Need Help Understanding Paramoralisms

[Miss Isness]

I have been trying to get my head around the concept of paramoralisms, and I'd like to get some feedback on whether the story below involves a paramoralism. If so, what would be the proper way to deal with it?

Henry repeatedly shouts, 'Who are you talking to?' from one room to another, at his partner, who has just finished one phone conversation, and is in the the process of making another call. His partner responds out of frustration, 'I don't have to tell you who I'm talking to'. Henry then becomes angry and starts sulking. Afterwards, his partner explains that his way of asking was inappropriate, but that she doesn't have any problem telling him who she was talking to.

Henry and his partner have an answering service that takes the calls while the line is being used for the internet. A couple of days later, the phone rings as there is a message at the answering service, actually no message, just a phone number. Henry's partner calls the answering service and writes down the number. Right after that, Henry's cell phone rings. When Henry finishes, his partner asks him, 'Who called?'. Henry gruffly responds, 'A guy'. 'What guy?' asks his partner. 'A guy,' repeats Henry evasively. 'Well, do you think it's the same person who didn't leave a message?,' asks his partner. She reads off the number and he confirms it, but then seems unsure. Satisfied with knowing that the call was probably not someone looking for her, Henry's partner drops the subject.

A couple of days later, Henry and his partner have a talk about honesty and agree that they both have to focus on being more honest with each other. The next day when his partner starts talking about the signs editorial she is reading, Henry shuts down the discussion. His partner, frustrated and disappointed by Henry's unwillingness to look deeply into what's going on in the world, nonetheless respects his choice to end the conversation and stops talking. Henry then gets angry about his partner's facial expression and repeatedly demands, 'What's that look on your face?!' with a raised voice. He insists she is being disrespectful.

Eventually, she brings up their agreement to focus on being more open and honest, and reminds him about the caller he refused to identify. He suggests that it was someone plausible and goes on to accuse her of having a double standard because she didn't immediately tell him who she was speaking to when he so rudely interrupted her several days earlier. Before walking off and locking himself into his study he says, 'I don't have to tell you everything. You won't tell me, but you expect me to tell you!'

Henry's partner feels she is on the brink of insanity....

 

[Laura]

Lobaczewski gives an example of a paramoralistic type of statement in reference to a description of Lenin:

He would often call his opponents hucksters, lackeys, servant-boys, mercenaries, agents, or Judases bribed for thirty pieces of silver.

Lobaczewski writes about Paramoralisms as follows:

Paramoralisms: The conviction that moral values exist and that some actions violate moral rules is so common and ancient a phenomenon that it seems to have some substratum at man's instinctive endowment level (although it is certainly not totally adequate for moral truth), and that it does not only represent centuries' of experience, culture, religion, and socialization. Thus, any insinuation framed in moral slogans is always suggestive, even if the "moral" criteria used are just an "ad hoc" invention. Any act can thus be proved to be immoral or moral by means of such paramoralisms utilized as active suggestion, and people whose minds will succumb to such reasoning can always be found.

In searching for an example of an evil act whose negative value would not elicit doubt in any social situation, ethics scholars frequently mention child abuse. However, psychologists often meet with paramoral affirmations of such behavior in their practice, such as in the above-mentioned family with the prefrontal field damage in the eldest sister. Her younger brothers emphatically insisted that their sister's sadistic treatment of her son was due to her exceptionally high moral qualifications, and they believed this by auto-suggestion. Paramoralism somehow cunningly evades the control of our common sense, sometimes leading to acceptance or approval of behavior that is openly pathological.

Paramoralistic statements and suggestions so often accompany various kinds of evil that they seem quite irreplaceable. Unfortunately, it has become a frequent phenomenon for individuals, oppressive groups, or patho-political systems to invent ever-new moral criteria for someone's convenience. Such suggestions often partially deprive people of their moral reasoning and deform its development in youngsters. Paramoralism factories have been founded worldwide, and a ponerologist finds it hard to believe that they are managed by psychologically normal people.

The conversive features in the genesis of paramoralisms seem to prove they are derived from mostly subconscious rejection (and repression from the field of consciousness) of something completely different, which we call the voice of conscience.

A ponerologist can nevertheless indicate many observations supporting the opinion that various pathological factors participate in the tendency to use paramoralisms. This was the case in the above-mentioned family. When it occurs with a moralizing interpretation, this tendency intensifies in egotists and hysterics, and its causes are similar. Like all conversive phenomena, the tendency to use paramoralisms is psychologically contagious. That explains why we observe it among people raised by individuals in whom it was developed alongside pathological factors.

This may be a good place to reflect that true moral law is born and exists independently of our judgments in this regard, and even of our ability to recognize it. Thus, the attitude required for such understanding is scientific, not creative: we must humbly subordinate our mind to the apprehended reality. That is when we discover the truth about man, both his weaknesses and values, which shows us what is decent and proper with respect to other people and other societies.

