Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century ePUB ↠ MOBI construyamos.co

متن معرفی از «پیش‌گفتار» نویسنده‌ی کتاب از محدودیت نوشته‌های انگلیسی‌زبان درباب اخلاق سخت به شگفت آمده بودم محدودیتی که ناشی از بی‌خبری نسبی از برخی فجایع قرن بیستم بود، فجایعی که زاییده‌ی دست انسانند رخ‌دادهای چنین قرن خشونت‌باری باید درس‌هایی درباره‌ی اخلاق به ما بیاموزد انگلیسی‌هایی که هم‌نسل من و یا نسل پس از من هستند، بخت‌یارشان بوده که از عواقب جنگ و تا حدود زیادی از دیگر بی‌رحمی‌ها در امان مانده‌اند آدم باید خیلی احمق باشد که از این بابت حسرت بخورد؛ و احتمالاً آموختن از دلایل چنین رخ‌دادهایی می‌تواند به تفکر اخلاقی ما غنا بخشددر این کتاب سعی کرده‌ام به اخلاقیات، بُعدی تجربی دهم از اخلاق برای طرح پرسش‌هایی در برابر تاریخ استفاده کرده‌ام و سعی کرده‌ام متقابلاً از تاریخ برای ارائه‌ی تصویری از استعدادهای پنهان انسان استفاده کنم که به اخلاقیات ربط پیدا می‌کنند متن معرفی از «سخن سرپرست مجموعه» در این ویرایش مدت‌ها بود که در این اندیشه بودم چرا تعداد کتاب‌های صرفاً نظری‌ای که به زبان فارسی منتشر می‌شود این‌همه زیاد و تعداد کتاب‌های انضمامی، اندک‌شمار است؛ کتاب‌های انضمامی که واقعیت‌ها را بازگو و تفسیر می‌کنند عوارض و عواقب این عدم تعادل را نیز در میان مخاطبانم می‌دیدم قشر کتاب‌خوان ما از اندیشه‌های هابز، لاک، دکارت، کانت و بسیاری از متفکران دیگر باخبرند، اما تعداد اندکی از آن‌ها می‌دانند که در دوران این اندیشمندان چه اتفاقاتی رخ‌داده است و وقتی‌که اندیشه‌های این متفکران، خارج از بستر تاریخی‌شان عرضه شوند امکان سوءفهم از آن‌ها نیز بیش‌تر خواهد شد و در حد تصوراتی انتزاعی باقی می‌مانند این نقصان زمانی بر من آشکار شد که با مکتب کیمبریج در حوزه‌ی فلسفه‌ی سیاسی و بنیاد آن آشنا شدم مکتبی که به بررسی اندیشه‌ها با توجه به خاستگاه تاریخی و شرایط مادی دوران‌شان می‌پرداخت و بنیاد آن تاکنون بیش از یکصدوپنجاه عنوان در همین راستا منتشر کرده استانسانیت تاریخ اخلاقی سده‌ی بیستم، هنگامی که منتشر شد چنان هنگامه‌ای در میان مورخان و فیلسوفان به‌پا کرد که دوسال پس از انتشارش سمیناری با شرکت مشهورترین چهره‌های فلسفه و تاریخ برای معرفی و نقد آن برپا شد شناسنامه و مشخصات ظاهریسرشناسه گلاور، جاناتان، 1941معنوان انسانیت تاریخ اخلاقی سده‌ی بیستمپدیدآور جاناتان گلاور Jonathan Gloverمشخصات نشر تهران آگه، 1392شمشخصات ظاهری 692 صفحه، 22در16 سانتی‌متر فروست مجموعه‌ی تاریخشابک 9789643292874ترجمه از Humanity A Moral History of the Twentieth Century 1999موضوع تاریخ جدید، جنگ، جنبه‌های اخلاقی قرن21م؛ تاریخ، جنگ، انسانیت، فجایع قرن 20م مترجم افشین خاکباز، 1334شویراستار خشایار دیهیمی، 1334ش نوبت چاپ اولسال انتشار پاییز 1392ششمارگان 1100 نسخهقیمت 35000 تومانفهرستسخن سرپرست مجموعه 21پیش‌گفتار 23تقدیر و تشکر 27این‌گونه خامی، دیگر هرگز 29بخش یک اخلاق بدون قوانین اخلاقی 43بخش دوم روان‌شناسی اخلاقی جنگ‌افروزی 101بخش سوم قبیله‌گرایی 211بخش چهارم دام جنگ 271بخش پنجم باور و وحشت استالین و جانشینانش 397بخش ششم اراده‌ی معطوف به بازآفرینی انسان تجربه‌ی نازی‌ها 527بخش هفتم درباب تاریخ اخلاقی اخیر انسانیت 659نمایه 683تبلیغات نشر آگه 693


