|
|
On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman© Catten Ely
In his book On Killing, Grossman uses interviews, personal accounts, published narratives, academic studies, and a few statistics to look at the psychology of killing in combat - what he calls killology. He looks mostly at military techniques developed to overcome human aversion to the innate resistance to taking a life. This is a problem police officers encounter in deadly force situations - ones in which they must draw their weapons and shoot a bad guy.
Grossman begins early in the book comparing combat to sex, which works nicely as an introduction to the topic, because while most people haven't killed someone, many have experienced sex and can relate to his explanation of posturing (acting larger to intimidate an opponent) and responses to aggression. He uses analogies from the animal kingdom to explain man's aversion to killing. In intraspecies conflicts, dueling to the death is unusual. Most often, there is a great deal of posturing in the form of puffing up, growling, hissing, clawing, and raising hackles. If there is physical confrontation, it is non-lethal, and at some point, one animal will choose to submit or retreat. Humans naturally follow the same patterns. According to Grossman, in the history of combat from Alexander the Great through World War II, only about 15 percent of soldiers in battle were actually trying to kill the enemy. The reason: Humans have a deep and strong taboo against looking a person in the face while destroying him. However, in Vietnam, that number jumped to more than 90 percent. How? According to Grossman, by conditioning fear into an automatic killing reflex: "When people become angry, or frightened, they stop thinking with their forebrain (the mind of a human being) and start thinking with their midbrain (which is indistinguishable from the mind of an animal). They are literally "scared out of their wits." When the US Army began using classical and operant conditioning, their numbers jumped. Training became more realistic, repetitive, and rewarding. Soldiers shot at man-shaped targets rather than bull's-eyes, and they got to see their results immediately because the targets fell down when hit. They practiced qualifying over and over until they were comfortable. And it certainly didn't hurt that the enemy became a collective "Charlie the gook" instead of people. Unfortunately, some parts of the equation for success were missing (support from the people back home, for instance) and our soldiers came back from Vietnam with plenty of psychic damage that they are still living with today. This is not purely a war phenomenon, however. Cops who shoot suspects frequently experience similar symptoms of nightmares, insomnia, fear, and feeling alone. Go To Page: 1 2
The copyright of the article On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in Crime Stories is owned by . Permission to republish On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|