124 research outputs found
Observations on the Architecture of Evil: A New Reading of Eichmann on Kant
No full textEn route from Birmingham to Syria in 2013, British-Jihadi neophytes aged 22, Yusuf Sarwar and Mohammed Ahmed purchased two books via Amazon to prepare for their mission in Syria after joining ISIS: The Koran for Dummies and Islam for Dummies. Journalists were swift to disparage their reading. The book’s author, Princeton University campus imam, Sohaib Nazeer Sultan remarked “Even though they may have ordered it, I don't think they read it.” In 1933, aged 27, Adolf Eichmann moved to Berlin to join the Sicherheitsdienst SD whereupon he read Immanuel Kant’s book the Kritik der praktischen Vernunft (The Critique of Practical Reason) for the first time. After his trial in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt of course dismissed Eichmann’s reading of the German philosopher as thoroughly vacuous. Ever since, writers have sought to undermine the veracity of Eichmann’s account. The global Jihadis are illiterate, a journalist recently commented: they’re not well read in the Qur’an, and if they have read it, they have thoroughly misunderstood it. He cited as evidence Abdul Raqib Amin’s YouTube rhetorical: Forget everyone. Read the Koran, read the instruction of life. Find out what is jihad. Eichmann on the other hand was not illiterate in his youth. Before Berlin, he had already read Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals ; he would also re-read the Critique of Practical Reason, and from his testimony and terminology we can infer he was familiar with Kantian concepts that extend beyond both books..
Eichmann e a incapacidade de pensar
No full textThe starting point of this book is the Eichmann case, as analyzed by Hannah Arendt in Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963), a work that results from her participation in the trial of the former SS lieutenant colonel responsible for the logistics of transporting Jews to the concentration and extermination camps during the Nazi regime in Germany. As the author shows, the mismatch between the monstrosity of the crimes that Eichmann helped perpetrate and his figure before the court – which did not seem monstrous or malevolent to Arendt, but completely normal and even mediocre – led her to coin the expression banality from evil. With such a notion, Arendt designates a new type of evil, which is not caused by base motives, corrupted instincts or an evil will, but by obedience to the duty of office linked to a refusal of the agent to think about what he does. With the aim of understanding what are the conditions that provide this inability or absence of thinking (thoughtlessness), the author examines, within Arendt's theoretical framework, how not only totalitarian regimes, but also the Modern Era itself, produce the experience of loneliness (loneliness) within mass society. Such an experience undermines the establishment of a
common world in which human plurality can be affirmed, a condition for exercising the ability to act, feel and also think.PublishedO ponto de partida deste livro é o caso Eichmann, tal como analisado por Hannah Arendt em Eichmann em Jerusalém (1963), obra que resulta de sua participação no julgamento do ex-tenente-coronel da SS responsável pela logística de transporte dos judeus para os campos de concentração e extermínio durante o regime nazista na Alemanha. Conforme mostra o autor, o descompasso entre a monstruosidade dos crimes que Eichmann ajudou a perpetrar e a sua figura perante o tribunal – que não pareceu monstruosa ou maléfica a Arendt, mas completamente normal e até medíocre –, levou-a a cunhar a expressão banalidade do mal. Com tal noção, Arendt designa um novo tipo de mal, o qual não é causado por motivos torpes, instintos corrompidos ou por uma vontade maligna, e sim pela obediência ao dever de ofício ligada a uma recusa do agente em pensar naquilo que faz. Com o objetivo de compreender quais são as condições que propiciam essa incapacidade ou ausência de pensar (thoughtlessness), o autor examina, dentro do arcabouço teórico de Arendt, como não só os regimes totalitários, mas também a própria Era Moderna, produzem a experiência da solidão (loneliness) no interior da sociedade de massa. Tal experiência prejudica a instauração de um
mundo comum no qual possa se afirmar a pluralidade humana, condição para o exercício da capacidade de agir, sentir e também de pensar
Hannah Arendt: política e responsabilidade no julgamento de Eichmann
No full textEste trabalho tem o objetivo de analisar as posições de Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) sobre o julgamento de Otto Adolf Eichmann (1906-1962). Para essa análise será utilizado o livro Eichmann em Jerusalém, produzido pela autora após ter assistido pessoalmente o julgamento do réu, um burocrata nazista apontado como responsável pelo sistema de transportes e pela burocracia que conduziam pessoas para a deportação e à morte no período da ditadura hitlerista na Alemanha (1933-1945) sob as ordens de seu governo. Após a derrota da Alemanha na 2ª Guerra Mundial, Eichmann foge e passa a viver na Argentina com outra identidade. Foi capturado em 1960 pelo serviço secreto israelense e levado a julgamento na Corte Distrital de Jerusalém, onde foi acusado por quinze crimes, dentre eles: crimes contra a humanidade, crimes contra o povo judeu e pertencer a uma organização criminosa. Ao longo de seu julgamento, foi analisado por Hannah Arendt, uma filósofa e intelectual renomada, que expõe inúmeras reflexões sobre o caso e a figura do sujeito Eichmann. Para além disso, Arendt problematiza a legalidade da captura de Eichmann e as questões morais que surgem ao longo