Need advices : Master’s degree in Ponerology

[Zadig]

Hi,

I am a student in History (third year), and next year, I want to make a Master's degree in Ponerology.

So last week, I sent to my teacher of contemporary history my proposition of subject, who was: to study the Nazi Germany in the light of the Political Ponerology.

Today, my teacher replied to me, and he greeted this ambitious and original project.

But, there are problems:

1-He is not a specialist in Nazi Germany, he is a specialist in social history. But, I think that other teachers in contemporary history would not accept my subject.

2- According to him, my project for an initiation to historic research is risked. Indeed, there is a problem of source. The work in master's degree is very empirical: identification, collect and exploitation of source, within strictly defined limits, and who will be biggest with the implementation of “master d’enseignement” ( a reform by the french government who is completely disastrous for the university, imho). De plus, I don't read German, but a lot of works have been translated in french and english (e.g the diary of Goebbels, all the speeches by Hitler since 1931...).

How can I couple a corpus of sources and, in the same time, to study the Nazi Germany according to a ponerological approach?

I have really no idea how to couple the two things.

Last remark, I chose the Nazi Germany as time period, because I thought that it was the easiest. I thought also to Stalin, but same problems of source and I don't understand Russian. So, if you have others country and time period (of preference in contemporary history), feel free.

I hope that everybody understood.

 

[vinny]

So, if you have others country and time period (of preference in contemporary history), feel free.

Perhaps some period of political history out of 'The Shock Doctrine' (worth a read anyway) - Such as late 20th century British politics: the Thatcher era, privatisation and the Falklands War?

 

[wanderer33]

Hi Zadig,

my background is in HPS, the history and philosophy of science. Have you ever heard of psychohistory? There is and has been for a long time a form of writing history
which is called psychohistory. Here is a wiki link to the concept.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory

When I was writing my thesis, I read several psychohistories. There have been several psychohystories written about Hitler.

"The Life and Times of Nikola Tesla" is a psychohistory by Marc Seifer.

I think ponerology would fall within the field of psychohistory.

 

[henry]

If you teacher has a background more in social history, could you frame the work in terms of the hysteroidal cycle that Lobaczewski outlines in the book? Look at the differences between European and American history in the 20th century?

 

[Mr. Premise]

If you don't read German, that will be a problem, especially if you want to go on past the Master's to do PhD research. And if your advisor is not a specialist in Germany that will also be a problem. How about looking at Vichy France?

What has been your area of concentration up until now?

 

[Zadig]

Have you ever heard of psychohistory?

No, I will do research on this field.

What has been your area of concentration up until now?

None, specialisation is only in master’s degree.

Such as late 20th century British politics: the Thatcher era, privatisation and the Falklands War?

If you teacher has a background more in social history, could you frame the work in terms of the hysteroidal cycle that Lobaczewski outlines in the book? Look at the differences between European and American history in the 20th century?

How about looking at Vichy France?

Thanks, very good ideas. I see my teacher tomorrow, I will speak to him.

 

[Zadig]

Normally it's good, I can make a Master's about Nazi Germany. For the language it's not a problem, I will learn German.

Some questions:

-Except for you and your works, there are specialists, professors, thesis, university research, books about ponerology?

-Last question, how can I know and prove, in the process of ponerogenesis, who is a characteropath, frontal characteropath, drug-induced characteropath, schizoid, essential psychopath...?

 

[rylek]

FWIW I did my undergrad in Cultural History/Politics and wrote my dissertation in Cultural history. The topic of the dissertation was "The concept of evil in the 20th century" since I had to narrow down the time frame as one could easily write a PhD on this. Actually the amount of information even in this short period proved quite problematic in trying to stay within the word limit.

Anyway one of the chapters dealt with Lobaczewski, Ponerology and psychopathy, where overall the dissertation wasn't about "proving" the ideas, rather it was me writing about how others have thought about evil. My supervisor was quite open minded but still demanded quite a bit of tweaking in the Lobaczewski section to make it "acceptable".

 

[Approaching Infinity]

-Except for you and your works, there are specialists, professors, thesis, university research, books about ponerology?

As far as I'm aware there are no academics who have incorporated ponerology, per se, into their research. There are, however, researchers who have covered similar ground. Gustave Gilbert worked with the Nuremberg war criminals and diagnosed several of them as psychopaths, schizoids, and paranoids. Since Gilbert, the only people to really focus on the Nazis have focused on their Rorschach tests, so there's not a lot of good data in that area. Here are some sources:

Brunner, J. 2001. “Oh Those Crazy Cards Again”: A History of the Debate on the Nazi Rorschachs, 1946–2001. Political Psychology 22(2), 233–61.

Gilbert, G. M. 1950. The Psychology of Dictatorship. New York: Ronald.

Kelley, D. M. 1947. 22 Cells in Nuremberg: A Psychiatrist Examines the Nazi War Criminals. New York: Greenberg.

Miale, F. R. & Selzer, M. 1975. The Nuremberg Mind: The Psychology of the Nazi Leaders. New York: New York Times Book Co.

Other than that, Philip Zimbardo has looked at the social aspects discussed in ponerology, but he hadn't read ponerology before writing his book, so you can't call it ponerology, exactly. Then there's the Milgram, Adorno, and Altemeyer stuff, the latter two on authoritarian personality.

-Last question, how can I know and prove, in the process of ponerogenesis, who is a characteropath, frontal characteropath, drug-induced characteropath, schizoid, essential psychopath...?

Except for the Nazis diagnosed by Gilbert, I'm not aware of any others who were officially diagnosed. For others you have to rely on psychohistory. Lobaczewski points out that you can't be sure by reading one's biography, but often there are sufficient clues to make a diagnosis probable. For example, Cleckley diagnosed Alcibiades as a psychopath based on the historical data available.

 

[wanderer33]

I have read and been informed that the histories mention by Approaching Infinity are defined as psychistories. They are results of cross-discipline excursions by psychology departments into history departments.