No More Heroes Analysis
ARE SOLDIERS WHO EXPERIENCE THE TRAUMA WEAK-HEARTED?
In No More Heroes, a study of madness and psychiatry in war, Richard Gabriel points out that contrary to what is in the movies, television, and the military, it is not only the weak and cowardly who break down in battle. In truth, everyone is subject to breaking down in war, “perhaps most telling, not only are there no personalities or demographic factors which are associated with psychiatric collapse; neither are there any factors associated with heroism. It’s impossible to predict which soldiers will collapse and which will behave bravely”. He also adds, “There is no statistical difference in the rates of psychiatric breakdown among inexperienced troops and battle-hardened veterans.” When all is said and done, all ‘normal’ men are at risk in war.
British psychiatrist Robert D. Laing maintained that insanity is ‘a sane response to an insane situation’. …show more content…
Individual differences in personality and adjustment capability are the reason I feel why not all who experience a trauma go on to develop the disorder, as rightly advocated by Friedman.
The unusually elevated rates of PTSD in Vietnam War only speak of the sanity of the people who fought there, if we choose to go with Gabriel’s hypothesis. The trauma, the killing, the disturbance—it all falls in the same circle. Here’s a paradoxical thought: Why would so many sane people fight a war? Are they insane?
So, sorry! But I find it absurd and feel that Gabriel’s theory fails to explain soldiers who survive the war psychologically unscathed. This question is certainly one I find very amusing and one that I find is yet unanswered as I reach the end of the
In No More Heroes, a study of madness and psychiatry in war, Richard Gabriel points out that contrary to what is in the movies, television, and the military, it is not only the weak and cowardly who break down in battle. In truth, everyone is subject to breaking down in war, “perhaps most telling, not only are there no personalities or demographic factors which are associated with psychiatric collapse; neither are there any factors associated with heroism. It’s impossible to predict which soldiers will collapse and which will behave bravely”. He also adds, “There is no statistical difference in the rates of psychiatric breakdown among inexperienced troops and battle-hardened veterans.” When all is said and done, all ‘normal’ men are at risk in war.
British psychiatrist Robert D. Laing maintained that insanity is ‘a sane response to an insane situation’. …show more content…
Individual differences in personality and adjustment capability are the reason I feel why not all who experience a trauma go on to develop the disorder, as rightly advocated by Friedman.
The unusually elevated rates of PTSD in Vietnam War only speak of the sanity of the people who fought there, if we choose to go with Gabriel’s hypothesis. The trauma, the killing, the disturbance—it all falls in the same circle. Here’s a paradoxical thought: Why would so many sane people fight a war? Are they insane?
So, sorry! But I find it absurd and feel that Gabriel’s theory fails to explain soldiers who survive the war psychologically unscathed. This question is certainly one I find very amusing and one that I find is yet unanswered as I reach the end of the