[Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
Steve Hovland
shovland at mindspring.com
Fri Feb 25 05:39:53 UTC 2005
I think the motivations of the Reich were mostly
economic. Some Nazi's admitted that they targeted
the Jews because they had a lot of money. The
killing of mental and physical defectives as well as
homosexuals and gypsies says something about
social ideals, but not religion. Most of the pseudo-
religious stuff seems to be associated with the
inner circle of the SS.
Steve Hovland
www.stevehovland.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Lynn D. Johnson, Ph.D. [SMTP:ljohnson at solution-consulting.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 7:34 PM
To: The new improved paleopsych list
Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
I found this:
http://www.cafes.net/ditch/motm1.htm
I am doubtful about the veracity of the book, based on that essay. It
sounds like the author, Pauwels, was a provocative and speculative
writer, not an historian.
I did find this:
http://www.sumeria.net/politics/nazioccult.html
and I recall that Hitler did have great fascination with the occult.
That article supports that. I am not certain what role occultism
played, in spite of that website. There is ambiguous evidence, even on
that site. (Nice emphasis on how 'science' causes wars . . . eugenics!)
I haven't read Rise and Fall of the Third Reich since I was in 8th
grade, and so I don't remember what Shirer says about that. Anyone else
want to elucidate?
Lynn
PS: both sites seem to be characterized by special pleading, and that is
generally a bad sign.
Steve Hovland wrote:
>If you can find it, an old book called "The Morning of the Magicians"
>had quite a lot about Nazi occultism- the Thule stuff, expeditions
>to Tibet. Just before he was executed one SS man muttered
>some kind of strange prayer and went to his death placidly.
>
>Steve Hovland
>www.stevehovland.net
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Lynn D. Johnson, Ph.D. [SMTP:ljohnson at solution-consulting.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:40 PM
>To: The new improved paleopsych list
>Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
>
>Yes, it is clear that Nazism tried to undermine legitimate religions and
>was positively hostile toward religious figures. Recall the famous quote
>by Niemoeller, and observe that it was often religiously committed
>people who opposed Nazism (Niemoeller was far too rough on himself; he
>was an early opponent of Nazism, as were many other pastors.)
>http://www.christianethicstoday.com/Issue/009/First%20They%20Came%20for%20the%20Jews%20By%20Franklin%20H%20Littell_009_29_.htm
>
>The cult was, IMHO, a maneuver to reduce religiousity, to replace
>Christianity with something that could be induced to support
>irreligiousity. Have you read The Hiding Place by Corrie Ten Boom? She
>points out that there was a terrible erosion of religious devotion in
>Germany in the late 1920s. Her brother, studying in Germany, wrote
>extensively to her about it. The dialog she reports between herself and
>the Nazi lieutenent is breathtaking. One cannot be truely educated about
>the 20th Century without digesting that book.
>
>BTW, the story behind the family that hid the piano player (that movie)
>was that they were committed Catholics who saved him from the Nazis at
>the risk of their own lives. The movie hid that vital bit of data. Thank
>you, anti-religious fanatics of Hollywood.
>
>Finally, a young Mormon lad named Huebner was beheaded by the gestapo
>for publishing anti-nazi tracts (he secretly used the church duplicating
>machine - remember those old things you hand cranked with a special
>carbon-like master?). Religiousity played an oppositional role in Nazi
>Germany, and the loss of religiousity caused people to lose their
>bearings. Corrie Ten Boom and her sister clearly did not lose theirs;
>Huebner did not lose his, and Martin Niemoeller certainly did not lose his.
>Lynn
>
>
>Steve Hovland wrote:
>
>
>
>>Lynn, are you familiar with the cult aspects
>>of Naziism?
>>
>>Steve Hovland
>>www.stevehovland.net
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Lynn D. Johnson, Ph.D. [SMTP:ljohnson at solution-consulting.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:51 AM
>>To: Alice Andrews; The new improved paleopsych list
>>Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
>>
>>Marty Seligman (learned helplessness theorist, Learned Optimism,
>>Authentic Happiness, former APA president) - an atheist - mentions that
>>as a key to true happiness. He reviews literature that religious people
>>are generally happier and more fulfilled, more resilient. Czentmyhali
>>(spelling!) at U Chicago finds that kids involved in something greater
>>than themselves are much more likely to experience "flow" and periods of
>>greater happiness. Religion is clearly an adaptive force. BTW, I don't
>>want to hear arguments that religion is behind most wars. That is a
>>pretty tired argument that was thoroughly debunked by the 20th Century.