So you see, the tendency of Lenin to defame people in terms of "Judas and thirty pieces of silver" is a clear paramoralism. He was likening their behavior to the traitor who betrayed Jesus with a kiss.

People who use "spare the rod and spoil the child" as the reason they abuse their children are using paramoralisms. The "spare the rod" thing is from the Bible, and the Bible is the "moral codebook" for most of Western Civilization and its "moral principles" have been, at various times and among various people, accepted across the board.

As Lobaczewski notes, paramoralisms are being invented all the time. One of the major ones of recent note is: "If you aren't with us, you're against us." This one can be hauled out and used in many ways.

Paramoralisms always have some suggestive reference to what is "morally acceptable" or understood or agreed on, even if it is invented on the spot.

Anybody else have some good examples?

 

[Alana]

Hi Miss Isness.

I don't know whether you read the book Political Ponerology (i suggest you do) and there's even an article written by Laura, Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes

I too am still learning what all these words really mean and how to recognize them in our daily conversations, politician speeches and in the media. That thread on doubletalk was extremely helpful btw.

Let's see what Lobaczewski has to say regarding paramoralisms, with notes by Laura, and perhaps together we can learn what they are, and see whether in the example you provide above Henry is using paramoralism. Henry's partner needs not be on the brink of insanity, but needs to study :)

Paramoralisms

The conviction that moral values exist but that some actions violate moral rules is so common and ancient a phenomenon that it seems to have some substratum at man's instinctive endowment level, and is not just a representation of centuries of experience, culture, religions, and socialization. Thus, any insinuation enclosed in a "moral slogan" is always suggestive even if the "moral" criteria used are just an ad hoc invention. Any act can thus be proved to be immoral or moral by means of using "paramoralisms" through active suggestion and people who will succumb to this manipulation are plentiful.

In searching for an example of an evil act whose negative value would not elicit doubt in any social situation, ethics scholars frequently mention child abuse. However, psychologists often meet with paramoral affirmations of such behavior in their practice.

An example would be one i heard years ago by a priest on trial in Greece, for inapropriate contact with a boy, and he said that the boy had constipation problems and he was helping him!!!

Or the the adult sexualy abusing a child and then claiming that the child "provoked" him, or that the child "enjoyed" it!!!!!

Lobaczewski earlier gave the example of the woman with prefrontal-field damage who was sadistically abusive to her child, but was supported in her abuse of the child by her brothers who were totally under her influence and convinced of her "exceptionally high moral qualifications." Particularly heinous examples of this type of thing often occur in a religious context where children have been beaten to death to "get the devil out." It is always done to "save their souls," and that is an example of "paramoralism" used in a conversive way. We have certainly been subjected to this type of use of "paramoralisms," but that's another story.

Paramoralistic statements and suggestions so often accompany various kinds of evil that they seem quite irreplaceable. Unfortunately, it has become a frequent phenomenon for individuals, oppressive groups, or patho-political systems to invent ever-new moral criteria for someone's convenience. Such suggestions deprive people of their moral reasoning and deform its development in children. Paramoralism factories have been founded worldwide, and a ponerologist finds it hard to believe that they are managed by psychologically normal people.

The conversive features in the genesis of paramoralisms seem to prove they are derived from mostly subconscious rejection (and repression from the field of consciousness) of something completely different which we call the "voice of conscience." ... Like all conversive phenomena, the tendency to use paramoralisms is psychologically contagious.

When the Turkish army in 1974 invaded and occupied Cyprus, they said it was because they felt the need to intervene in order to protect the Turkish/Cypriot population. They presented it as their moral duty. And because of this "morality", thousands were killed, wounded, violently thrown out their houses, women were raped, and those they wished to protect, are now living in the occupied part of Cyprus under dictatorship-like conditions.

And there are plenty of other examples, thank those in power, in our world today: the war on terror, the war in iraq, the war against the palestinians, etc.

All supported by "morals" invented in convenience for furthering plans which assasinate TRUE morality.

Now, Henry refuses to tell his partner who was on the phone, and he uses as an excuse the fact that she didn't tell him either the other time. That seems more like an example of covert aggression in action rather than paramoralism, which seems to be working, if Henry's partner feels near insane.

The above is how i understand what i read, which is subject to being wrong, so i welcome feedback from others, for the sake of all of us learning correctly.

 

[Appollynon]

How about some Bush and Blair-isms:

1- "We need to inavde Iraq to promote Democracy and peace"

2- "We need this 90 day detention law to protect us and our freedoms"

3- "If we don't stay the course in Iraq, then the terroists will win"

4- "We went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam Hussein, and in doing so rid the world of an evil tyrant"

5- "We will prtect our Israeli friends from any attack by Iran or Syria"

6- ""I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq, it will look like just a comma because there is -- my point is, there's a strong will for democracy."

