due to the
German invasion of France the couple alongside Arendt's mother fled France and flew over to
Portugal using illegally issued visas. Religion played a very large role in Hannah Arendt's life, but in
a completely inevitable manner. The fact that Arendt was Jewish and grew up in a city under full
nazi regime control. Hannah Arendt incorporated her idea and views of religion very delicately in
her writing which is expected of from a good

Nazi Crimes Research Paper
After World War II Allied authorities determined that roughly 13.2 million men could automatically
be arrested for their part in the holocaust. But some of the men and women responsible for Nazi
crimes are still alive, they have managed to escape their past and evade justice for more than 70
years. Investigators have not forgotten these war criminals and dedicated their lives to tracking
down the murderers of the Second World War, with the reward of $25,000 for any information that
leads to the arrest and conviction of former Nazis. It might be thought that after more than 70 years,
these War Criminals might be forgotten, but Nazi hunter Kurt Schrimm, head of the German office
responsible for investigating Nazi crimes, believes that there's

How Does Eichmann Play In The Manifestation Of The Holocaust
Hannah Arendt controversially discussed how banality, ordinariness and everyday life played an
important role in the manifestation of the holocaust in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963). In
1961 Arendt reported on Eichmann's trial in Israel for the New Yorker. Eichmann was a primary
organiser of the holocaust and was tried for 15 charges, including crimes against humanity and the
Jewish people. Arendt observed that Eichmann himself was not an impressive monster or some
Cartesian Evil Genius one would expect to be responsible the murder of millions of people, in fact
she described him as completely ordinary. Not only was he physically unimpressive, but he was
declared psychologically to be completely normal by six psychologists. Arendt even believed that
despite being a Nazi Schutzstaffel (SS), he was not even a fanatic. She explained that Eichmann
simply craved inclusion, and joined the SS for this reason as opposed to sharing their extreme
views. The trial attributed mass genocide to Eichmann alone and concentrated on the doer as
opposed to the victims, creating a preconception of a diabolical monster, which Eichmann struggled
to live up to. Arendt describes Eichmann as a clown, this is a difficult concept to grasp and feels
almost disrespectful to attribute such mass death and suffering to a clown of a man. ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
This may be one factor contributing to some of the rejection that her theories faced as well as the
frightening possibility that atrocities like genocide are manifested with the help of ordinary,
everyday people, and not metaphysical

Totalitarianism: Hannah Arendt
Hannah Arendt was a political philosopher who grew up in Germany and was born into a Jewish
family. Arendt was one of the most prominent and influential political philosophers of the twentieth
century. Throughout her works, she discussed extremely catastrophic political events that she
experienced, and tried to examine these situations in relation to their meaning and how their
historical importance is able to change our own moral and political judgements. (d'Entreves, 2016)
The film 'Hannah Arendt' depicts how Arendt responded to trial of Adolf Eichmann, a member of
the Nazi government. The film shows how Arendt received extreme criticism and abuse for her view
on the Eichmann trial. However, she does not abandon her opinion and remains strong ... Show
In relation to thinking, she hopes to make it clear that it is different from "knowing". Understanding
is having knowledge, whereas thinking applies to beyond knowledge and conveys questions that
cannot simply be answered by using knowledge. (Yar, n.d.) Thinking does not refer to gaining a
solid answer, rather it constantly gives more questions about people's actions and more. For Arendt,
thinking is fundamental for political actions. She felt that this concept of questioning the meaning of
actions and experiences was not part of the Eichmann trial, thus leading her to state the "banality" of
Eichmann's evil. (Yar, n.d.) Arendt's idea of judgement can be linked in with her notion of thinking,
but it also stands as its own concept. She had planned to extensively examine her notion of
judgement in the third volume of 'The Life of the Mind', but sadly died before she could do so.
However, she wrote a series of lectures on Immanuel Kant's political philosophy in which she
discusses judgement. Arendt was no longer concerned with judging "as a feature of political life",
but was now focusing on judgement as a part of the life of the mind. Her theory of judgement uses
two models. The actors are those who judge in order to act. The spectators are those who judge to
gain a full understanding from history.

Truth And Justice : A Lexicon Of Terror And The Banality...
Truth and Justice
"I believe that truth and justice will eventually triumph. It will take generations. If I am to die in this
fight, then so be it. But one day we will triumph" (Feitlowitz 133). There are many different aspects
of truth and justices described in Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality
of Evil, Victoria Sanford's Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala and in Marguerite
Feitlowitz 's A Lexicon of Terror, these aspects of truth and justice play an important role in
describing the tragedies in each respective book. The books also illustrate to readers why truth and
justice in general are necessary. Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem is a book about Adolf
Eichmann who was a German ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In the end, Eichmann was found guilty of overseeing the deaths of many different people. This trial,
while it did bring some justice for the survivors and those people who were killed in the Holocaust,
it was not done in the truthful and just manner that many people would have hoped. The whole
purpose of the trial of Adolf Eichmann was to find out the truth of what really happened during the
Holocaust, in regards to who was responsible for different aspects of the Holocaust, and to bring
justice for those who lost their lives, and for those who survived but had to suffer through the
Holocaust. Victoria Sanford's Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala is about La
Violencia, a time in Guatemalan history where "the Guatemalan army" was blamed "for 93 percent
of the human rights violations, violations that were so severe and systematically enacted against the
whole Maya communities" (Sanford 14). It has been concluded that La Violencia, the acts that the
Guatemalan army had committed were "acts of genocide against the Maya" (Sanford 14). After all
was said and done, and these horrific actions had been committed against the Maya it was important
for them to show the truth about what had happened to them. In Sanford's book she has a quote from
Juan Manuel Gerónimo where he says, "We want people to know what happened here so that it does
not happen here again, or in some other village in Guatemala, or in some other department, or in
some

Adolf Eichmann's Role In The Final Solution
The Holocaust was a horrible event that should never be allowed to happen again. Over the course
of this tragic event there were many people who were responsible for the ordered killings of so
many. Adolf Eichmann was a Nazi officer who was in charge of keeping all of the trains going all
over, so that the prisoners would get to the camps. He also called himself the "Jewish specialist" and
was the head of the Gestapo Department 4, for Jewish Affairs. Eichmann was in control of many
deportation jobs and played a large role in the final solution. On March 19, 1906 by the city of
Cologne, Germany, Adolf Eichmann was born. After the death of his mother, at a young age, his
family moved to Linz, Austria. Linz is also the same town that Hitler grew up in. After dropping out
of engineering ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One of the alternative solutions was gas, at first they used mobile gas vans and then progressed to
gas chambers. In the early months of 1942, Adolf aided in the organization of the Wannsee
Conference. At this conference the Nazi officials talked about exterminating the entire Jewish
population of Europe in the surrounding area. They assumed that if they were to kill all of the Jews
in this area it would probably be 11 million people. After this meeting Eichmann focused intensely
on the final solution and any issues regarding it. In order for the Jews to be exterminated they were
placed on trains and sent to the concentration camps. There were many small and larger camps that
were spread throughout the countryside. Out of all of the concentration camps Auschwitz was
probably Adolf's favorite because he visited there so much. Since he was in charge of getting the
Jews to the concentration camps he traveled all over to make sure that everything was running
smoothly. By August of 1944 an estimated 4 million Jews had died in the concentration camp and
another two million were killed with the use of mobile units. As the end of the war was nearing and
the Nazis knew that

Guided Inquiry : The Nature Of Evil
Guided Inquiry: The Nature of Evil
My Inquiry:
"To what extent is Adolf Eichmann just a bureaucratic businessman doing his job, or were his
motivations composed of pure evil and murderous intent?"
'Is Eichmann a rotten, soiled and evil man, and were his motivations boring, mundane and obvious?'
Why did Eichmann kill so many Jews if he 'supposedly' no real hate or motivation to do it?
Reading 1
"Adolf Eichmann went to the gallows with great dignity. He had asked for a bottle of red wine and
had drunk half of it. He refused the help of the Protestant minister the Reverend William Hull who
offered to read the Bible with him: he had only two more hours to live and therefore no "time to
waste." He walked the fifty yards from his cell to the execution chamber calm and erect with his
hands bound behind him. When the guards tied his ankles and knees he asked them to loosen the
bonds so that he could stand straight. "I don't need that " he said when the black hood was offered
him. He was in complete command of himself nay he was more: he was completely himself.
Nothing could have demonstrated this more convincingly than the grotesque silliness of his last
words. He began by stating emphatically that he was a Gottgläubiger to express in common Nazi
fashion that he was no Christian and did not believe in life after death. He then proceeded: "After a
short while gentlemen we shall all meet again. Such is the fate of all men. Long live Germany long
live Argentina long live Austria. I

Virtue In The Meno

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Jessica Valentin

More from Jessica Valentin (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Virtue In The Meno