In Girardian terms, is the scape-goat *always* arbitrary?
-
-
It's not exactly arbitrary, because there's a mechanism to it, but it's not attached to a specific identity. Perhaps
@Ahimsa_Satya_@GirardForum@BrunoPerennou could elaborate further?2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MimeticValue @nntaleb and
What I am getting at is that: Could it be that the scapegoat could actually be deserving of collective punishment in some cases? Did Girard account for that?
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Pv @MimeticValue and
That is entirely possible. In this case, one could say that "he did, at the wrong time, what he shouldn't have done". Even if guilty, his fault redirects towards him all the hatred that the protagonists feel for each other. These phenomena can still be found nowadays
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrunoPerennou @Pv and
After the scapegoat's death, whether he was guilty or not, the crowd's point of view is invariable anyway: he *was* guilty "Paradoxically" he is held responsible for both the crisis and its resolution (in archaic religions). That's the turning point
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrunoPerennou @Pv and
The degree of the crisis matters. Girard talks about this in A Theater of Envy. "The crisis brings catastrophic undifferentiation rather than differentiation." This is the main factor that separates the condemning of the guilty from the sacrifice of the innocent.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MimeticValue @Pv and
The sacrificial crisis leads to a general indifference, I agree (with Girard, of course...) Is the victim's guilt so important after all? What matters is that the crowd is convinced after the fact
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrunoPerennou @Pv and
I think that if the there's high certainty when we know exactly who is guilty, then the undifferentiation wouldn't be triggered in the first place, because the degree of crisis is too small.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MimeticValue @Pv and
The "mob murder" of the murderer doesn't trigger any sacrificial crisis – not necessary, i mean But if the crisis is already very high, any deviant (real or alleged) action will concentrate the whole anger
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BrunoPerennou @Pv and
The sacrifice is a response to crisis, even something non-social, like a flood. The flood is way more deadly than a single criminal, and nobody knows who is guilty in a flood, thus, an innocent scapegoat is sacrificed, who becomes the river god.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Aka the plague at Thebes.
-
-
Replying to @Ahimsa_Satya_ @BrunoPerennou and
This is why I think complexity matters. It's impossible to find a single person to blame during the crisis, prior to the sacrifice. Of course afterwards, the scapegoat is seen as guilty regardless, but the mechanism is different prior to the sacrifice.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MimeticValue @Ahimsa_Satya_ and
It's the conditions of the crisis that matter, not the identity of the scapegoat.
0 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.