7-"The Patriot Act has increased the flow of information within our government and it has helped break up terrorist cells in the United States of America."

8- "I can look you in the eye and tell you I feel I've tried to solve the problem diplomatically to the max, and would have committed troops both in Afghanistan and Iraq knowing what I know today."

9- "I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense."

10-"I mean, there was a serious international effort to say to Saddam Hussein, you're a threat. And the 9/11 attacks extenuated that threat, as far as I-concerned"

11- "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in"

12- "We discussed the way forward in Iraq, discussed the importance of a democracy in the greater Middle East in order to leave behind a peaceful tomorrow"

 

[Alana]

Laura, i only saw your post after i posted mine, and reading it i got confused. So paramoralisms are already made and widely accepted moral phrases, that are used, among others, to defame opponents, excuse and get support on actions and behaviors that are not truly moral?

 

[Appollynon]

Irini, you said:

So paramoralisms are already made and widely accepted moral phrases, that are used, among others, to defame opponents, excuse and get support on actions and behaviors that are not truly moral?

I had a slightly more basic take on what a paramoralism is. I had thought that it could be the use of any word or phrase that would lend moral credibility to immoral actions, ideologies, laws etc.

Such as "I lied to you to protect your feelings", or "Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind", or "He only acts violently like that becuase he had a hard upringing". I feel like you, that I may have misread slighlty what a paramoralism is. Learning is fun though.

 

[Alana]

Yes, learning is fun! I'll go have some fun with the Ponerology book and get back to this 2morrow. But i think what you are saying is right Apollynon,

I had thought that it could be the use of any word or phrase that would lend moral credibility to immoral actions, ideologies, laws etc.

and that paramoralistic slogans are made anew "on demand" all the times, otherwise we'd be stuck with the bible ones :) I misread Laura's post, who actually points this out.

So they have to be slogans. I can't think of one though...

 

[Miss Isness]

Hi all,

Thanks for the feedback. I've read most of the Ponerology material on the site, but have a little difficulty absorbing it, partially because of the writing style, I think. Anyway, I recognize the usefulness and validity of the information, and I'm not opposed to getting a copy. I'm still trying to figure out how to pay for an e-book, though, cause the store does'nt accept visa electron.

I remember reading something that gave me the impression that a religious member of my family was adept at making paramoralisms. What about saying, 'This hurts me more than it hurt's you, but I'm doing it for your own good,' to a child before giving him a whipping?

I read 'In Sheep's Clothing' too, but I wasn't able to recognize Henry's equating his intentional evasiveness with his partner's unwillingness to respond to a badly timed, rude demand for information ,with being covertly aggressive. I guess I'd better read it again!

So many things seem crystal clear when I read them, but when I'm confronted with distorted behaviour I get so easily confused. It's so frustrating. There have been improvements in my ability to recognize some forms of covert aggression, and psychopathic behaviour but it seems there are endless variations. It's so hard to avoid getting thrown off balance by all the twists and turns. I guess practice makes perfect....

 

[Appollynon]

Reading your replies I just thought of another well used paramoralism.

"Doing it/ its for the greater good of everyone"

 

[rylek]

Hi all. I found a comment on my blog today:

Hi, I enjoy reading your blog and I do understand what leads authors posting on the internet to condemn Israel. I personally agree that Palestinians deserve their own state. Nevertheless I am struck by one thing – the two extremes on the internet that fight one another – one view claims that Israel is evil, the other that it´s the Palestinians. You know I´ve met a few Palestinians and based on my limited experience these people are hot headed and easily resort to violence. I therefore believe that Israel is really in dire straits because a truce with the Palestinians is impossible. Therefore I lack an absence of  a “middle ground” in terms of information on this topic that reaches me. 

I will assume that this guy is sincere and isn't just trying to waste my time. I am aware of all the contradictions and inability to objectively see the situation obvious in this short blurb (e.g. him being caught in the "plausible lie" trap, how does hot headidness justify having genocide committed against your people, lack of knowledge about the existence of psychopaths hence the simple fact that Israel is a terrorist state run by these guys etc.).

Anyway, what I am wondering is whether his statement

"I therefore believe that Israel is really in dire straits because a truce with the Palestinians is impossible"

  is itself a paramoralism, or if it is an erroneous view of the situation based on all the propaganda and paramoralisms to which this person has been exposed all of his life. Not to mention the struggle with cognitive dissonance.

edit: corrections

 

[Skyalmian]

(/learning about this.) Laura pointed out many by a poster in this 2015 post.