Rescuing Evil What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition) Ron Rosenbaum David Marantz Audible Studios Books
Download As PDF : Rescuing Evil What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition) Ron Rosenbaum David Marantz Audible Studios Books
The use of the term "evil" has become controversial. Many are reluctant to apply it at all - even to Adolph Hitler (psychological adjustment problems, you see). And while it is true that the word has been recurrently misused, if we abandon the idea that it is possible to commit a knowingly evil act, we must abandon our belief in free will. Consider the case of "Psycho-Cabbie"....
Rescuing Evil What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition) Ron Rosenbaum David Marantz Audible Studios Books
The topic of evil is one I've had a personal and professional interest in for some time, so this Amazon Single piqued my interest. I'd read some favorable reviews of Rosenbaum's book on Hitler, and thought this would be an inexpensive way of getting a sense of whether I wanted to buy his book. I've saved myself some money, if this essay is a fair sample of his work.Setting aside the desperate need for copy-editing, the most significant problem is that he repeatedly substitutes a snarky attitude for making cogent, well-supported arguments. I can do snark with the best of them, but I recognize that I need to make actual arguments if I expect others to share my conclusions. Rosenbaum, however, repeatedly makes snide comments about neuroscience and other fields without ever bothering to present substantive arguments that would suggest they are wrong. I share his view that there is a determinism underlying much reporting on neuroscience research, but that does not invalidate a whole field of scientific research. If studies find a correlation between particular neurological features and people who commit heinous crimes, that does not automatically mean that they caused the criminal acts. Rosenbaum writes as if that is, indeed, the only conclusion one could reach, and then dismisses the research as a modern form of phrenology. He doesn't cite any neuroscientists making such deterministic claims, just news headlines that do, which rightly should lead to criticism of journalism. If there are scientific studies making sloppy claims of causality, then he should tell us about those.
The biggest problem, though, is that much of the essay is driven by an a priori judgment that unless people who commit evil acts see what they do as evil, we cannot hold them responsible for their actions. Coupled with his belief that this is an unacceptable outcome, this leads him to dismiss any evidence that might suggest that people who commit evil acts may see those actions as justified -- perhaps even as admirable. While he acknowledges that people have made such claims, he quickly pushes them aside to return to his false dichotomy. This isn't a reasoned position; it's dogma. Rather than seeking to learn how evil-doers understand their actions and moving from there, he determines what he wants the answer to be in advance and clouds the issue by making a false dichotomy: either people consciously choose to do evil or people who engage in evil acts cannot be held responsible. Understanding why people act as they do does not logically entail forgiveness, no matter how many times Rosenbaum suggests that it must.
Product details
|
Tags : Amazon.com: Rescuing Evil: What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition): Ron Rosenbaum, David Marantz, Audible Studios: Books, ,Ron Rosenbaum, David Marantz, Audible Studios,Rescuing Evil: What We Lose,Audible Studios,B00X5IF1I0
People also read other books :
- The Complete Leader Everything You Need to Become a HighPerforming Leader eBook Ron Price Randy Lisk
- Wouldn't Miss it for the World eBook Tara McCarthy
- Badge of Honor [The Town of Pearl 9] Siren Publishing LoveXtreme Forever edition by Dixie Lynn Dwyer Romance eBooks
- Stand Out Networking A Simple and Authentic Way to Meet People on Your Own Terms A Penguin Special from Portfolio eBook Dorie Clark
- Whose Body? Dorothy Leigh Sayers 9781544045566 Books
Rescuing Evil What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition) Ron Rosenbaum David Marantz Audible Studios Books Reviews
The Single is actually a very fine idea; it gives me a chance to experience an author and his or her style or argument, short of committing to a full-length book, but hopefully in the context of what the author intended to be a complete package. That said, I have to fully agree with other reviewers that this particular essay was atrocious in its lack of proper copy-editing, punctuation, grammar and formatting, let alone conceptual clarity.
It's a shame because once I suffered through to the latter half of the essay, he does make some provocative and helpful points about evil and the study of evil. And I do intend to read some of his longer work, partially as a result. But will have to be careful about better quality control, otherwise they'll lose customers from what should be a popular format in these busy times.
Excellent and well written article about evil and why we should hold people responsible for their actions. We are being hit with a numerous theories on why people commit evil and how it may have had a basis in disorders they developed while growing up. These analyses are probably true, but murder, rape and assualts on a singular level or on a mass level are unacceptable and we must hold the perpetrators accountable. Good read.