do julgamento, bem como sua responsabilidade pessoal e legal quanto aos crimes de que era acusadoThis paper aims to analyze Hannah Arendt s (1906-1975) positions on the trial of Otto Adolf Eichmann (1906-1962). This analysis will use the book Eichmann in Jerusalem, produced by the author after having personally witnessed the defendant's trial, a Nazi bureaucrat appointed as responsible for the transport system and bureaucracy that led people to deportation and to death in the Hitlerist period in Germany (1933-1945) under his government orders. After Germany's defeat in World War II, Eichmann escapes and lives in Argentina with a new identity. In 1960, the Israeli secret service captures him and takes him to trial in the District Court of Jerusalem. He was charged with fifteen crimes, including crimes against humanity, crimes against Jewish people and for being a membership of a criminal organization. Throughout his trial, he was analyzed by Hannah Arendt the renowned philosopher whom exposes a number of reflections on the case and on the subject Eichmann. In addition, Arendt discusses the legality of Eichmann s capture and the moral issues that arise throughout the trial, as well as his personal and legal responsibility in the crimes of which he was accusedConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológic
Personal Responsibility in Hannah Arendt: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann
No full textThe research in question presents the study developed about the notion of personal
responsibility, in the thought of the philosopher and contemporary political theorist Hannah
Arendt, starting from the account that the author makes of the trial of Adolf Eichmann, from
which her work: Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report about the banality of evil. Otto Adolf
Eichman was one of the architects of the “Final Solution”, a plan that aimed to annihilate the
Jewish people during the Nazi regime. Eichmann was put on trial accused of crimes against
the Jewish people, crimes against humanity and war crimes among others. Faced with these
accusations, Eichmann pleaded not guilty as reported by the author in her work, therefore, he
exempts himself from responsibility for his actions. And it is in this scenario that the issue of
personal responsibility comes into discussion. The idea of personal responsibility, which must
be understood in contrast to political (collective) responsibility, which concerns the collective
being held accountable for certain actions, is another very important concept for
understanding this study. The question of the absence of thought activity is a crucial point in
this discussion. In this way, the research discusses these questions, in order to understand the
notion of personal responsibility addressed by the author, aiming to clarify what would be the
responsibility of Otto Adolf Eichmann in relation to the crimes he perpetratedA pesquisa em questão, apresenta o estudo desenvolvido acerca da noção de responsabilidade
pessoal, no pensamento da filósofa e teórica política contemporânea Hannah Arendt, partindo
do relato que a autora fez do julgamento de Adolf Eichmann, do qual proveio sua obra:
Eichmann em Jerusalém: um relato sobre a banalidade do mal. Otto Adolf Eichmman, foi
um dos arquitetos da “Solução Final”, um plano que tinha por finalidade aniquilar o povo
judeu no período do regime nazista. Eichmann foi levado a julgamento acusado de crimes
contra o povo judeu, crimes contra a humanidade e crimes de guerra entre outros. Diante
dessas acusações Eichmann se declarou inocente conforme relatado pela autora em sua obra,
assim sendo, ele exime-se da responsabilidade de suas ações. E é nesse cenário que se coloca
em discussão a questão da responsabilidade pessoal. A ideia de responsabilidade pessoal diz
respeito a culpa, e deve ser compreendida em contraste com a de responsabilidade politica que
diz respeito ao coletivo ser responsabilizado por determinadas ações, a responsabilidade
coletiva é outro conceito muito importante para o entendimento desse estudo. A questão da
ausência da atividade do pensamento é um ponto crucial nessa discussão. Dessa forma, a
pesquisa coloca em discussão essas questões, com o intuito de compreender a noção de
responsabilidade pessoal tratada pela autora, objetivando esclarecer qual seria a
responsabilidade de Otto Adolf Eichmann com relação aos crimes por ele perpetrad
Panel 1: The Adolf Eichmann Trial
No full textSpeakers:Lawrence R. Douglas, James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Amherst College
Deborah Lipstadt, Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies, Emory University; Author of the recently published book, The Eichmann Trial
Tim Naftali, Director, Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
Hanna Yablonka Torok, Professor of Jewish History, Ben Gurion University of the Negev
Moderator:Lisa Yavnai, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Video of Panel 1 (and Welcome Remarks
Recommended from our members
The Eichmann trial diary /
No full text"Fifty years ago in April, 1961, the trial of Adolf Eichmann opened in Jerusalem. At first most observers concentrated on the details of the amazing arrest of the former SS officer hiding in Argentina under an assumed name. The trial informed the world about the gigantic enterprise of extermination and murder carried out by Nazi Germany against the Jews that is now called the Holocaust. RAI--Italian State radio--asked a professor of history and political science who had emigrated from Italy to Palestine in 1947 to report to its listeners. His account came as the trial unfolded with vivid descriptions of the proceedings and how the Israeli public was reacting to the shocking revelations that a worldwide audience discovered for the first time. The author kept his notes as a daily chronicle so that the drama taking place in the courtroom was preserved and became this book. The Eichmann Trial Diary therefore offers a very different view from that of the philosopher Hannah Arendt writing for The New Yorker or the historians reconstructing the event decades later. This account stands out as the best kind of journalism and popular history. It is in the process of being translated into Hebrew for distribution into the Israeli educational system"--Provided by publisher
