Remember the Electric Light Orchestra? I couldn’t resist. But I really want to say something about an e”¦evil woman. Actually, not really. I just wanted an excuse to say e..evil woman. Okay, I’ve said it, again. Now I’ve got it out of my system. I’ll stop with that.
But I do want to talk about evil. Evil’s such a dicey word. Evil? What is evil? What really makes someone evil? Do evil people exist?
That is, can someone even be evil: Are people evil, or just their behaviors?
I remember a friend of mine, a close friend, years ago, once called me an “evil m*therf*cker,” and I laughed. Did I laugh because I’m evil, thereby validating his accusation? Or did I laugh because I was secure enough to know I’m not?
By the way, what prompted his accusation was a really cruel, funny practical joke I played on him. I’m afraid he found it much more cruel than funny, whereas I found it much funnier than cruel. (Maybe some other time I’ll describe the joke?)
Speaking of cruel, is there a relationship between evil and cruelty? Are they the same thing? When you’re being cruel, or committing a cruel act, are you being evil? Is the cruelty itself evil?
If you don’t have a headache by now, I do. But that’s okay”¦I’ll even make it worse by posing some more light questions, like: Are exploiters, by definition, evil? Is exploitation always evil? Or, must acts of exploitation reach a certain threshhold of heinousness to constitute evil?
And what about our favorite friends, the sociopaths? Are sociopaths, by definition, evil? Sometimes? Always?
And then, of course, the really ultimate question: Do you really think I’m going to answer these questions?
Do you really think I’m crazy, and grandiose, enough, to tackle these questions?
Maybe I am”¦but I can assure you, not adequately. Still, I will “man up” and offer some “takes” on these heady matters, if for no other purpose than to drum-up some good discussion!
I fully expect, incidentally, your feedback to change my mind on, and views of, these questions many times, exposing (you can be sure) the fickleness of my positions.
But, for the moment, here are my short answers:
I believe people can be evil, not just do evil; in other words, I believe some people are evil.
I believe that evil is always cruel, but that cruelty is not always evil.
I believe that evil is always exploitative, but that exploitation is not always evil.
I believe that evil is always destructive, but that destructiveness is not always evil.
Consistent with these views, I believe that some exploiters and, more specifically, some sociopaths—but not all—are evil.
Now, for my personal working definition of evil, in all its glaring limitations: Evil, as I see it, is the lust to express cruelty towards, and/or destructiveness of, others.
There it is. Note the boldfaced “lust to express;” I regard the “lust” as a central element of evil.
Let me dive right into an elaboration of some of my positions.
Evil is always cruel, but cruelty is not always evil. My view here is that evil, fortunately, is less commonplace than cruelty. Cruelty, however, is tragically commonplace.
Most of us are capable of cruelty, but most of us are not evil. This isn’t to diminish the impact of cruelty. In fact, because cruelty is so commonplace and destructive, it is arguably the worst part of human nature.
But not all cruelty is lust-driven. When cruelty is lust-driven, it is evil. When not, it is something less than evil—although I stress that even this debatable point doesn’t lessen cruelty’s impact one iota.
I think the same applies to “exploitation—”that is, exploitation is cruel, always, but not always evil. Valid or not, this assertion isn’t meant to minimize the potentially traumatic impact of exploitation.
Let me give a relatively benign example: A slick colleague convinces you to lend him $150 cash, promising to pay you back in a couple days. The next day, he’s gone. Has left the job. Quit. Never gave notice. The boss is bewildered, and you are too. You never hear from him again. You knew him well enough (so you thought) to lend him the money, but not, as it turns out, as well as you thought. The money probably bought his Amtrak ticket to Seattle.
You were fleeced. He knew he’d be gone, and he had no intention of honoring his debt. To him, you weren’t so much a nice guy whose generosity he appreciated, as much as, ultimately, a sucker. You were taken. He’s a sociopath.
But he needed the money, and put it to practical use. The problem is, he stole it from you. But he needed the money, and money is money, however he can get his hands on it. Not all sociopaths think like this, but some do.