10 thoughts on “Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century

  1. says:

    Humanity A Moral History of the Twentieth Century 1999 Jonathan GloverThe twentieth century was the most brutal in human history featuring a litany of shameful events that includes the Holocaust Hiroshima the Stalinist era Cambodia Yugoslavia and Rwanda This important book looks at the politics of our times and the roots of human nature to discover why so many atrocities were perpetuated and how we can create a social environment to prevent their recurrence تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز بیست و هفتم ماه فوریه سال 2015 میلادیعنوان انسانیت تاریخ اخلاقی سده‌ ی بیستم؛ پدیدآور جاناتان گلاور؛ مترجم افشین خاکباز؛ ویراستار خشایار دیهیمی؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، آگه، 1392 ش؛ در 692 صفحه، 22 در 16 سانتی‌متر، فروست مجموعه‌ ی تاریخ؛ شابک 9789643292874؛ موضوع تاریخ جدید، جنگ، جنبه‌ های اخلاقی سده 20 م؛ تاریخ، جنگ، انسانیت، فجایع سده 20 م فهرست سخن سرپرست مجموعه، تا ص 21؛ پیش‌گفتار، تا ص 23؛ تقدیر و تشکر، تا ص 27؛ این‌گونه خامی، دیگر هرگز، تا ص 29؛ بخش یک اخلاق بدون قوانین اخلاقی، تا ص 43؛ بخش دوم روان‌شناسی اخلاقی جنگ‌افروزی، تا ص 101؛ بخش سوم قبیله‌ گرایی، تا ص 211؛ بخش چهارم دام جنگ، تا ص 271؛ بخش پنجم باور و وحشت استالین و جانشینانش، تا ص 397؛ بخش ششم اراده‌ ی معطوف به بازآفرینی انسان تجربه‌ ی نازی‌ها، تا ص 527؛ بخش هفتم درباب تاریخ اخلاقی اخیر انسانیت، تا ص 659؛ نمایه، تا ص 683؛ تبلیغات نشر آگه، تا ص 693؛ ا شربیانی


  2. says:

    Don't be fooled by the title this book is neither about humanity nor is it a history of the 20th century though we can perhaps say it is moral if morality means feeling good about not being a war criminal Glover's grandiose title masks a project of a substantially limited scope a catalogue of atrocities committed in the last century followed by a discussion after each particular episode of what went wrong and a concluding section with suggestions as to how we can fix itGlover's purpose he announces at the onset is to bring ethics and history together a promising approach And it should have been to the book's advantage that Glover as director of the Center of Medical Law and Ethics at King's College London is enmeshed in the discipline of bioethics Alas Glover enshrines the misperceptions and inadeuacies typical of his profession in his approach to the topic at hand Namely he believes ethics could be empirical than it is as if the discipline needed empiricism not lessGlover's empirical approach to ethics takes on a veneer very much like the pseudo psychological approach he professes at the same time to disfavor Worse still Glover uses his own peculiar brand of pop psychology for the majority of his analyses In their application none of the clumsy pop psychology terms or concepts proves particularly rewarding or especially original Further the ideas that are original are not useful and what is useful is unoriginal Given the vision of humanity he assumes at the outset that is a ualified materialist one it is not hard to understand why Glover claims to replace the thin mechanical psychology of the Enlightenment with something complex a darker account of human nature which at first glance seems suspiciously like an understanding of Original Sin However he basically sticks to the Enlightenment model of man and to its hope of a world that is peaceful and humane In Glover's world humans are little than stimulus response machines input the correct moral resources and the correct behavioral output will emerge soon after What is this view of man places Glover suarely in the same trap experienced by humanity time and again in the last grim centuryFor example in the concluding chapter which lays down a plan of action for improving the human condition he writes the following lines without a hint of irony The causes of these 20th century catastrophes are partly political and social Solutions to them cannot be purely in the realm of psychology or ethics the political dimension has to be central There is a need for proper policing of the world with a legitimate and properly backed international authority to keep the peace and to protect human rights There is a need for independent sources of information as alternatives to propaganda There is a need to avoid large scale utopian political projects emphasis addedThus in one concise paragraph Glover's solution identifies itself with the primary cause of the largest scale and most horrid atrocities of the last century For what are proper policing of the world and the establishment of an international authority to keep the peace if not examples of the very kind of large scale utopian political projects he condemns?


