Louis Schmier wrote:
> the Nazis very specifically called upon science as
> justification of their views. 

They actually called upon pseudo-science as a justification for their 
views. Racial hygiene and its extrapolation to issues of land, warfare, 
governmental structuring, education, etc., as espoused by the Nazis, was 
more ideology than science. They used the veneer of science as part of 
their propaganda campaign to make their sweeping prejudices more 
palatable to the general population. Moreover, destructive ideologies 
alone do not result in a genocide but are rather elements of a much 
larger constellation of factors.

Science can certainly be misused towards destructive ends but then, so 
can just about everything else. In the case of science, this represents 
not so much a problem with the science but with the individuals and 
societal misuse of that science. The same case could be made about water 
or religion. In the case of water, I can use it to sustain life or to 
bring someone's life to an end. Should one condemn water because someone 
historically has misused it towards destructive ends? Or in terms of 
religion, does it really make sense to blame the attacks of 9/11 on the 
Koran or blame Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing on Christianity?  
The terrorists in each case drew on their religious misinterpretations 
for their actions. So does it make sense to condemn each religion for 
the misuses of that religion?

The Holocaust was the result of human agency and it is within that 
context that it is best understood.  Blaming science or saying the 
Holocaust wouldn't have been possible without science is like saying 
that that Holocaust wouldn't have been possible without railway lines. 
Both have a small grain of seemingly sounding truth to them but neither 
were the root cause of the Holocaust.

Best,

Linda


For more about genocide or religious hate/violence see:

Woolf, L. M., & Hulsizer, M. R. (2005). Psychosocial roots of genocide: 
risk, prevention, and intervention. /Journal of Genocide Research, 7/, 
101-128. http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/WoolfHulsizerJGR05.pdf

Woolf, L. M., & Hulsizer, M. R. (2002/2003). Intra- and inter- religious 
hate and violence: A psychosocial model. /Journal of Hate Studies, 2/, 
5-26. http://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/againsthate/Journal2/Journal2.html
 

 
-- 
Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology and International Human Rights
Past-President, Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, & Violence 
(Div. 48, APA) <http://www.peacepsych.org>
Steering Committee, Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR) 
<http://www.psysr.org>
Secretary, Raphael Lemkin Award Committee, Institute for the Study of 
Genocide <http://www.instituteforthestudyofgenocide.org/>
Webster University
470 East Lockwood
St. Louis, MO  63119

Main Webpage:  http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/ 
<http://www.webster.edu/%7Ewoolflm/> 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's (and woman's) best friend. . . .
Inside a dog, it's too dark to read."
                  -             Groucho Marx

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to