The Holocaust

Comparing
Hanna Arendt , Eichmann in Jerusalem , Imporant pages ( 21-55, 83-93;105-111; 112-116; 126-150; 206-133; 248-298) and Stanley Milgram

To interpret his experinmental observation, Stanley Milgram famously said that the “perpetrators” who played the role of teacher entered a “state of agency” (Reader 130) To interpret her courtroom , observations, Hannah Arendt famously said Adolf Eichmann served as an example of “the banality of evil” ( Arendt, 252)

Your job in your essay is
(a) To Contrast how the “state of agency” vs “ the banality of evil” explains prpetrator’s conduct
(b) To draw conclusions about the significance of your contrasts for understanding morality, history , or human conduct

You are free to analyze the diffrences and their implications as creatively as you like ,so long as you back up your reasoning with references to the materials.

You may want to consider some of following subquestion as suggestions:
1. DEFINE exactly what the two phrases mean for the authors Milgram and Arendt ( are there similarities between them two phrases worth mentioning?)
*both reject the “norm of internality (assume what people do reflect their inner nature) “
*both think that identity at the victim is secondary
* both downplay the power of ideology ( they believe that doesn’t matter what the ideology is, it can happen anywhere)

2. How do you think that Milgrim’sand Arebdt’sexplanation of the perpetrators conduct differs in :
Whether the perpetrators are following order without regard to morality; Whether the perpetrators are conflicted about their actions;
Whether the perpetrators identity with their actions;
Whether the perpetrators are drawing upon the surrounding culture to define what they are doing;
Whether the perpetrators are exercising their conscience;
Whether the perpetrator were coerced or at least bullied into acting as they did;
Whether the perpetrators think they were morally justified;
Whether the perpetrators would repeat their actions in hindsight;
Whether the perpetrators wee cogs in a machine or whether they indeed exercised some creativity – or your own wording for all of the above of course!
3. For judging the significance of “the state of agency” and of “the banality of evil” you may want to consider as well;
whether they explain the essential character of the Holocaust to human history;
whether they explain the essential character of the Holocaust for human history;
whether the perpetrators reflect a particular society or whether they reflect human potentials everywhere;
whether events similar to those of the holocaust could be repeated in the future; the perils of the division of labor and of complex bureaucracies in modern societies such as those of Nazi Germany and beyond;
Whether immoral conduct can be waded off by the lessons of Milgram and Arendt; o of course, whether you think Milgram and Arendt offer compelling explanations of their evidence of other evidence.

Your focus in the essay will represent your own knowledge and insight. There is an absolute limit of nine pages , double- spaced. Back up assertions in your essay with quotes or with page references to reading or to historical facts from lecture. You may cite lecture only for historical fact not found in the readings, not for opinion. You are not expected to carry out independent research, but if you seek evidence apart from course assignment, you are free to cite in your essay.

In evaluating your essays, we will be looking at three dimensions:
1) Quality and consistency analysis
2) The range and aptness of source citations that you use to back up your analysis
3) Grammar and clarity of expression.
All standard citation or footnote style are fine

Useful link

http://www.unc.edu/~pmeyer/General_Publications/Hitler.pdf

Stanley milgram, chapter nine “group effects” from obidience to authority , reissue 2009