The topic is Heinrich Himmler's Speech at Poznan (Posen)

Question

-Give a summary of the speech
-How does this relate to ethics and moral
-How does this relate to philosophy and philosophers (like Hobbes and others)
-Cite evidence from the Moral Life 7th edition
-Give many thoughts about how his moral view is seen as correct in his eyes vs how it is seen unlawfully and wrong in the eyes of others

Write in complete sentences using Standard English grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Response Papers need to be 700 WODS OR MORE.

Your Response Papers must consist of two paragraphs.

-In your first paragraph, the task is to demonstrate that you have carefully read the text assigned for that day, by explaining, in your own words, what is going on in a particular section of it. You can choose to write about one paragraph, or one page, from the text assigned for that day. You must include a brief quotation (or two) from the passage you are writing about, and you must indicate the quotation’s page number. Put the source [either Moral Life or Folio] and the page number, in brackets right after the quotation. i.e., ... “Some things are up to us, some are not up to us” (Moral Life, p.388). I assume you are using the assigned seventh edition of the textbook. If you are using a previous edition of the textbook, indicate which version in your citation. Do not spend any time on biographical information about the philosopher.

-In the second paragraph, the task is to demonstrate that you have thought critically about this portion of the text by offering some sort of critical response to it (i.e. what you think about the ideas in this portion of the text, and why you think that). The second paragraph must be at least as long as or longer than the first paragraph

Answer 1

Heinrich Himmler's speech delivered in Poznan (Posen) in October 1943 is a chilling articulation of the Nazi regime's ideology, particularly concerning the Holocaust and the extermination of the Jewish population. In this speech, Himmler expresses his belief that the actions taken against the Jews were not only justified but necessary for the survival of the Aryan race. He discusses the process of achieving what he calls "the final solution," emphasizing the need for secrecy and the moral justifications behind their systematic extermination. Himmler frames these actions as a burden that falls upon the perpetrators, suggesting that those involved in the mass killings must detach themselves from the emotional weight of their deeds. This notion of detachment is strikingly evident when he states, “Unlike the Jews, we have to improve the human race” (Moral Life, p. 455). Here, Himmler’s use of language demonstrates a perverse sense of nobility in their actions, which he rationalizes within a warped moral framework that prioritizes ideological purity over human life. This illustrates the depths of moral depravity that can arise when a regime subscribes to an extreme ideological perspective that dehumanizes entire groups of people for the sake of presumed societal benefits.

Critically examining Himmler’s moral reasoning reveals a stark contrast to the ethical frameworks traditionally endorsed by philosophers. Thinkers like Thomas Hobbes posited that moral principles arise from social contracts necessary for living in a civil society, suggesting that morality is grounded in the preservation of life and common good. Himmler’s rhetoric, however, undermines this foundation by promoting a perverse moral calculus that allows for the justification of mass murder in the name of preserving a particular race. This is fundamentally at odds with the notion of intrinsic human rights, which philosophers like Immanuel Kant advocate—that every individual has worth and must be treated with dignity. Himmler’s perspective illustrates a morality contingent upon group identity rather than universal ethical considerations. His view, while justified and accepted by Nazi ideology, collapses when subjected to broader moral scrutiny; it is seen as atrocious and unlawful by the global community. As the events of World War II remind us, moral frameworks must not only exist but also reject ideologies that rationalize harm against others. The stark dichotomy between Himmler’s self-justification for heinous acts and the widely accepted moral principles underscores how dangerous moral relativism can be when wielded by those in power, allowing individuals to evade ethical responsibility under the guise of ideology. In this light, the examination of Himmler's speech serves as a crucial reminder of the need for vigilance against morally destructive ideologies that threaten the fabric of humanity itself.