It’s Frighteningly Telling…

… that Brown University professor emeritus of psychology, medical science, and human development Lewis Lipsitt doesn’t offer one single example of what he means by “learning processes and socialization on a grand scale [that] will ensure human survival.”

The same intelligence that brought us here must now be used to reverse aggressive assaults and promote opportunities for collaborative peace-making. …
FDR’s emphasis on science suggests that had he lived there might have been another Manhattan Project, addressing human relationships and the learning processes required to control international aggression. We have the choice to use, or not use, behavior science benevolently. …
Such an effort is now required, even more than in FDR’s time, to study how to abort and abate the violent behavior so prevalent in the modern world. Today, only a full-throttle commitment and large-scale investment in the study of the behavior of aggression will provide a level playing field for the terrorized people of the world.

So what rights will society claim when it comes to handling those who don’t consent to this benevolent socialization? And why do I get the feeling that Lipsitt intends a very broad meaning of “terrorized people”? I’m sure the category of terroristic behavior will not drift toward a secular liberal fantasy of social engineering one bit. Yeah, right.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
17 years ago

I was just suprised to see a professor actually admit there is a difference between men and women – “aggressive behavior is (inherent)… and most strikingly in males”

17 years ago

Not as registered reader, so I can’t fisk the article. Since we have laboratories all over the country called prisons, shouldn’t these “engineers” already have a proven track record of success at the micro level to expand upon? If not, why not?
It’s all psychobabble rap to me

17 years ago

Yes, this is a request for a definition of “terrorized people”.
Do they include the victims of Kim Jong-il (i.e., all of North Korea)? The Iraqi civilians now being targeted by the remnants of Saddam Hussein’s supporters? The beleaguered people of the Sudan?
If so, go to it, Mr. Lipsitt. If this is a cute way of referring to American foreign policy, you need to redirect your efforts where they are needed.

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.