all PB:

>>102484, >>102485, >>102487 Psychology of Evil: The Lucifer Effect in Action - Dr. Phil >>102533 Zimbardo mp3

Questions -

1. What kind of person calls himself a hero?

(imagine what would happen to any anon who did that - hahaha)

2. How has such a "maverick" remained a pillar of the academic psychology establishment?

(which he is)

3. What does Z think about God?

Doesn't seem very interested. Seems like anyone talking about evil would be.

4. What does Z think about free will / choice?

Not much. He's still caught up in 'nature vs nurture' debate. Whichever you pick, means thinking people are victims of circumstances beyond their control = no ability to make real moral choices - like the choice to reject tyranny in favor of liberty.

One guy wrote a long critique on Z's book The Lucifer Effect on Amazon - search the reviews for "Kristo Ivanov." It's pretty academic but one thing he mentions: Z never talks about love. Other critical commenters call the book dry, academic. IMO, that's because he never really engages with evil on anything but a mental level.

The best book i ever read on the psychology of evil was People of the Lie (1978) by psychiatrist Scott Peck. Old now but exceptional in that the author wrote it after becoming a Christian. It's definitely not dry. He deals with real moral dilemmas, not academic ones.

Excerpt from a more recent (2013) essay on Peck:

https://subfictional.com/thoughts-on-pecks-people-of-the-lie/

Peck explains that evil is inability to tolerate oneself as imperfect. Not being able to tolerate the idea that you are not perfect means that you cannot recognize your need to grow. It means that you need to maintain the pretense of your goodness and perfection above all else. People who demonstrate evil see the world as they want to see it rather than how it actually is. To maintain their version of reality, they must scapegoat others and project their own faults onto them. They must attack any and all who jeopardize their self image. All of this means that those who demonstrate evil are entirely incapable of true empathy and can be utterly destructive in their relationship with others in the name of self-preservation.

SOUND FAMILIAR?

>>102558

forgot to include a coupla slides from Zimbardo's "hero" presentation.

SLIDE 1:

Here he lists the 3 forces that matter in human behavior:

1. within people

2. in social situational contexts

3. in dominant systems

1 is NATURE

2 and 3 are NURTURE

It's not that both NATURE and NURTURE don't matter - it's that they are not in the ends what matters MOST.

What matters most imo is CHOICE.

It's not there.

Zimbardo does make the point that habits contribute to behavior. But habits are habits of choice. We develop character (see next slide) by making good choices over a period of time.

SLIDE 2:

Quotes George Bernard Shaw - who defines character as "nature' (genes) and circumstances as what determines behavior. [although in the YT video below, he seems to think people have a choice about whether they want to contribute to society - interesting, isn't it?]

Shaw is a eugenicist and fabian socialist who eventually advocated the gassing of undesirables:

Shaw....insisted that the only way for the human race to improve was by making sure that natural instinct, unrestricted by social forces, would guide reproduction (Hale, 2010).

http://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/connections/531f82e5132156674b00020b#!

In this clip from the 2008 film “The Soviet Story“, we see that George Bernard Shaw...defended Hitler, advocated killing those who can’t justify their existence and called for the development of lethal gas 10 years before the national socialists in Germany did exactly that.

https://youtu.be/WgpaKkrZex4 [ATTACHED]

https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2010/01/25/george-bernard-shaw-hitler-and-margaret-sanger/

ZIMBARDO IS QUOTING A MONSTER

>>102565

>Why are you attacking the person and not the arguments he makes?

I am attacking the arguments, although I do think Z is a slippery character.

I gave an alternative source - Scott Peck - whose arguments (and basis for argumentation) seem better grounded.

Zimbardo is not the person with whom I would choose to ally. Too much like Milgram, who claimed that those who refused to give potentially lethal shocks had nothing to distinguish them from those who complied.

In the Stanford prison experiments, there were prisoners and guards. Within each group, there were those who refused to comply - and those who complied readily. Looking at which is which would elicit very interesting results. But results that almost certainly do not fit the narrative of academic psychology and thus will never be advanced from within the field.

this is just my 2cents worth but based on more than a casual interest.

>>102566

thumbnail does not fit the slide - you have to expand it to see the quotes.

>>102567

>>102566

lemme try with a different copy of the Shaw slide.

>>102568

nope, doesn't work - how bizarre.

@SeattlePD

Robbery Suspect Pleads for His Gun Back After Victim Disarms Him

https://twitter.com/SeattlePD/status/1450852133331369986

https://t.me/CovidRedPills/8448

[Forwarded from GALLIA DAILY | 🇫🇷 IN 🇬🇧]

[ Video ]

🇫🇷🔥 THE YELLOW VESTS ARE BACK!

👉🏻 The tense context in France, a few months before an explosive presidential election, gave rise to what the government seems to fear the most:

➡️ A merger of the anti-vaccine passport movement with the yellow vests movement.

ℹ️ Sociologically, these are the same people who are yellow vests and who are against the vaccine passport.

📌 So the two have merged and from now on, it seems that every Saturday will be marked by demonstrations and blockades.

Health care providers doing a different dance this year.....

https://t.me/PepeMatter/5022

>>102574

noice doc, howsa?

>>102578

Productive today and last night.

Mostly doing deeper digs on plandemic. Eg, David Martin's ideas that it's insurance companies that drive a lot of the 'evildoing' currently, with banks more as a patsy (although obviously, they would work together).

This is quite interesting; have thought before about insurance, think we talked about it at least once. Insurance is based on driving up costs and so making it impossible to avoid insurance - then devising ways to avoid paying out (like mebbe making sure those who no longer 'contribute' die of a dread disease?).

I think i posted here on dat last night....

yep, right here >>102395

>>102580

links good, go for it

>>102572 maybe add if you're not bakin yet

>>102582

hello RA

thanks as always for the great work you do, on there all day long

we should not be getting stuff deleted post hoc here on this board

thx for the info on not changing thread titles more than 6 hours later, didn't know

• FRB

>>102584

>insurance firms as finance firms

this actuarial role - they can use that information to figure out who is more profitable to eliminate

this is what Amazing Polly was talking about in her hospital vid from last month - where it seems now that "intensivists" run the show, have more authority than surgeons or other docs for determining the course of treatment in ICUs - which are often CLOSED (using covid as the excuse).

>>102586

tanks for adding YV's as well - always watched em, glad it's back

GIVE EM HELL FRENCH ANONS