  3. says:

    Humanity examines some of the worst wars and atrocities of the last century with an eye toward finding a strategy for making them less likely or not as awful in this century Author Jonathan Glover explores these events from a number of angles — asking how the people who advocated them came to have their views and how those views became influential how the people who participated in them overcame any aversion they might have had to becoming monsters and how the way society was structured encouraged or failed to inhibit the atrocitiesAt the same time it tries to uncover examples of people who did take risks to go against the tide — and to discover what sort of stuff these people were made of how they were formed and what triggered their brave and sadly unusual actsGlover is a philosopher of ethics — and he sees the history of the last century as a call for ethicists to leave the ivory tower and turn their sights on practical matters For this reason he also asks along the way through his recounting of bloody history “what did the philosophers say about all this?”


  4. says:

    Probably the most extraordinary and insightful book I have read this year Not for the sueamish Indeed one could say the whole 20th century is not for the sueamish The essential message is that the source of really toxic genocide is tribalism or extreme nationalism and rigid belief systems When you get the two in tandem as in Nazi Germany Stalinist Russia or Maoist China you get mega deaths And there is a watch out here both for two major powers that have strong nationalism and religious belief systems India where Hindu nationalism is on the rise and the US where religious backlash conservatism is walking away from education and self critical thinkingThe book is revelation in ethical philosophy too It challenges ethics philosophers to road test their theories on the 20th century and see how they fare modifying them in the light of whether they might help prevent the mass killing in future Not sure post modernism or many recent isms would make the cut But I like the concept of this test and I like the way this book really helps us conduct an after action review of the whole 20th century from a moral perspective Read it and you may lose your complacency about the world and its humanity if you still have any But I think ultimately this book offers hope too the hope that we can learn the lessons raise our collective societal and global standards and avoid repeating the 20th century in the 21st


  5. says:

    This book summarizes the worst atrocities of the 20th century not as some kind of freakshow but as examples in how human psychology and ethics can be bent to enable people to commit the worst mankind has done in its 200000 years of history Glover doesn't offer many solutions for the future maybe in another book? except that we need political restraints on a world scale but if you have a world police that police can kill without problems and we need to learn how to develop ethics and psychology in the face of technology that enables us to kill men women children at the press of a buttonA few personal takeaways People actually learn from history and they actually learn from books During the Cuba Missile Crisis the Soviets cited their personal war experience and Kennedy cited the First World War especially Tuchman's Guns of August as reasons why they did not want to continue the conflict as a sidenote reading the letters and opinions of the US military leaders who wanted to keep the conflict going makes you realize how realistic Jack D Ripper in Dr Strangelove is History repeats itself all the time; when the Athenians attacked the Melians they 'presented their hard amoralism as mere realism' Everyone else has done that since here in Australia the current government clouds their inhumanity in the guise of 'adults being in charge' In a way the First World War was present at Nagasaki and Hiroshima Glover makes a nice case how the 'modern' sliding of standards in regards to the death of civilians in wartime started at the blockade of Hamburg in WW1 went on to the indiscriminate bombing of civilians from Germans and the British and culminated in the atomic bombs If this book would have come out later it would have included indiscriminate drone killings in the Middle East in that slide Internet trolls with absolute horrifying opinions in the comment section of news articles are nothing new another American massacre of Japanese survivors in lifeboats provoked a letter of moral criticism which was published Many of the replies to that letter claimed that Japanese atrocities justified the massacre One reader wrote of 'killing a helpless rattlesnake' Another had 'thoroughly enjoyed' reading about the slaughter' Another said that a 'good old American custom I would like to see is nailing a Jap hide on every backhouse door in America' Glover doesn't like Heidegger in the slightest 'The inarticulate complexity is Heidegger's trademark Can someone whose thinking is so blurred be a serious philosopher?' Or even better you have to know that Heidegger once wrote that Hitler's hands were beautifulTo imagine a meeting between them with Heidegger glancing at Hitler's marvellous hands and talking about the unity of the outside of itself in the raptures of the future is to be reminded how easily the Führer was moved to rage That the two men did not meet is one of surrealism's great losses in the twentieth centuryNot recommended for 1 The sueamish Every atrocity is introduced with several personal eyewitness accounts it makes for good nightmare material In fact I think I had weird nightmares every single night while reading this book but correlation causation2 People who love people your beliefs might take a punchThe widespread enthusiasm even now for capital punishment seems to reflect something than a concern to reduce crime rates When capital punishment was the law in Britain there were about five applications a week for the post of executionerRecommended for People interested in changing the future by learning from the past


  6. says:

