However, what puzzled me in this case was that I would have thought that an
ultra conservative site would welcome the Zimbardo study as vindication for
the events that followed as a consequence of consevative governmental decision-making. Rather, the author is trying to discredit this explanation of events at Abu Ghraib. Which puts the burden back onto the military personnel
individually and directly.
I'd say that the key is the conservative (or at least neocon) emphasis on personal responsibility underlaid by an (unnecessary) assumption of free will.
If one holds that individual's alone (the agency question) are ultimately responsible for their behavior, one can justify all sorts of policies (welfare 'reform', huge wage disparities, etc) on basis of 'people get what they deserve' -- the rich are rich because of their own efforts and abilities (being born rich had nothing to do with it ;-) and the poor are poor because of their lack of ability and motivation (again interpreted as intrinsic qualities, NOT the consequence of extrinsic (situational) variables.
-- * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Department 507-389-6217 * * 23 Armstrong Hall Minnesota State University, Mankato * * http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
