5 ms·
>So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he
by starfallg 6y ago
>So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he does.
That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects.
- watwut 6y ago> That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects. That is actually not. Through contemporary lens, the contemporary person being tortured or someone who is close to that person, is in fact perceiving you as cruel. Factoring in writing and diplomacy done in other situations is literally applying different standard.
- starfallg 6y agoThe contemporary view as in how the populace at the time viewed it, not the condemned person. There are a lot of practices in our prison system today (both inside the US and in other industrialised nations) that some people find questionable, but much of the populace accept. This window is constantly moving over time.
- watwut 6y agoBut the books the whole thread is about are written from the point of view of "someone who is close to that tortured person". It if point of view of third party witness of inquisition, not from the point of view of diplomat. And they did perceived that as cruel and had emotional reaction to what is happening. Moreover, if you want to know what "populace thought" you cant just decide to ignore some people.