    A deeply moving book which makes you doubt Steven Pinker's claims that violence is vanishing Glover as a moral philosopher takes a look into how inhumane humanity has acted in the 20th century It includes all the things you would expect World War I and the Battle of the Somme but also the British Naval Blockade; World War II the Atomic Bomb and the atrocities of Nazi Germany; the terror spread by Stalin Mao Pot; Vietnam and My Lai; Rwanda; the Bosnian War For all of these examples you will be confronted with lots of first hand accounts that will make you feel physically ill Glover doesn't argue that humanity has become inhumane in principle but that technological progress in a way made it easier to act in such a way and also increases the conseuences of inhumane acts On the other hand you also get the stories of people who refused to participate and actively engaged against inhumanity My Lai Hugh Thompson who saved civilians from being murdered by other soldiers – and Ronald Ridenhour – who later blew the whistle on the massacre; the MDs who treated injured regardless of their ethnicity; civilians taking in and hiding refugees; Kennedy Khrushchev not escalating the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Christmas truces of WW1 Glover sets out to investigate why some human beings can act so cruel and unethically while some don't – as it's pretty obvious that most of those atrocities weren't done by natural psychopaths According to Glover this is due to a slow decline of moral identity which can be fueled by lots of things physical distance to the victims of your acts this is where technological progress comes into play going from hand to hand combat to long distance missiles and bombers; if the book was written today it most likely would include the US drone 'warfare'; emotional distance to your victims as fueled by tribalism that makes you see other humans as less than eual; peer pressure; spread of responsibility the people developing the atomic bomb were just doing research; the politicians green lighting it's use just following recommendations from the experts; etc While slippery slope arguments often are just an excuse for being intellectually lazy Glover gives a uite compelling case how the British Naval Blockade after WWI and it's effect on civilians ie starvation was one thing that prepared the acceptance of area bombings in WW2 which in turn made it seem acceptable to use the atomic bomb Despite this being an oversimplification of things moral judgement doesn't take place in a vacuum but is most often compared to a moral baseline or so the argument I guess the real lesson to learn here is that acting in a humane way is a skill that has to be learnt and nurtured Glover or less paraphrases Aristotle in this The small act of defiance and the small act of generosity can be enormously important These small acts reinforce the ordinary everyday human decencies out of which the large heroic acts grow So in some way Nietzsche got it partially right Self creation and cultivating characteristics reuires self discipline some hardness But that's being hard to yourself not others


  7. says:

    Wow What an amazing book and ever so timely Jonathan Glover is a philosophy professor Centre of Medical Law and Ethics at King’s College London Taking into account the brutal and horrible atrocities of the 20th century Glover digs deep at just what drives our moral boundaries that allowed for the Hitlers Stalins Maos Pol Pots and other despots of the last 100 years Boundaries can be tribal ethnic national and religious which can lead to conflict But it is than just leaders and moral boundaries it is also people's personal moral imaginations that can either block the darkness around us allowing for feigned ignorance because the others are less than human or my role isn't tied to the decision makers or my nationalism is important than the individual or we can use our moral human response first before ignoring following or justifying Glover clearly demonstrates that a moral identity is not enough to stop the same from occurring in the 21st century The Nazis Soviets and Maoists justified many of their acts as part of a moral identity a collective view of a greater good It's just that morals can easily slide and drift away from what we'd hope normal human moral responses should be leading many times to genocide What is most sobering about this book is it's timeliness considering what is happening in the United States and the rest of the world with significant shifts back to nationalism If there is someone to blame across a boundary tribal national ethnic religious the moral slide begins because those on the other side of the boundary are unfit not human reasons for our condition impure and unwanted The slogan 'Make America great again' is no different than the early slogans during the rise of Hitler and Mao's Cultural RevolutionGlover says the key is to not allow human responses to be overwhelmed weakened narrowed or eliminated by some form of external unity that drives the moral slide Let's hope we're not walking into an even violent century This book is long historically expressive and well researched Getting through it will be worth the effort and will shake your core moral imagination Five stars


  8. says:

    This is a very accessable work on morality and the psychology of people who commit attrocities It manages to steer clear of making its own judgements and sticks to the central uestion of why? Having read my fair share of moral philosophy this is exceedingly rare Also rare is that the book does not really fall into the trap of stating that things now are worse than ever before just that our modern attrocites are better documented and thus are uniuly suited to analysisIt is perhaps not as exhausitve as it could be to support its reasoning but that would probably make the book a little unweildy and less accessable


  9. says:

    Sorry I Couldn't read the whole bookI don't even want to read it for the simple reason it consider Nietzsche as an anti humanistConsider his views crueland even glover deliberately use term like Nietzsche challenge against humanity which is nothing but rubbishIn one way or another Nietzsche influenced and responsibe for the rise of many potential crusaders to fight for humanity


  10. says:

    Hard to read because of the atrocities it describes but meaningful devastating and fascinating with just the right level of philosophy for readers who don't want anything arcane Intense level criticisms of Nietzsche and Heidegger and how they do bear some responsibility for the Nazi rise which will stay with me for a long time