Daniel J. Goldhagen's Ordinary Men

Daniel J. Goldhagen, an author and former Harvard professor, is an acclaimed academic who studies prejudice and antisemitism. While historians and professors are familiar with his published works, his response to Christopher Browning’s book, “Ordinary Men” has received the most attention. In his book, Christopher Browning argues that the men who committed the acts of mass murder of innocent people during the Holocaust were merely typical German citizens who killed due to social pressures. Goldhagen argues that the men who participated in these mass killings were not normal human beings and, in fact, killed for personal fulfillment. He successfully refutes Browning’s claim in his article “Presentation of Hitler’s Willing Executioners” by quoting credible historians and former Nazis, presenting accurate historical facts, and pointing out flaws in Browning's arguments. Goldhagen’s use of emotional …show more content…
Goldhagen could have solely relied on the emotional appeal that is already present when discussing genocides. If he did so, his argument would be satisfactory, however it would not be exceptional. I believe that the use of logos was most successful in his argument for two reasons. Firstly, the discourse community of historians and other academics would respond best to a logical appeal rather than an emotional appeal. When contemplating Goldhagen’s versus Browning’s opposing claims, one must consider the facts and disregard emotions. Secondly, providing the audience primary facts and quotes deepens the emotional response of the audience. Presenting evidence that validates that there were people who desired the annihilation of an entire group of people is abhorrent and horrific. This is not just assumed by Goldhagen, but stated by former Nazis and antisemites. Reading the factual excerpts provided in this article was chilling yet successful for Goldhagen’s