This sociopath was thinking somewhat pragmatically; he needed the money and schemed to get it. But here’s the point: He didn’t lust for your suffering as much as he lusted for your money. Basically, he was greedy and sociopathically conniving, and so he took what he wanted, not per se to inflict pain or harm on you, but because he wanted it.
In this instance, he is exploitative, in my view, but not evil.
Is he cruel? Not in this example. I define cruel as having an intention to inflict harm or pain on someone. This could be mental, or physical pain. It is arguably cruel, for instance, to dismiss someone contemptuously, and yet it is not necessarily cruel, but is definitely exploitative, to con someone out of $150.
A former client of mine, around 1994, shot-up a bunch of kids at a swimming pool with a semi-automatic weapon. (For my own pathetic ego, I was grateful he waited until about two years after I last saw him.) He’d been dually diagnosed as a psychopath and paranoid schizophrenic. Was he evil? I don’t think so, although I appreciate that those kids, and their families, might have thought so.
In any case, I think he was more paranoid than evil, although he was certainly cruel. I also think that he believed that those kids were evil.
So, in this case, which is not hypothetical, I’d suggest that my ex-client was cruel, but not necessarily evil, or for that matter, even exploitative.
How about a Bernie Madoff? Is Bernie Madoff evil? I don’t think so. Yet he may very well be a sociopath and most certainly was heinously exploitative. Was he cruel? I don’t think so, again. I don’t think it was Madoff’s intention to inflict suffering on anyone. That wasn’t his primary motive to do what he did, despite the devastating impact of his greed and deception.
Regarding cruelty: for me, to be cruel implies, and requires, an intention to cruelty; it is a separate issue whether the consequences of your actions are experienced as cruel. I suspect that Madoff’s victims will describe him as cruel, if only for his indifference. However, I don’t see, from the little that is known about this case, that “cruelty” drove Madoff’s exploitation.
Now let’s tackle some big fish: How about Saddam Hussein and Adolph Hitler?
Hussein, in my view, was both cruel and exploitative, but I’m not sure I’d call him evil. Hussein’s lust was principally for power, less principally (one might argue) evil-driven. His cruelty was more a means to an end—the “end” being the consolidation and preservation of his power, by whatever ruthless means necessary. Was he a sociopath? Very possibly.
Hitler, I think, was cruel, exploitative, and evil. Hitler’s lust transcended his obsession with power; his was a lust to exterminate the Jews and other “non-desirables.” In other words, apart from his pathological lust for power, he also had a lust for cruelty and destruction. The latter meets the criteria of evil.
What do you think? Whatever it is, I’m betting it’ll change my mind?
(This article is copyrighted (c) 2009 by Steve Becker, LCSW.)
SOS said: The first one was off the chart with the in your face charm and loved lying to get over on people for no reason whatsoever….A good candidate for P.”
Hhmn, he also had 3 marriages, 4 cohabitations (and that is not counting the ones that only lasted a coupla months); numerous arrests–one felony theft, 5 DUI’s, driving on suspended licenses, a menancing, several resisting arrests, several eluding police, a DMV, a coupla public intox, 7 jobs in the 4 years I knew him and something like 12 or so jobs prior to that that I know about–that is just for starters. No credit whatsoever–couldn’t finance a thing, or qualify for even dishnetwork or electricity–had to be in someone else’s name. In addition to the in-your-face charm, when things did not go to suit him he also had an in-your-face delight in psychological terrorizing, making threats, destroying property, and rather unpleasant things like that. Don’t know for sure if he is a P, but yeah, good candidate.
SOS said: ” The second one”…Looks to me like a standard ISTP……..The .357 magnum event was not good – could have been a sign of unresolved work stress leaking out. Did he initiate a discussion afterwards to try and explain or understand the event?”
On the second one, well, although he had a gambling problem of a year or two, a drinking problem for forever (still has it), and three marriages, he had no arrest record except for a DUI, and although he bounced around alot quitting or getting fired from jobs up until mid 20’s after that he settled in career wise and did quite well. He did screw around on his 2nd wife the entire 9 years–starting about 6 months after marriage (per his own admission as he liked the thrill of sneaking around), but as far as I know he has no history of conning people out of money.
