![]() Most perpetrators of evil derive pleasure from the harm they inflict Most evil acts are done deliberately by people who know they are evilĢ. The book first outlines “the myth of pure evil.”ġ. The book focuses primarily on the psychology of perpetrators.Īt the outset, Baumeister acknowledges that any sincere effort to understand the perpetrators of vicious acts will be insensitive to the victims.īaumeister states bluntly, “This book cannot be ‘politically correct.’” There is plenty in this book to outrage people across the political spectrum. It is impossible to imagine a legal or moral system that doesn’t take this difference between the two men seriously.” Common sense tells us that only the second man is blameworthy because only he chose his action. When she awakes, he pretends to be horrified at what had happened. One night, he waits for her to fall asleep and then, fully awake, hits her in the face. Compare this to a man who hates his wife and wants to hurt her. They both wake up, and he is horrified at what has happened. “Consider a man who thrashes in his sleep and hits his wife in the face, breaking her nose. Here is an example from the psychology professor Paul Bloom, which illuminates the distinction Baumeister is making: But for evil to be defined as evil, there has to be room for conscious choice. Some people here might get hung up on free will or whatever. This is because the person who is under distress is still in control of what they are doing, while the person with psychosis does not. The best way to avoid committing such acts is to understand that we are capable of them.įor the purposes of the book, Baumeister defines evil as “actions that intentionally harm other people.” For example, the book treats loss of self-control as a result of emotional distress as a possible cause of evil, but not psychosis. The book is about the psychological understanding of evil, not a philosophical or moral treatise on what constitutes evil.īaumeister writes, “The hardest part of understanding the nature of evil is to first recognize that you or I could, under certain circumstances, commit many of the acts that the world has come to regard as evil.” ![]() This extended essay is an overview of this incredible book, along with some commentary. Since reading it, I’ve discovered that Evil is a favorite of two of my favorite psychologists and authors: Steven Pinker and Paul Bloom. It shook my mental foundations and changed the way I see the world. This was a “quake book” for me when I first read it. The best book to understand the psychology of evil is Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty by the renowned psychology professor Roy Baumeister. And the less you believe this to be the case, the more likely it is to be true. We would have been supporters, either actively or passively. Had you or I been an ordinary German, Chinese or Russian person living under those regimes, we would in all likelihood not have resisted. People often view the crimes of Nazi Germany, Maoist China, and the Soviet Union through the eyes of the victims.īut to understand evil, it would be wise to view it through the eyes of the perpetrators. There is a widespread belief that evil acts come from evil people. It’s always the other side…they’re the ones who are irrational and aggressive. We think, I’m not irrational, I’m not aggressive, I don’t feel envy, I’m not a narcissist. “If I had to say what the primary law of human nature is, it is to deny that we are subject to these forces.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |