The Question of Altruism During the Armenian Genocide of 1915

Hovannisian, Richard G.

doi:10.2307/j.ctt9qg24m.21

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in interviews with survivors of the Armenian genocide, Richard G. Hovannisian found that in about a quarter of the reported cases, rescuers had a prior acquaintance with those they helped (1992:288). And in almost half (43.8%) of the cases, he says an economic motive was dominant (Hovannisian, 1992:292). Some of these involved direct payment, but the most common type of rescue in this category involved Turks taking in Armenians who could help with herding, field labor, and other tasks (Hovannisian, 1992:294).…”

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And in almost half (43.8%) of the cases, he says an economic motive was dominant (Hovannisian, 1992:292). Some of these involved direct payment, but the most common type of rescue in this category involved Turks taking in Armenians who could help with herding, field labor, and other tasks (Hovannisian, 1992:294). Many Armenians were also rescued as a result of their willingness to convert to Islam (Hovannisian, 1992:290, 295–297).…”

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of these involved direct payment, but the most common type of rescue in this category involved Turks taking in Armenians who could help with herding, field labor, and other tasks (Hovannisian, 1992:294). Many Armenians were also rescued as a result of their willingness to convert to Islam (Hovannisian, 1992:290, 295–297). In many of the other cases, Armenians likewise provided labor for their rescuers and accepted their religion, even if this was not considered the dominant motive for the rescue (Hovannissian, 1992:290).…”

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Contradictory Behavior During Genocides1

Campbell¹

2010

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In all large-scale genocides, rescuing occurs alongside killing. Some members of the aggressors' ethnic group even risk their own lives to save members of the targeted group. Killing and rescuing occur closely together, and even the same persons may engage in both behaviors-killing on one occasion and rescuing on another. This article examines such cases-where the same individuals kill and rescue-and discusses their relevance to the explanation of genocide. Both collectivistic and individualistic theories of killing and rescuing-which explain these behaviors with the properties of groups or persons-are inadequate in accounting for those who do both. Using Donald Black's (1995, 2000) strategy of pure sociology and my theory of genocide (Campbell, 2009), I offer an explanation of contradictory behavior by individuals during genocide. The behaviors themselves occur in different structures-killing where there is social distance and rescuing where there is social closeness. Individuals who exhibit contradictory behavior thus kill those who are distant and save those who are close. One feature of this analysis is its demonstration of the explanatory power of pure sociology, which is uniquely capable of explaining extreme variations in individual behavior.

show abstract

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pure Sociology Of Contradictory Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contradictory Behavior During Genocides1

Campbell¹

2010

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More specifically, situational conditions (e.g., natural disasters) motivate individuals to care for others (Baron 1992; Hovannisian 1992; Oliner 2002). Altruism also may be motivated by deeply rooted ideological leanings including politically liberal, humanistic, cultural and religious beliefs, values, and norms (Baron 1992; Hovannisian 1992; Johnson et al 1989; Lee et al 2005; Midlarsky et al 2005; Monroe 2002; Oliner and Oliner 1988; Oliner 2002; Peterson and Seligman 2004; Wuthnow 1991). Lee et al (2005) assert that ideologies, values and norms that place a premium on caring for others may inform a sense of personal responsibility for the fate of those who are in need, and may become such defining aspects of the self that they prompt us to act in ways that are consistent with what we profess to value (i.e., to behave altruistically).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some individuals engage in altruistic action as a result of having established positive relationships with particular individuals or members of particular social identity groups (see Baron 1992; Hovannisian 1992 for examples). Further, some scholars suggest that individuals may be influenced by the selfless values of models such as parents (Gagne and Middlebrooks 1977; Lee et al 2005; Oliner and Oliner 1988, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Social Production of Altruism: Motivations for Caring Action in a Low‐Income Urban Community

Mattis

Hammond

Grayman

et al. 2009

American J of Comm Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary social science paints a bleak picture of inner-city relational life. Indeed, the relationships of low-income, urban-residing Americans are represented as rife with distress, violence and family disruption. At present, no body of social scientific work systematically examines the factors that promote loving or selfless interactions among low-income, inner-city American individuals, families and communities. In an effort to fill that gap, this ethnographic study examined the motivations for altruism among a sample of adults (n = 40) who reside in an economically distressed housing community (i.e., housing project) in New York City. Content analyses of interviews indicated that participants attributed altruism to an interplay between 14 motives that were then ordered into four overarching categories of motives: (1) needs-centered motives, (2) norm-based motives deriving from religious/spiritual ideology, relationships and personal factors, (3) abstract motives (e.g., humanism), and (4) sociopolitical factors. The implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Intersectional Identities and the Politics of Altruistic Care in a Low-Income, Urban Community

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literatures on the ways in which social identity and social position (e.g., gender, class, race) inform altruism have developed orthogonally. In this community-based qualitative study we use intersectionality theory to explore the complex ways in which social identity and social structures jointly influence altruism among African American adults (n= 40) in an urban, economically distressed housing community in New York City. Content analysis of participants' narratives reveals the ways in which gender, race, ethnicity, class, age, and urbanicity work in tandem to create differential patterns of vulnerability, differential needs, differential commitments to caring for particular subgroups, and informs how altruists are perceived by others. The implications of this work for future research on altruism are highlighted.

show abstract

The Question of Altruism During the Armenian Genocide of 1915

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Contradictory Behavior During Genocides1

Contradictory Behavior During Genocides1

The Social Production of Altruism: Motivations for Caring Action in a Low‐Income Urban Community

Intersectional Identities and the Politics of Altruistic Care in a Low-Income, Urban Community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About