A figura de Eichmann e a faculdade do pensar em Hannah Arendt
No full textIn her work Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of evil, Hannah Arendt (1999) analyzes the trial of Adolf Eichmann – a former Nazi regime official responsible for the deportation of European Jews during the Holocaust, who, in turn, became an expert on the matter. Jewish. During her trial, the author highlights her inability to escape bureaucratic clichés and her conspicuous superficiality in conventional and standardized conduct. Faced with this figure, Arendt is amazed (thaumazein) with the absence of thought in him: the lack of stopping to think. This astonishment led Arendt to question whether the absence of thought was one of the conditions capable of leading man to do evil. From this perspective, this work seeks to analyze the conflicting relationship between the evil that becomes banal, expressed in the figure of Eichmann, and the human faculty of thinking, in order to avoid catastrophes.Em sua obra Eichmann em Jerusalém: um relato sobre a banalidade do mal, Hannah Arendt (1999) analisa o julgamento de Adolf Eichmann – um ex-oficial do regime nazista responsável pela deportação dos judeus europeus durante o Holocausto, que, por sua vez, se tornou um perito na questão judaica. Durante o seu julgamento, a autora destaca a sua incapacidade de fugir dos clichês burocráticos e sua conspícua superficialidade em condutas convencionais e padronizadas. Diante dessa figura, Arendt se espanta (thaumazein) com a ausência de pensamento nele existente: a falta de parar para pensar. Esse espanto levou Arendt a questionar se teria sido a ausência de pensamento uma das condições capazes de levar o homem a fazer o mal. Nessa perspectiva, este trabalho busca analisar a relação conflitante entre o mal que se torna banal, expresso na figura de Eichmann, e a faculdade humana de pensar, no sentido de se evitarem catástrofes
Defense of Superior Orders in International Criminal Law as Portrayed in Three Trials: Eichmann, Calley and England
No full textThe paper is dedicated to the defense of superior orders in international law. The author discusses attempts to use this defense in three trials, - Adolf Eichmann\u27s, William Calley\u27s and Lynndie England\u27s. The paper juxtaposes the trials and provides conclusions on the success of this defense in each case
Történelmi igazságtétel - Ötven évvel az Eichmann per után
No full textOn the 50th anniversary of the Eichmann trial the author gives an analysis of the legal and human rights issues raised by the Jerusalem trial in the light of the development that has taken place in international criminal law and international human rights law over the last half decade. In addition to the particularities of international crimes and the question whether national or international courts should exercise jurisdiction over such crimes the paper elaborates on whether fair trial standards that apply in „ordinary cases" could be observed in historical trials as well. In order to answer these questions the author identifies the functions of historical trials and points to the tensions created by the multiplicity of objectives historical trials are expected to fulfill
Tumour Budding/T-cell infiltrates in Colorectal Cancer: Proposal of a Novel Combined Score.
No full textAIMS
The TNM classification system is used for prognostication purposes and to guide patient management. However, in colorectal cancer (CRC), additional markers are needed to stratify prognostic subgroups. From large bodies of research, two promising markers have emerged: Tumour budding and T-cell host response (CD3, CD8 and CD45RO infiltrates). However, attempts to combine these two parameters have been sparse. The aim of this study was to perform an assessment of potential protagonists that could be used in a combined score (Budding/T-cell Score, BTS).
METHODS AND RESULTS
This descriptive, retrospective study was performed on a multi-punch tissue microarray containing material from 345 patients with Stage I-IV CRC. Areas from tumour centre, front and microenvironment were stained for Pancytokeratin/CD3, Pancytokeratin/CD8 and Pancytokeratin/CD45RO. Tumour buds were scored manually and T-cell infiltrates digitally using open-source software (QuPath). Tumour buds, T-cell counts and combined BTS were associated with clinico-pathological features and overall survival (OS). A higher combined BTS score (Buds/CD8, tumour centre) performed better than budding or CD8/CD3 alone in predicting nodal metastases (p<0.0001, OR 1.466, 95%CI: 1.115-1.928). Only higher BTS (Buds/CD3) was significantly associated with poorer OS on multivariate analysis (p= 0.012, HR 1.218, 95%CI: 1.044-1.419).
CONCLUSIONS
Although CD8+/CD3+ T-cells are predictive of tumour biology in CRC, we found a combined BTS to be stronger in predicting survival and certain features with high clinical relevance, such as nodal metastases, in comparison to budding or T-cells alone. Further studies combining T-cell infiltrates and tumour budding are necessary to optimize risk assessment of CRC
- …
