On Killing...

[Lady Cassandra Seahawke]

ok, I am going to hop into this discussion just for a brief moment. There is an individual reaction to things then there is a group reaction...both being contingent upon their beliefs, times, mores and experiences.

We cannot really go back into time and analyze the psychology another culture. ...Think of the

Romans with arenas how death was viewed, ...as a sport...patricide was a given in order to further ones goals.

How the Spartans trained their boys for war...they couldn't be called a man until they successfully killed a slave. Mothers sent their sons off to war with "either victory or on your shield"

The Spainish Inquisition...public torture, burnings etc.

The French Revolution use of the Gullitine...etc.

British public executions ...disembowments, beheadings... drawn and quarterings...etc

I could give other examples...All of these were of the societal norm of the times even with their professed belief that killing was wrong. When using hindsite we are judging others by own inert belief and standards. We cannot say what the psychological aspects of a situation was given as we do not have the same norms as they had...

Social and psycholical norms ...these continue to evolve as time goes on.

Consequently, IMHO, any study is ascrewed because the statician is using his/her belief system as the comparable norm against what he/she views as right or wrong. (speaking of which...when I was in elementary school I always refused to use just he in writing...I always used the "he/she". Because I felt that girls were being left out...ok, hard to explain my childish thinking...but, this was before the so called sexual revolution. I stepped out of the norm but eventually the norm caught up.)

....wonder how someone from Ancient Rome would analyze modern day society. Or how GOAP pirate hunter would view the handling of the Somalian situation. Perhaps they would be scratching their head wondering why we hesitate to just blow them out of the water....displaying their severed head on the ships bow.

OK, hope I didn't ramble to much ...as stated ...the above is from my viewpoint and not another...hmmmm the old saying "We are a product of the times"

Hopping back to just a reader...

[Mission]

I submit that the basic thing that makes one remorseful for killing a fellow human, whatever the socio-political or religious norms is a far more basic emotional response. Thus it would transcend all the layers of external rationalization we are using as an excuse to say someone would not feel remorse at this time or that place. (See my post above.)

We know there is a process that is gone through to desensitize soldiers to killing the enemy. It is very simple and I believe there are records of it going back to Roman times.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Mission, when the "truce" was over, they went right back to machine gunning and gassing each other. So they had a moment of melancholy missing home for the season. Not really a sign of remorse for killing each other.

As far as what it would take for me personally to be remorseful, it would have to proven that the bullets being fired at me were not real and that the person trying to kill me really wasn't. Much of my experience is not for cyberspace. That's all I have to say about that.

Bo

[MadL]

Remorse for killing, for me I would have had to have found out after the fact that my killing was done by mistake, or that I was fooled into killing a good man who had no intention of harm.

On the other hand you have people who break down and cry just to hear of a wild animal being killed, people who cry when they hear of a person killed of whom they have never met, know no one connected to them, even do not know the circumstances around the killing. There are even people who stand outside prisons as a confirmed serial killer is executed and still they weep tears - a complete foreign feeling for me, indeed I wonder why so many of them in there continue to live after the heinous acts they have committed (as I am sure several loved ones of victims do as well)

Indeed Lady Cassandra speaks much wisdom for anyone today trying t' explain th' thoughts and minds of humans 300 years and beyond ago has a much skewed frame of mind to over come. I would say however that 80% if not 98% of today's citizens would cringe if asked to put them self in the seat of a towns folk witnessing a public execution of the 16th and 17th century, yet have have not read ANY WHERE that protests where ever staged for hanging pirate's corps out on the docks to rot and 'serve warning to other pirates', I don't recall even as much as a sentence of any complaints that "but children can see them there!" - it was a vastly different world then and so where your and my ancestors in the way their minds work. Back then women, children, and man alike would gather in the street and cheer te executioner on, not gather with candles and beg a murder be given a second chance because "he is really a good man down inside, he just needs a hug" or "but he had a tough time as a child"

"Basic Humanity" is a figment of the imagination for every culture, every religion, every person has a varied 'basic humanity instinct', it is not something encoded into human genetics but something mentally 'developed' over time and generations. By the time we are living among the stars in great Star Ships our predecessors may well look back and wonder how WE TODAY could kill a chicken, let along a cow. then Eat it without remorse.......(dangit! now I'm hungry!)

For me you ask? Often the only reason I do not kill is because I do not have permission to and no heinous act has been committed against me to over turn the need for such permission; for me, that is what many generations have inbreed into my genetics.

