>Sounds very odd from Zimbardo, certainly one of
>psychology's brighter sparks. I know that, in saner
>moments, he is well aware that 'reality' and 'delusion'
>are both _social_ rather than objective constructs. We
>say a person is 'delusional' because that person holds
>a socially-unacceptable view of the world, not because
>we can necessarily prove them to be wrong. (We used to
>use the term 'heretic' instead, but modern persecution
>prefers the language of science :-) )
(over limit agaion -sorry). If memory serves, the comment I cited was made to illustrate that exact point -- one person's delusions are other people's enshrined beliefs. But the fact that some delusions become socially accepted does not mean that they cease to be delusions. To my recollection, that comment was made in Zimardo's Psychology textbook but I do not have it handy (it was quite a while ago I took that class).
>
>Doubtless some individual NRA members are paranoid, but
It is not about them being paranoid, but acting out their paranoid beliefs and using deadly weapons to that end.
>it's not clear to me that all people are wrong, who
>suspect the motives of the folk in power. Goddess
>help the members of this list if that were so! :-)
>
Something tells me that assorted campaigns to protect "the right to bear arms" are not really about making our government more responsive and democratic, but about the right to poseess manly toys that project a macho image. Do you think I am wrong?
Wojtek