> When your access to food, housing, heating and healthcare for your family are dependent on your income, you may find yourself facing very difficult decisions
This is the time when your ethics are tested. Anyone can do the right thing when they're getting paid for it.
Nah. I’ve been in the exact situation you describe and it’s pretty obvious tbh. Loss of a job is a temporary setback. Being locked up in a jail is a permanent one.
> There was a lesson to learn from the holocaust. We're always reminded that: "Never forget, we've learned our lesson." "What was the lesson?" That's the question. The lesson is, "You're the Nazi". No-one wants to learn that; If you were there, that would have been you. You might think "Well, I'd be Oskar Schindler and I'd be rescuing the Jews." It's like, no, afraid not. You'd at least not be saying anything. And you might also be actively participating. You might also enjoy it.
Hindsight theoretical morality is very different from experience on the ground, where peer pressure, stress, uncertainty, exploding situations and fog of war come into the mix.
Seems like a better lesson would be "don't be the Nazi."
It's not like it's impossible. The Nazis arrested 800,000 Germans for active resistance activities, and several hundred thousand Germans deserted the military, many of those defecting to the Allies.
It wasn't a huge percentage, but we don't know how many actively resisted without getting caught, or resisted in more passive ways. And that was resistance against the Nazis, who had no qualms about killing resistors. Risking or quitting your job to not only do what's right, but avoid getting in trouble with your government, isn't in the same ballpark.
I thought the lesson was to not base your morality and what you are willing to do on the laws, because they can change at a whim. And for the democratic politicians, don't play with fire and take problems seriously.
You might want to think about why Petersen wants you to think you’re the Nazi. What change is he trying to effect in our culture, and how does that belief support his desire? Rhetoric always aims to effect some change in the attitude of the listener, and never without some benefit of the speaker.
Not that person but the my take on their take is that Peterson is greasing you up to accept more authoritarian control since he puts you in the in-group of the oppressors to ease the societal drift.
I don't necessarily agree. I think he is pointing out that people morally grandstand and the majority will not act out how they say they would.
> You might want to think about why Petersen wants you to think you’re the Nazi. What change is he trying to effect in our culture, and how does that belief support his desire? Rhetoric always aims to effect some change in the attitude of the listener, and never without some benefit of the speaker.
What benefit do you think he's trying to get from it? I'm honestly trying to figure out the nefarious angle and coming up blank.
It seems to me like a very similar sentiment to that great "are we the baddies?" sketch from Mitchell and Webb. [1] I see both as an exercise in moral humility.
See the Milgram experiment, or the Asch experiment. Most people do cave to pressure from authorities and the group. Everybody believes they're they exception. Statistically, most of them are wrong.
This is the time when your ethics are tested. Anyone can do the right thing when they're getting paid for it.