eto na naman tayo kay Hitler at Nazism natalakay natin to sa ibang thread on different topic naman.. But now ay about morality, as par as i can remember from what ive read and learned from the different literatures about nazism and biographies of hitler wala ako natatandaan na may empazise sila sa source of morality.Nakita nmn natin ang epekto ng flawed na paniniwala na yan thru nazi socialism, saka iba't ibang bersyon ng communism, which are more or less produkto ng misreading ng philosophy ni Neitzche. They are mostly from the presuppositions na ang morality ay built in sa atin. Kaya may tendency ang mga followers ni Neitzche mag reject ng ancient religions and philosophies. At ang motivation png nmn din ay dahil sa rejection ng mga dogmatic beliefs, pero msyado din na-generalized sa lahat ng religions, at nawala na ang nuances ng ibang explanations. "Throwing the baby out with the bathwater", if you will
Siguro ang tamang tanong ay kung bakit may radical racist ideology si Hitler at ang German National Party o Nazi, ang radical na pananaw ba na ito ay dahil sa preposupposition nila na morality ay built na sa atin? Masasagot natin yan (gaya nga ng sabi ko, ang kultura ang pinaka humuhubog/nag didikta ng moralidad ng human species) kung i tratrace natin sa ancient culture ng Teutonic tribe, the ancient tribe of germanic people, bago pa si Hitler likas na sa mga Teuton ang pagiging very loyal sa kanilang tribal lineage, which according to Plutarch they did not intercourse with other people, at nadala nila yan mula pa 19th century German Empire, bago pa naging prominent si Hitler sa polical arena ng germany ang Pan-German movements ay masigla ng nationalist political idea -- at dyan makikita natin kung papano hirap sila makisalamuha sa mga non german, they want a unified Germany-Austria kung saan mayorya ang mga German at hindi kasama ang minority na Slavs. Polish and other minority, idagdag pa natin ang impluwensya that time ng mga panulat ng mga Ariosophist na si Guido Von List and Lanz Liebenfels, and we not overlook the personal experience of Hitler yung mga pinag daanan nyang kahirapan, nasaksihan nya kung papano ang mga Aleman ay nilubog ng kahirapan dahil sa sistemang riba mga Hudyo -- iyan ang pagkaka alam ko mga bagay kung bakit radical racist ang ideology ni Hitler at ng Nazism, nadala nila ang tribalism mula sa kultura ng kanilang kanilang mga ninuo kaya madali nabulag ni Hitler ang mga Aleman, Hitler and Nazism brought german culture tribalism to it its extremism.
How can you observe the building blocks u mentioned sa isang infant??
I really cant see how morality is innate sa humans…
i much prepare the term hardwired in our brain and learned through experience
it has beginning in the brain and its chemical, but since observation and demonstration ang hinihingi mo, we cannot observe what happened inside the brain of a child, hindi natin alam ang tumatakbo sa utak ng isang bata, but we can observe the building blocks of morality in an infant through educated guess and experiments. And modern day researchers and pyshologist find a way to do that
so i will direct you on a Profesional Psychologists and Cognitive scientist Paul Bloom and his team, this is how they demonstrated that moral judgement is innate:
In one experiment, researchers showed nine- and 12-month-old infants images of a ball trying to get up a hill with either a helpful character (a square gently pushing the ball uphill) or a hindering character (a triangle pushing the ball back down). Afterward, they showed a sequence where the ball would approach either the square or the triangle. Both the nine- and 12-month-olds spent a longer amount of time looking at the images when the ball approached the hindering character than when it approached the helpful character.
According to the researchers, this indicated that the children had developed expectations of how the ball would react to the hindering character and therefore looked longer when the ball acted differently from how they’d expected.
In a second experiment, the researchers added eyes to the shapes, making them look more like people, which they used to deduce that the children were making a social judgement about the hindering character.
Critics of the experiment think it only shows that babies developed expectations of what would happen, not which shape they morally preferred.
Therefore the original researchers conducted a third experiment in which they used three-dimensional puppets instead of animated geometric shapes. Again, there was a ball either being helped or hindered by a puppet, and instead of simply using “looking measures,” the researchers adopted “reaching measures” to determine which puppet the kids preferred.
Almost all the babies reached for the helpful puppet, demonstrating their opinion of “good” and “bad” and, in doing so, an innate form of moral judgement.