>>Lynn
>>
>>Alice Andrews wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hi Gerry,
>>>Thanks for the note...
>>>There was an interesting article somewhere--maybe Frank sent it
>>>in?--about teenagers and the possiblity that what they were missing
>>>was 'religion' or 'spirituality' or a 'sense of purpose and meaning
>>>beyond them.' Do you remember reading that on paleo some time ago? I
>>>can't find it...But it seems apropos to your missive. (If anyone knows
>>>it and can send out again, I'd appreciate!)
>>>Thanks and cheers,
>>>Alice
>>>
>>>Hi Alice,
>>>
>>>Thanks for the rec re: Nesse's "Evolution and the Capacity for
>>>Commitment". Although I still haven't read it I'm familiar with its
>>>contents. The issue of 'commitment' especially for young people is
>>>something that definitely needs addressing and maybe requiring our
>>>youth to make a firm political commitment to a particular party will
>>>carry over to their demonstrating less risky behavior with drugs, sex,
>>>employment, family or whatever. Yet isn't our youth already
>>>politically brainwashed into political awareness or have they flicked
>>>away that duty as well? I no longer hang out with our country's young
>>>but when I did I found that very few had their head screwed on
>>>correctly and many were adrift; from what I hear now they still
>>>continue on their aimless flow. When I wrote my original answer my
>>>thoughts were on "my generation", not the others. Thanks for your post.
>>>
>>>I'll add the book to my list.
>>>
>>>Gerry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Alice Andrews <mailto:andrewsa at newpaltz.edu>
>>>To: The new improved paleopsych list <mailto:paleopsych at paleopsych.org>
>>>Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 8:30 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
>>>
>>>Hi Gerry,
>>>Randy Nesse edited a book called "Evolution and the Capacity for
>>>Commitment"; do you know it? It's wonderful... if you don't. (His
>>>'Commitment in the Clinic' chapter is superb, btw.) Anyway, I think
>>>the book addresses your question. The word 'commitment' itself
>>>addresses the question. We have evolved mechanisms for detecting
>>>commitment and for detecting possible defection in others. People who
>>>tow the party line, etc. are considered committed. We seek out such
>>>people because it is proximately and ultimately adaptive to do so.
>>>Befriending, supporting, trusting, etc. the uncommitted would have
>>>been-- and still is, a risk (or threat). Such risks could have been
>>>very costly over our evolutionary history and can be still today. Of
>>>course, sometimes such risks (siding with someone who seems to be
>>>sitting on the fence, uncommitted, a rebel) can be to one's advantage.
>>>But 'ancient-brain' doesn't know this--and probably 'statistics-brain'
>>>doesn't know this either!
>>>Anyway, enough late-night babbling! It's a good book and might answer
>>>your question...
>>>All best!
>>>Alice
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: G. Reinhart-Waller <mailto:waluk at earthlink.net>
>>> To: The new improved paleopsych list
>>> <mailto:paleopsych at paleopsych.org>
>>> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 9:55 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
>>>
>>> >> Someone beyond the liberal/conservative
>>> dichotomy may be rejected by both sides as a nuisance,
>>> a threat to shared assumptions that define a group
>>> against another.
>>>
>>> This is absolutely amazing! Why would any audience
>>> reject someone who cannot plop into either the liberal
>>> or conservative camp? Please explain the threat you
>>> feel is apparent. This I need to hear!
>>>
>>> Gerry
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> paleopsych mailing list
>>> paleopsych at paleopsych.org <mailto:paleopsych at paleopsych.org>
>>> http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>paleopsych mailing list
>>>paleopsych at paleopsych.org
>>>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>paleopsych mailing list
>>>paleopsych at paleopsych.org
>>>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>><< File: ATT00025.html >> << File: ATT00026.txt >>
>>_______________________________________________
>>paleopsych mailing list
>>paleopsych at paleopsych.org
>>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> << File: ATT00000.html >> << File: ATT00001.txt >>
>_______________________________________________
>paleopsych mailing list
>paleopsych at paleopsych.org
>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych
>
>
>
>
<< File: ATT00005.html >> << File: ATT00006.txt >>
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list