12 ms·

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil "Banality of evil is a phrase used by Hannah Arendt in the title of

by ferdo 13y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil "Banality of evil is a phrase used by Hannah Arendt in the title of her 1963 work Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Her thesis is that the great evils in history generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths, but by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal."

scott_s 13y ago
That quote has to do with the authorities presenting bad things as good things. In order to apply it, you must first establish that what is being presented is bad. If you agree that what is being presented is good, then this quote does not apply. Instead, then, we have to have a discussion about what policies need to be in place to prevent the things that we agree are, in fact, bad.
- ferdo 13y ago
  The quote has to do with the fact that most people engaging in evil don't even think about it. When a State says, "These are the bad guys. Go get them.", there's a sizable percentage of the population that can rationalize away the evil committed by "The Mission" because for whatever reason, they either lack the ability to reflect on what they're doing or they choose not to reflect on what they're doing. "The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil." -Hannah Arendt
  - scott_s 13y ago
    And what does the quote have to do with the current discussion? The implication is that the given examples are evil.
    - ferdo 13y ago
      The thread topic is "FBI Surveilling U.S. With Drones".
      - scott_s 13y ago
        That does not answer my question. Yes, I can quite easily come up with many ways in which that quote is relevant to the topic. But what were your intentions? The problem with dropping a quote without context is that people end up countering points they think the person was trying to make. The person you responded to said "Hey, here's a bunch of good uses of drones that we currently can't do." The implication of dropping your quote there is, "I don't want you to do those things." Or maybe you did not mean to imply those things. Which is rather my point that without context, there's not much value in dropping a quote. I find quotes are great to illustrate or support discussion. But they are not discussion itself.
        ferdo 13y ago
        > But what were your intentions? I fail to see why my intentions matter one whit in a discussion about increased surveillance by the government.
        scott_s 13y ago
        I was asking what your intended contribution to the conversation was. What point were you trying to make?
        ferdo 13y ago
        The point was made in my first post: "the great evils in history generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths, but by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal.""
        PavlovsCat 13y ago
        People who use your products or subsystems for evil are NOT going to tell you about it. Yes, you can do great stuff with drones. But to bring that up in the context of BAD stuff possibly being done with them, can seem naive and (inadvertently or not) help covering for bad stuff. Let's say there is a topic about how a flaw in the SSL implementation of browser X can be used to take over the machine of a user by sending them to a specific link; and someone says "yeah but without that bug SSL is quite useful actually". It's at least kinda missing the point, and in a way that's in the playbook of PR firms to boot. To start out with "I am amazed at the disconnect" and the continue trying to create a disconnect is kinda rich, if you think about it.
srl 13y ago
I think wanting to detect lost alzheimer's patients isn't quite equivalent to accepting the premise that germanic purity should be preserved.
- ferdo 13y ago
  The FBI won't be looking for Alzheimer's patients.
  - super-serial 13y ago
    That's just a code word used by drone operators... Hey Central - we have another "Alzheimer's patient" who has driven out of his low-class zone to a more affluent one... send a squad car over to help "remind him" of his place.
asynchronous13 13y ago
Are you proposing that unmanned aircraft can only be used for evil purposes? I see huge potential for use in agriculture. I talk to wine growers in California and we figure out how much money they can save using one of our products instead of using a tractor. I see that as a good thing, but perhaps I am simply living the banality of evil.
- ferdo 13y ago
  I agree with you, there's great potential good for this tech. The evil that is coming from it and will continue to come from it is perpetrated by those that, as said earlier, accept the premise of the State/government that they work for. If it's a person's job to use technology such that it results in innocents being killed, injured or sucked up into a byzantine legal system and that person keeps doing that job, that's an example of the banality of evil. Making quads to replace manual labor isn't banal or evil.
  - scott_s 13y ago
    Which is why the discussion should be about the policies and rules we need to allow good uses, but prevent bad ones.
    - ferdo 13y ago
      We already have policies and rules that are considered "good" by the people that implement and execute policy. That's the problem.
  - vowelless 13y ago
    > If it's a person's job to use technology such that it results in innocents being killed, injured or sucked up into a byzantine legal system and that person keeps doing that job, that's an example of the banality of evil. I guess McDonald's fits that bill as well, as diabetes and obesity are among the biggest killers in the US.
    - ferdo 13y ago

by ferdo 13y ago

scott_s 13y ago

That quote has to do with the authorities presenting bad things as good things. In order to apply it, you must first establish that what is being presented is bad. If you agree that what is being presented is good, then this quote does not apply. Instead, then, we have to have a discussion about what policies need to be in place to prevent the things that we agree are, in fact, bad.

