Hostile writers assumed what harms an enemy’s cause is automatically true.

Evidence

The most probable explanation of what happened must be that Christians thought that whatever tended to harm the enemies of truth was likely itself to be true. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1372 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

In the rhetoric of conflict, opinion shapers ascribe to their foes irrationalities, barbarities, and culpabilities that color public beliefs (Ivie, 1980). In these different instances, those who have been persuaded are not lying to themselves. The misleaders and the misled are different persons. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 708 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Conflict rhetoric attributes barbarities to foes so that the persuaded are not self-deceived — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 708; Enemies are rhetorically recast as animals or demons before being killed. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 613; The very concept of a justified enemy collapses under logical scrutiny (+1 more)

Broader Connections