Serial Killers - Philosophy for Everyone

Philosophy for Everyone #36

by Fritz Allhoff, S. Waller, John M. Doris (Foreword)

Serial Killers—Philosophy for Everyone investigates our profound interest in mass-murderers. Exploring existential, ethical, and political questions through an examination of real and fictional serial killers, philosophy comes alive here via an exploration of grisly death. This

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Psychology, True Crime, Crime

MP3 CD

First published October 11, 2010

Reviews

[Annie]

I read about half of the essays in this book and skimmed the rest. Some essays were written well but most offered no new insight and many were written about the same serial killers and the same philosophies. It was overall bland and I was not motivated to finish this book.

[John · Rating 2 out of 5]

A series of essays that provide little insight, pop culture understanding and often repeat the same points. Yes we get it, you've watched Dexter and Silence of the Lambs an can write an essay.

[Steve Scott · Rating 3 out of 5]

A collection of essays that varied in quality. Several were terrible, with one giving outlandish estimates of the numbers of victims killed each year by serial killers. (Historian Philip Jenkins puts that nonsense to rest in his book “Using Murder”.). I was disappointed by the focus on Dexter in one essay, doing a deep dive into his motivations. Dexter is fictional for goodness sake!

Several were well written. Not enough to redeem the book.

[Linda Is on her way · Rating 2 out of 5]

Only read 65%. Won't finish. So far they keep talking about TV shows and movies with serial killers in them. Also saying that Tom riddley from Patricia Highsmiths book only killed when he had to is false. He didn't have to kill anyone and even if he had killed the first dude, he later could've avoided killing his friend in the hotel. Also Dexter was not some hero, that's not what I think. I never liked him, he was quite a dick. I hated the series and only watched five episodes. But unfortunately this book seems to only focus on Dexter and some other popular movies . The title sounded very interesting but the author chose to waste the potential and talk about fictional psychopaths, throwing around some important names from philosophy in here and there...

[John Arnold · Rating 2 out of 5]

i have read quite a lot on this subject, and this book did not really tell me anything new. It is a collection of essays, mostly by professors. The majority of these essays left me feeling undernourished. They felt pointless and hollow. If you have not read very much about serial killers you might want to add a star. Best part of book is a timeline of serial killers dating back to 144 BCE. There are one hundred or more names. so the list can be used as a reference to look up more serial killers.

[D M · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mmm, me gustó la variedad de perspectivas con las cuales abordar el tema, la moral, la responsabilidad, la filosofía, la culpabilidad, los estigmas y prejuicios, la inocencia, la definición del concepto de empatía, etc.

Es un poco soso de leer, de repente perdía el interés, si soy sincera. Pero aprendí muchas cosas y eso es suficiente para mí.

[Roy Van Den Brande · Rating 3 out of 5]

The risk of a reader is that some of the independent papers resort to the same topics and statements. Like the ethical dilemma of Dexter, the Milgram Experiments or the utilitarian view on serial killers. But most of the authors were enjoyable to read.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

What better way to study ethics than by analyzing those who blatantly disregard it?

A great read for laypeople and experienced students.

[Ari · Rating 3 out of 5]

Definitely a unique take. The editor of this work has gathered and organized a sizeable number of essays, primarily written by philosophy professors and PhD students that focus on serial killers (both as a group and some individuals, both in real life and through the lens of Hollywood) through writings of different philosophers. The reader is treated to the observations of Socrates/Plato/Heidegger/Sartre/Sade/Nietzsche/Rambam/Nozick/Kant and many more, as philosophies through which to analyze serial killer actions as 'necessary', 'good', 'evil', and more. I appreciate books that make me think and question, and I appreciate books even more that use philosphical lenses in ways I wouldn't generally expect. This is worth the read, if only for the novelty factor. Heavily biased toward philosophy and not psychology, and you'll get more out of it if you've studied philosophy formally, in my opinion (I have an undergrad in Philosophy, and feel that some of the references were rather subtle and not easy to catch on the surface reading).

Downfalls: The essays were written independently of one another and by different authors. This is great as far as styles, but not so great as far as overlap. There was significantly too much focus on Dexter.

[Nullaesomines · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was a bit of a disappointment. Far from being ABOUT serial killers as such, it is more about societies fascination with them. It spends almost more ( or more) time on fictional characters from books and film than actual serial killers themselves. Each chapter is contributed by a different author (I won't use the term expert, or philosopher) and not surprisingly lacks any coherence, or theme; except maybe the post structural, or almost solopsistic approach to an attempt at an ethical stance on murder itself. Some chapters go so far as to present one (again fictional) serial killer as almost a paradigm of virtue. It is bad enough that they frequently reference an actual Philospher Nietzsche to bring credibility to the enterprise, but also site Eminem as a source for speculation on the subject. I should not be surprised however, as the books in this series are directed towards an audience of arm chair enthusiasts of different topics. There were I allow, one or two chapters that were well thought out and were worthy of a second glance. If you are looking for a work on serial killers, and not pop culture, pass this one by at the coffee shop.

[E. Kahn · Rating 3 out of 5]

A collection of essays that explain philosophical concepts using serial killers as a launching pad.

Generally not great, with a few pretty good ones and a couple of bad ones too. Something like half the authors seem to have chosen to write about Dexter to prove how hip they are to pop culture; most of the ones that write about real killers stick to the super-famous.

My favorite essay was Chapter 9, "Killing with Kindness," by Elizabeth and Harold Schechter. Nice and crunchy. I'm going to look for more by them, individually or together, and I also made note of their recommended books on the topic.

Least favorite was Chapter 7, "The Allure of the Serial Killer," by Eric Dietrich and Tara Fox Hall. This one felt like reading a sensationalistic "True Crime" book, not least because it repeats a bunch of old stories that are generally considered exaggerated at best and politically motivated fabrications at worst by modern historians.

[Gebo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting book, but like all books of collected essays, you can't like them all. There are a few choice ones like my friend Andrew Winter's article about the Son of Sam.

[Kate Diamond · Rating 1 out of 5]

Just so, so bad.

[Arwen · Rating 5 out of 5]

VERY interesting hehe

[Jason Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

cool

[Megan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good compilation of artices on the psychology of serial killers. Some of the subjects are repeated though.

[Lucy Trojanovich · Rating 4 out of 5]

very interesting