PhiloExp ~ tada #4

.docx

School

Regis University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

270

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by DukeTeamRook31

Tada #4 Lexi Jensen Identify one key idea and one key area in the text from our discussion of chapters 5 & 6 From Session #1 that your group thinks needs further discussion. Identify the idea and passage, and offer a brief explanation of why they're worthy of our returned attention. ★ I thought everything was explained very thoroughly and I understood it very well. But if there was one point I would want more explanation for, it would be the part we went over from chapter 7. In particular the quote form the slides “ Heydrich expects difficulties in convincing the conferees, but in less than an hour and a half, lunch adjourns, drinks are served, and "members of the various branches of the Civil Service did not merely express opinions but made concrete propositions" as to how to effectively carry out the execution of Hitler's Final Solution (113).” I was slightly confused about what was specifically meant by the conference and what exactly it was in more detail. Arendt opens chapter 7 with the claim, "My report on Eichmann's conscience has thus far followed evidence which he himself had forgotten" (Arendt, 112).What is the evidence Eichmann himself offers in relation to his own understanding of conscience presented in chapter 7? ★ Hannah Arendt believes that Adolf Eichmann's testimony reveals his idea of moral conscience, which is more about doing what you are told and fitting in with society than it is about reflecting on your own morality. Eichmann argues that he lacked independent moral judgment and was only a bureaucrat carrying out orders throughout the Holocaust's preparation. Arendt uses this to illustrate the "banality of evil," implying that, rather than coming from malicious purposes, great crimes can come from mindless submission to authority. In chapter 8, Arendt compares Eichmann's disposition in the final days of Nazi power to those expressed by Himmler and Max Becher (pronounced "Becker"). What makes Eichmann different, and does this make him more or less despicable than Himmler and Becher? Is it worth even trying to figure out who is the worst when everyone is bad? Why or why not? ★ Eichmann, Himmler, and Becher are all important members of the Nazi leadership who committed awful acts during World War II. It's hard to determine who is more evil because they each contributed in different ways to the great misery of people. It could be hard and subjective to rank their actions. ★ There is a philosophical dilemma about whether it is worthwhile to identify the worst person when everyone is evil. Some contend that studying historic acts is essential to learning from the past, while others think it may not be beneficial to concentrate on the extent of evil. Consideration is required while discussing historical individuals in order to acknowledge the seriousness of their crimes and derive lessons from the events of the past. Beginning on page 115, Arendt turns the analysis of conscience toward the role of Jewish leaders and their complicity in the "Final Solution." She concludes this powerful analysis with the claim that "it offers the most striking insight into the totality of the moral collapse the Nazis caused in respectable European society" (Arendt, 125). What

is your estimation of Arendt's argument concerning the "totality of moral collapse"? Is she being too harsh? Use our earlier discussion of critical theory to help explain your reasons. ★ According to Hannah Arendt, there was a severe ethical crisis in European culture at the Wannsee Conference, where the plans for the Holocaust were established. She raises problems with the bureaucratic dehumanization that made it possible for people to ignore the ethical consequences of their behavior. She also draws attention to the cooperation of certain Jewish leaders, viewing it as an example of the "banality of evil," in which common people, motivated by bureaucratic efficiency and conformity, become collaborators in horrible deeds. Her critical theory-based analysis seeks to highlight structural problems that aided in the moral standards' decline throughout this troubling time.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help