A must read as we contemplate beheadings being videotaped.
This was a good essay, and a fun short read. There were quite a few typos, so it could use a bit more editing- it does make it hard to read at times. But in general, I feel it is worth it and interesting.
The other reviewers' comments on issues of grammar and punctuation are well noted; this went beyond the typical British English-to-American English disconnect and looked just plain sloppy. Nothing a good editor couldn't have fixed in half an hour, really. And I don't feel my $2 or my reading time was wasted on this.
But for $2, the meat of the argument is worth putting up with the gristle. Rosenbaum's essay touches on deep questions that have been with us for as long as we've been able to formulate abstract thought and offers an entry point to the discussion of evil. And that's the way to look at this Single -- as an entry point, leading one to look at the other works he mentions, whether he agrees or disagrees with those authors' conclusions on the subject.
The reviewer who said this reads "like a loopy blog post" has it about right. This document is riddled with typos (it's like whoever typed it up didn't even glance through it again after finishing) and is poorly organized--it reads like a good starting draft for something that could turn into something interesting later. Maybe it's transcribed from a lecture? In that case, tone and gestures might have helped carry more sense/meaning. As it is, it's a mildly interesting, often frustrating read. The author should be embarrassed that is charging money for it.
Ron Rosenbaum's RESCUING EVIL reads like a frenzied, loopy blog post. It is riddled with typographical and grammatical errors, the cumulative effect of which is to make the reader wonder how invested the author is in "getting it right" and making his argument(s) pursuasively. There is (or should be) a difference between posting and publishing. When I spend my own money to download a "book" from , I expect it to have been duly edited and vetted (if not peer reviewed ... there was no Acknowledgments page to RESCUING EVIL so I think it's safe to assume no peer was harmed in the making of this book). On the other hand, if I just want to hear someone sound off, I'll take a late-night ride on the J train.
On the positive side, Rosenbaum (energetically) covers a lot of turf in his brief essay. And he drops a lot of names along the way, giving the interested reader hopeful leads for further reading and exploration. People interested in contemplating the reality of evil might prefer M. Scott Peck's People of the Lie The Hope for Healing Human Evil.
The topic of evil is one I've had a personal and professional interest in for some time, so this Single piqued my interest. I'd read some favorable reviews of Rosenbaum's book on Hitler, and thought this would be an inexpensive way of getting a sense of whether I wanted to buy his book. I've saved myself some money, if this essay is a fair sample of his work.
Setting aside the desperate need for copy-editing, the most significant problem is that he repeatedly substitutes a snarky attitude for making cogent, well-supported arguments. I can do snark with the best of them, but I recognize that I need to make actual arguments if I expect others to share my conclusions. Rosenbaum, however, repeatedly makes snide comments about neuroscience and other fields without ever bothering to present substantive arguments that would suggest they are wrong. I share his view that there is a determinism underlying much reporting on neuroscience research, but that does not invalidate a whole field of scientific research. If studies find a correlation between particular neurological features and people who commit heinous crimes, that does not automatically mean that they caused the criminal acts. Rosenbaum writes as if that is, indeed, the only conclusion one could reach, and then dismisses the research as a modern form of phrenology. He doesn't cite any neuroscientists making such deterministic claims, just news headlines that do, which rightly should lead to criticism of journalism. If there are scientific studies making sloppy claims of causality, then he should tell us about those.
The biggest problem, though, is that much of the essay is driven by an a priori judgment that unless people who commit evil acts see what they do as evil, we cannot hold them responsible for their actions. Coupled with his belief that this is an unacceptable outcome, this leads him to dismiss any evidence that might suggest that people who commit evil acts may see those actions as justified -- perhaps even as admirable. While he acknowledges that people have made such claims, he quickly pushes them aside to return to his false dichotomy. This isn't a reasoned position; it's dogma. Rather than seeking to learn how evil-doers understand their actions and moving from there, he determines what he wants the answer to be in advance and clouds the issue by making a false dichotomy either people consciously choose to do evil or people who engage in evil acts cannot be held responsible. Understanding why people act as they do does not logically entail forgiveness, no matter how many times Rosenbaum suggests that it must.
0 Response to "[TEQ]∎ Descargar Gratis Rescuing Evil What We Lose (Audible Audio Edition) Ron Rosenbaum David Marantz Audible Studios Books"
Post a Comment