ferdo 13y ago
The quote has to do with the fact that most people engaging in evil don't even think about it. When a State says, "These are the bad guys. Go get them.", there's a sizable percentage of the population that can rationalize away the evil committed by "The Mission" because for whatever reason, they either lack the ability to reflect on what they're doing or they choose not to reflect on what they're doing. "The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil." -Hannah Arendt
- scott_s 13y ago
  And what does the quote have to do with the current discussion? The implication is that the given examples are evil.
  - ferdo 13y ago
    The thread topic is "FBI Surveilling U.S. With Drones".
    - scott_s 13y ago
      That does not answer my question. Yes, I can quite easily come up with many ways in which that quote is relevant to the topic. But what were your intentions? The problem with dropping a quote without context is that people end up countering points they think the person was trying to make. The person you responded to said "Hey, here's a bunch of good uses of drones that we currently can't do." The implication of dropping your quote there is, "I don't want you to do those things." Or maybe you did not mean to imply those things. Which is rather my point that without context, there's not much value in dropping a quote. I find quotes are great to illustrate or support discussion. But they are not discussion itself.
      - ferdo 13y ago
        > But what were your intentions? I fail to see why my intentions matter one whit in a discussion about increased surveillance by the government.
        scott_s 13y ago
        I was asking what your intended contribution to the conversation was. What point were you trying to make?
        ferdo 13y ago
        The point was made in my first post: "the great evils in history generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths, but by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal.""
      - PavlovsCat 13y ago
        People who use your products or subsystems for evil are NOT going to tell you about it. Yes, you can do great stuff with drones. But to bring that up in the context of BAD stuff possibly being done with them, can seem naive and (inadvertently or not) help covering for bad stuff. Let's say there is a topic about how a flaw in the SSL implementation of browser X can be used to take over the machine of a user by sending them to a specific link; and someone says "yeah but without that bug SSL is quite useful actually". It's at least kinda missing the point, and in a way that's in the playbook of PR firms to boot. To start out with "I am amazed at the disconnect" and the continue trying to create a disconnect is kinda rich, if you think about it.

srl 13y ago

I think wanting to detect lost alzheimer's patients isn't quite equivalent to accepting the premise that germanic purity should be preserved.

ferdo 13y ago
The FBI won't be looking for Alzheimer's patients.
- super-serial 13y ago
  That's just a code word used by drone operators... Hey Central - we have another "Alzheimer's patient" who has driven out of his low-class zone to a more affluent one... send a squad car over to help "remind him" of his place.

asynchronous13 13y ago

Are you proposing that unmanned aircraft can only be used for evil purposes? I see huge potential for use in agriculture. I talk to wine growers in California and we figure out how much money they can save using one of our products instead of using a tractor. I see that as a good thing, but perhaps I am simply living the banality of evil.

ferdo 13y ago
I agree with you, there's great potential good for this tech. The evil that is coming from it and will continue to come from it is perpetrated by those that, as said earlier, accept the premise of the State/government that they work for. If it's a person's job to use technology such that it results in innocents being killed, injured or sucked up into a byzantine legal system and that person keeps doing that job, that's an example of the banality of evil. Making quads to replace manual labor isn't banal or evil.
- scott_s 13y ago
  Which is why the discussion should be about the policies and rules we need to allow good uses, but prevent bad ones.
  - ferdo 13y ago
    We already have policies and rules that are considered "good" by the people that implement and execute policy. That's the problem.
- vowelless 13y ago
  > If it's a person's job to use technology such that it results in innocents being killed, injured or sucked up into a byzantine legal system and that person keeps doing that job, that's an example of the banality of evil. I guess McDonald's fits that bill as well, as diabetes and obesity are among the biggest killers in the US.
  - ferdo 13y ago