Witch Hunts and Moral Logic
What Heinrich Kramer’s Malleus Maleficarum Teaches Us About Structural Discrimination
Photo by John-Mark Smith: https://www.pexels.com/photo/brown-paper-envelope-on-table-211290/
Hi there,
This is Trgr,
Introduction
I felt this could be valuable for understanding ourselves, society, history, and the world while caring for each other. That's why I'm writing this article.
I'm drawing educational insights from history about discrimination that requires sensitive consideration and its prevention. However, as someone raised in Japan, I think my understanding of medieval witch hunts may be incomplete.
Also, writing in detail about the historical background might be burdensome for readers. So I'll focus on textual criticism.
And if I've made any mistakes due to my lack of knowledge, I sincerely apologize.
Note: As a native Japanese thinker writing in English, I use AI tools to help bridge cultural and linguistic gaps - similar to how a musician might use technology to arrange their compositions. All ideas, perspectives, and cultural insights remain uniquely mine.
1. Self-Defense in the Age of Fake News
The text is in the public domain, so anyone can verify its contents. You don't need to go to a library—you can access it anytime, right now. Of course, you don't have to read it if you don't want to.
I want to quote just one passage from this book to specifically examine how authority is used to structurally embed prejudice in society.
Why?
Just like understanding scam techniques can help protect you, knowing these patterns might help you support yourself and your loved ones.
Here are the URLs:
Malleus maleficarum - Digital Collections - National Library of Medicine
https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-9413083-bk
Malleus Maleficarum : Institoris, Heinrich, 1430-1505; Sprenger, Jakob, 1436 or 1438-1495; Summers, Montague, 1880-1948 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
https://archive.org/details/bf-1569-a-2-i-5-1928
2. Textual Criticism
Others again have propounded other reasons why there are more super-stitious women found than men. And the first is, that they are more credu-lous; and since the chief aim of the devil is to corrupt faith, therefore he rather attacks them. See Ecclestasticus xix: He that is quick to believe is light-minded, and shall be diminished.
Malleus Maleficarum : Institoris, Heinrich, 1430-1505; Sprenger, Jakob, 1436 or 1438-1495; Summers, Montague, 1880-1948 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
https://archive.org/details/bf-1569-a-2-i-5-1928
As a simple 21st-century Protestant believer, I have some straightforward questions:
1. Isn't there a contradiction between the teachings of "love others and don't kill" and the justification of torture?
2. There's no evidence provided for why women are supposedly "weaker." Isn't it possible that the author himself lacks logical thinking and self-critical abilities, and that his own faith is weak, causing him to obsess over the external factor of "women" and imagine witches?
3. During Jesus's crucifixion, there's no mention of the 12 male apostles being present. As described in Matthew 26:69-75, even Peter denied Jesus three times and fled because the situation was so dangerous.
Matthew 27:55-56
Mark 15:40-41
John 19:25
In contrast, the Bible states that women, including Mary Magdalene, were present at the scene. If Mary Magdalene was a woman, and Heinrich Kramer was a man, and if we can make generalizations based on gender as Kramer did, then women should have stronger faith. That would mean Heinrich Kramer must be inferior to Mary Magdalene.
Why do we get opposite conclusions from the same Bible? It's because authority was used selectively to justify bias, isn't it?
As an independent thinker, I'd like to point out two things:
1. The claim that "the devil targets women → women are superstitious" falls into circular reasoning.
The existence of the devil itself is an unprovable religious belief. Instead of explaining "I believe this because of these reasons," the author essentially says "Just believe what I say! Follow me!" This approach, coming from an influential medieval clergyman, systematizes prejudice that denies individual dignity, which is irresponsible.
Generally, reasoning goes wrong when you start with incorrect premises, like in deductive reasoning.
2. Isn't discrimination convenient? Positioning women as "weak beings" in medieval Christian society served to justify male-centered religious authority. This labeling and superstition reflects the asymmetry of power and reproduces it structurally.
I don't know if Heinrich Kramer had children, but he must have had a biological mother. There's a double standard—Kramer clearly distinguished between "important women" and "other women" in his mind. How can a clergyman who should guide people spread prejudice instead of teaching that "regardless of feelings, we must protect others' dignity"?
3. What We Can Learn from This Book and History
Discrimination becomes easier to address when we're conscious of these thought processes:
Basis of claims: Data or belief?
Visualizing assumptions: What's being implicitly assumed?
Alternative explanations: What other interpretations are possible? (Occam's Razor is effective here)
Social context: Who is speaking from what position?
We can avoid these thinking traps by being particularly aware of "the limitations of using religious texts to explain social phenomena" and the opposing axes in gender theory of "essentialism vs. social constructivism" (such as tradition and performativity).
4. In Closing
What this article suggests is that being right isn't the goal. We shouldn't intimidate others who aren't discriminating. (Everyone should be free within the bounds of public welfare.) Rather than criticizing others, what's important is examining our own thinking, and improving our "information balance and emotional inventory."
We might not achieve a discrimination-free society overnight—perhaps discrimination will still exist 1,000 years from now. Still, wrong is wrong, and increasing the number of people who can understand why—that small accumulation might be the tangible certainty we can confirm.
Let's learn from history. Isn't weakness actually the inability to face oneself, and spreading prejudice because of that? We can learn from history again and again. The more we learn from history, the more we can run through the PDCA cycle, and the less sorrow there will be in the world.
Even without discrimination and hurting each other as fellow humans connected by the deep bonds of 'nakama' (a uniquely Japanese concept of community that transcends mere biological classification), there's plenty of contradiction and pain in the world. I don't understand why we hurt those with whom we share this profound connection, this sense of belonging together that extends beyond current communities to include even isolated individuals and future generations.
(Of course, discrimination exists in Japan too, and there are various initiatives addressing it.)
I know about the patience that has endured throughout our long, long history. And I believe such people will only grow in number.
So women who have been oppressed don't need to cry anymore. Instead of being swept along by a discriminatory society, I hope you'll have more time to cry because of watching beautiful movies or appreciating beautiful nature—all for your freedom and pride.
Best,
Trgr KarasuToragara
About the Author
I’ll keep writing. Your subscription helps me continue creating content like this. Join our growing Substack community, where we can write what we want to write and read what we want to read.
Kramer was a rather unsuccessful Inquisitor, who first in Ravensburg and then in Innsbruck lost his witch processes.
He was always highly controversial, but managed to make his very unclean and hastily written justification of the witch hunt "The Witch's Hammer" (malleus maleficiarum) "official" by a bull summis desiderantes affectibus. He wrote the bull himself and had it signed by Pope Innocent VIII. Since he cites a notarial deed to confirm the bull, the authenticity of which is highly questionable, I suppose (my personal opinion) that the bull itself is a forgery.
I think he was in his time a similar katalyst for superstition and fear like many times before and after the Jews were declared the scapegoats of everything what went wrong.
He lived in a time where (except the clergy and the Jews) allmost nobody could read or write in Europe.
It was the time of the “little ice age” cold winters, rainy summers lead to several problems. There was an inflation and life was getting harder and harder.
Under this tough conditions any scapegoat was welcome.
(I think the Landesfürsten - the secular sovereigns, were not that unhappy, that they were not blamed)
Nobody significant of the educated people believed in witches or the other mental insanity in the malleus maleficiarum. The Spanish Inquisition declared it as “unsuitable”
If Johannes Gutenberg had not invented the letterpress printing with movable types about 1440 this book would have been forgotten very fast (no monk would have duplicated it by hand writing)