2,359
edits
Game: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Psychopaths were traditionally war heroes
| Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
=== Psychopaths were traditionally war heroes === | === Psychopaths were traditionally war heroes === | ||
2 leading morality researchers Peter, Descioli (Education: Postdoctoral Fellow, Harvard University PhD and MA, University of Pennsylvania BA, University of Delaware) and Robert Kurzban (Education BA, Cornell University, 1991; Ph.D, UCSB, 1998) In their research file '' Cracking the superhero's moral code '' point out that the idea of an "ideal hero" whom always does the right thing is a pretty new one, as far as cultural narratives go, and that most characters to whom the term "hero" has been applied since antiquity were of a very different mold. Many classical Greek, Indian, Chinese, etc. heroes were inherently flawed and destructive individuals who would be poor role-models in modern times, yet are still upheld as champions by their respective cultures. Descioli and Kurzban argue that the distinction between these classical heroes and the modern ideal ones (exemplified by comic book superheroes like Superman) lies in that the former excel at between-group conflict and the latter, in within-group conflict.<ref>https://www.academia.edu/26235404/Cracking_the_superhero_s_moral_code</ref> | 2 leading morality researchers Peter, Descioli (Education: Postdoctoral Fellow, Harvard University PhD and MA, University of Pennsylvania BA, University of Delaware) and Robert Kurzban (Education BA, Cornell University, 1991; Ph.D, UCSB, 1998) In their research file '' Cracking the superhero's moral code ''<ref>https://www.academia.edu/26235404/Cracking_the_superhero_s_moral_code</ref> point out that the idea of an "ideal hero" whom always does the right thing is a pretty new one, as far as cultural narratives go, and that most characters to whom the term "hero" has been applied since antiquity were of a very different mold. Many classical Greek, Indian, Chinese, etc. heroes were inherently flawed and destructive individuals who would be poor role-models in modern times, yet are still upheld as champions by their respective cultures. Descioli and Kurzban argue that the distinction between these classical heroes and the modern ideal ones (exemplified by comic book superheroes like Superman) lies in that the former excel at between-group conflict and the latter, in within-group conflict.<ref>https://www.academia.edu/26235404/Cracking_the_superhero_s_moral_code</ref> | ||
For most of human history, our species lived in relatively small communities/groups fighting others over limited resources in an existential conflict. As such, myths of powerful individuals whose main talent was slaying their enemies by the dozen were most relevant to members of said communities. These myths didn't need complex moral messages, because most of the time, their morality boiled down to a simple and easy-to-understand mantra "we are good, the Others are bad, so our hero kills them". However, as communities grew larger and more depersonalized, their susceptibility to internal strife outpaced their ability to self-police, requiring the creation of specialized social institutes for law enforcement. By similar processes, we observe the emergence of a new breed of hero, one specializing in within-group conflict — essentially a crime fighter, whose main talent is mediating conflict according to a set of norms and morals espoused by his society. Because a within-group conflict can never be resolved just by killing every opponent, unlike a inter-group war for survival, the ideal-hero fights the "bad" guys to subdue and, ultimately, to redeem them. | For most of human history, our species lived in relatively small communities/groups fighting others over limited resources in an existential conflict. As such, myths of powerful individuals whose main talent was slaying their enemies by the dozen were most relevant to members of said communities. These myths didn't need complex moral messages, because most of the time, their morality boiled down to a simple and easy-to-understand mantra "we are good, the Others are bad, so our hero kills them". However, as communities grew larger and more depersonalized, their susceptibility to internal strife outpaced their ability to self-police, requiring the creation of specialized social institutes for law enforcement. By similar processes, we observe the emergence of a new breed of hero, one specializing in within-group conflict — essentially a crime fighter, whose main talent is mediating conflict according to a set of norms and morals espoused by his society. Because a within-group conflict can never be resolved just by killing every opponent, unlike a inter-group war for survival, the ideal-hero fights the "bad" guys to subdue and, ultimately, to redeem them. | ||