[callenish gunner]

OK ....the first time it was difficult because it was a child of 8 or 9 who was strapped with explosives running toward me ....I drew my pistol and fired 3 rounds he dropped and blew a 12 ft wide crater in the concrete... I went around the corner of the building and puked my guts out because of my religious beliefs that "thou shalt not kill" But when in the field it became second nature to kill a suspected enemy, man, woman young or old it never mattered and I was good at what I did. It was kill or be killed. The range factor had no effect on me either; in fact at times I might have said I took particular pride in the souls that departed on my knife. I didn't go out to kill just any random person but there was an enemy and a mission and I wanted to live to get the hell out of that Hell so I did what I had to to survive ....My nightmares were always that I wouldn't react fast enough and it would be me the next time ...

Would I prefer to never be in that situation again; DAMNED RIGHT!!! Nor do I want any of my children to have to go through that either. I will admit that when I came back to the states I was dangerous to be around. People got badly hurt when conflicts arose usually over some woman. Whether I actually knew her or not. The mindset to react to a life or death situation is a powerful stimuli.

So for some PHD to say that you have to be crazy to have no remorse for killing I don't think they have ever been in or lived through combat situations.

[Mission]

Mission, when the "truce" was over, they went right back to machine gunning and gassing each other. So they had a moment of melancholy missing home for the season. Not really a sign of remorse for killing each other.

Not all of them...

I think there is a necessary condition for a psychologically normal person not to feel remorse over killing. It has to do with the way you view the person you have killed.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

It has to do with the way you view the person you have killed.

Here we can agree, but this must also be combined with the situation the individual is faced with as well.

Bo

[Mission]

It has to do with the way you view the person you have killed.

Here we can agree, but this must also be combined with the situation the individual is faced with as well.

True. At a certain point, instinct takes over. This has limited effect on remorse, however. Remorse comes after the fact.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

I have been reading a book my sister gave me for my B-day; "A Peoples History of the American Revolution" by Ray Raphael. Here is a releative real-life scenario from a British observer after a battle for New York;

"I never before saw such a shocking scene; some dead, others dying, death in different shapes; some of the wounded making the most pitiful lamentations, others that were of different parties cursing each other as the author oftheir misfortunes. One old veteran I observed (that was shot through both legs and not able to walk) very cooly loading his piece and cleaning it from blood. I was suprised at the sight and asked him his reasons for it. He, with a look of contempt, said, "To be reay in case any of the Yankees come this way again."

The author goes on in the next sentence to say;

"Of all wartime experiences, death is certainly the hardest to comprehend. Without first-hand documentation, and with no comparable experiences of our own, how can we possibly understand? If put in the place of the victim, who would we curse, the enemy or the recruiting officer?"

I think that sums up pretty well the value of controlled experiments on the human nature of combat death and mortality.

Bo

[Mission]

I have been reading a book my sister gave me for my B-day; "A Peoples History of the American Revolution" by Ray Raphael. Here is a releative real-life scenario from a British observer after a battle for New York;

"I never before saw such a shocking scene; some dead, others dying, death in different shapes; some of the wounded making the most pitiful lamentations, others that were of different parties cursing each other as the author oftheir misfortunes. One old veteran I observed (that was shot through both legs and not able to walk) very cooly loading his piece and cleaning it from blood. I was suprised at the sight and asked him his reasons for it. He, with a look of contempt, said, "To be reay in case any of the Yankees come this way again."

The author goes on in the next sentence to say;

"Of all wartime experiences, death is certainly the hardest to comprehend. Without first-hand documentation, and with no comparable experiences of our own, how can we possibly understand? If put in the place of the victim, who would we curse, the enemy or the recruiting officer?"

I think that sums up pretty well the value of controlled experiments on the human nature of combat death and mortality.

Bo

By this logic, only Callenish should be posting on this topic then, right?

As the name implies, controlled experiments are the only way to control for all the different variables that affect results. Many of these are at work in ways we don't understand. So if you throw them out entirely, each situation is, by definition, unique and the question can no longer be examined rationally. (Note that this is not an insult. Rational - using reason or logic in thinking out a problem.) Thus, no one can logically discuss it because its entirely context dependent.

Experiments have their limitations, but they are designed to examine specific facets of a situation. They cannot predict every situation, nor do they claim to be able to because that is impossible. They give us an idea about trends in behavior, not specific behaviors.

[Mission]

Also note that a survey is not a controlled experiment. It is a survey and is subject to many problems that controlled experiments are not, primarily expectations of the surveyor and perceived expectations by the subject. These things alter response behavior.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Callenish is the only one to decide to post his experience. This doesn't mean he is the only one with experience. As to the original post about the book and the 98/2 % value, which is done by a former Army Ranger, all I can get from this is that his views are anything but scientific and he probably has issues of his own to deal with. For this man to make such a blanket statement and then someone else here condemn that 2% to mental instability is absolutely BS. This is the problem I have with this book and it's suppositions. I would not argue that more people have remorse that do not, but i will not accept this mans comments based on what has been given here. I may read this book myself in the future to better understand where he is coming from, but from all indications he is just trying to justify his own interpretations and feelings on the subject. Those of us with real-life experiences with death and killing are not under any sort of obligation to agree with this nonsensical one sided view of one individuals claims. that is why some of us are offended by "mentally unstable" comments. I think perhaps the author may be unstable, but I don't know him so I cannot say.

Bo

Edited January 12, 2009 by Capt. Bo of the WTF co.

[Mary Diamond]

It has to do with the way you view the person you have killed.

Here we can agree, but this must also be combined with the situation the individual is faced with as well.

True. At a certain point, instinct takes over. This has limited effect on remorse, however. Remorse comes after the fact.

I have to agree ~

My Dad was telling me about his stint during the Korean war. His camp abutted the Turk's camp ~ their way of managing spies was to hang them, for all to see, from their ears... with ice tongs.

IMHO ~ Place sufficient threat on a person's feeling of security, they will react to restore their security, to the degree they feel necessary. Whether or not remorse comes along (and the degree to which it is felt) will be a matter of interpretation of events, guage of reaction (over/under-reaction), personal beliefs, &c.

To then question sanity will be to require knowing every detail of the killing and proposed remorse (and all that feeling would entail) ~ simply not possible, IMHO.

[Graydog]

Just to add some clarity, the Author of the book:

LTC Grossman, USA Ret.

Via info on his website:

Has no combat experience.

He does NOT list being assigned to a ranger unit on his website, but he does list his military units, so I assume he has no ranger unit experience. He did go to ranger school and graduate so that makes him a ranger.

He lists 23 years military experience, but reading his bio that's about 13 years experience with Army units and then 10 years experience as an instructor at various ROTC or West Point assignments. His military experience reflects an officer in the army during his period of service. He did not serve what would be called a line officer career. Commendable service, and I would thank him for it, but a special operator he certainly was not.

His degree is a Master of Education in Counseling

Below is a link to a book review of On Killing, that IMO is dead on target.

Review in Canadian Armed Forces publication

Edited January 14, 2009 by Graydog

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

I have enjoyed this debate, but must confess that I have reached a point where I must leave it to others. I feel I am at a point where emotion will override reason and I wish to end on a freindly note and with all respect to my fellow pyrates here on the pub. I commend Callenish for the courage it took to put those memories out for all to see. Best wishes, I remain , yours...

Bo

[Quartermaster James]

But it's a quantum leap now, isn't it?

From remorse & hardening to enjoying?

Instantaneous, you think? Or just hard to make?

Neither, actually, but if pressed the former. Rather, that I do not see a continuum from remorse to enjoyment. More like two parabolic curves approaching from opposing side an axis they never touch.

Edited January 13, 2009 by Quartermaster James

[Jib]

Woah! Sorry for all the heat this topic has caused. Not my desire to have fellow pirates angry and emotional at each other. A friend and vetran suggested this book to me about 6 years ago and I just got around to reading it. I do suggest that if you feel passionate about this topic you check the book out the next time you visit your local book store or library. It may surprize you.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Heard about the down-time and came over to check things out. No anger towards anyone from me. just drummed up memories better left where they were. My mess entirely, no-one forced me to get involved. Funny how you think you have a handle on things for several years and then WHAM! You suddenly realize you don't. I also realized in reflection the last couple of days and going back to school that crawling under a rock isn't going to work it out either. Maybe it is time to talk about it, but not in cyberspace. Problem for me is, no-one to talk to. Anyhow, it's all good here, I've made it this far and I'll make it out of this one too. best ...

Bo

[Story]

Problem for me is, no-one to talk to. Anyhow, it's all good here, I've made it this far and I'll make it out of this one too. best ...

We are all travellers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.

Robert Louis Stevenson

Check yer PMs.