On the magnum .357 episode, NO, no discussion afterwards. After a coupla minutes of pointing a gun at my head and a bit of raspy breathing and a laser beam stare that looked like pure hatred, he just as suddenly changed demeanor, dropped his arm to his side, turned around and went to bed. After about 10 minutes he called out, “I’m sorry. Just come to bed.” He was asleep about 5 minutes later. End of story. Never mentioned again. (I was trying to remember, but I think this may have been what prompted me to go for marriage counseling with the psychiatrist who met him and talked with him, did some sort of testing, and said he thought he had no conscience).
This wasn’t the first time he pointed a gun at someone’s head. Several years after almost shooting me he toldme about an incident from 10 -12 years earlier (before I met him) He and some other guy had a fender bender. Other guy said something my ex did not like, so ex pulled out his gun and aimed it at his head. Then he PULLED THE TRIGGER. Ex said gun jammed. So, although he has had only one arrest (DUI) in his lifetime, if not for a jammed gun he could easily be living in an 8 x 10 jail cell for murder instead of living in a nice house in tropical paradise watching ocean waves from his window.
Also months after an arguement he had with his ex, one day while he was watching tv he suddenly very calmly says, “I”d like to kill XXX.” I’m like, huh? I thought he was joking. (we weren’t even on the subject of her so it was out of left field). Then he says he would kill her if he could figure out a way to do it where he thought he could get away with it. I’m like you can’t be serious. He told me he thought she deserved to die and he’d kill her if he knew he could get away with it. So I start reasoning with him why this is a BAD idea (including religious arguments). He told me he didn’t think God would mind at all if he killed her, that he thought God would think he was doing him a favor!!! (btw, she is still alive last I heard)
I dunno if he was a P or not. But like I said earlier, other than an overall cold demeanor and these very infrequent episodes (and others that were alot less dramatic than the ones I listed) he was basically not difficult to live with or please at all when it came to just day to day living stuff simply because he didn’t much care one way or the other about most things. Probably his most consistent fault was sarcasm which he liked to use to poke at people on a fairly consistent basis.
Oxy, I’m not sure if I agree about the BPD. I suppose I could say I was misdiagnosed with it in my younger years. But I’ve just read so much literature over the years on successfully treating the condition. I’ve also read that with many BPD’s, if they survive into their 40’s and 50’s they can outgrow it. I guess I don’t understand it well enough. But I will say that the label crippled me for a long time, even though I think it applied.
Jim!!! Welcome back.
I also wanted to report for those helping me last night, I feel I’m getting over my anger at the nasty woman on the reptile site. In fact someone started a thread about an event that she organizes in town. I didn’t hesitate to give her credit for running such a great event. I hope a little positive energy can redirect her aggression or at least protect me from being affected by it.
However, I do feel a wave of anger coming up about who-knows-what. It has been there for a long time. I was never allowed to be angry growing up, so as an adult, when I feel angry, I get scared first. This has been the toughest part of healing for me. I know I need to go through it to get un-depressed.
Dear Star,
I’m sorry that you felt crippled by a “label” and I can understand how you would feel that way, Star. Keep in mind though, that a psych diagnosis isn’t always 100% correct, and that even then, there are various ranges of intensity of problems, like “depression” is feeling sad, but there is “deeeeeep dark depression” where a patient will almost literally be catatonic, and there is the other end where the patient feels a little sadder than “normal.”
I’m not sure that BPDs or Ps “out grow” their personality disorders, though Hare says that the Ps get “less” P-ish in their middle age, but I’m not sure I agree that much on that. Maybe Dr. Leedom will answer here on her opinon or some research. Most of the Ps I know are middle age or older and are all still VERY P-ish.
Anyway, Star, don’t let a “label” cripple you, we are all more than the sum of our parts….and to me at least, your efforts to work through your own problems show me that while you may have as much “baggage” as the rest of us (and folks that includes me) the fact that you are actively working on it means to me that you are not personality disordered. (((hugs))))
Star: Anger scares me too, but especially if it’s someone else that is angry, if somebody yells at me I fall apart. I do anything to avoid anger and confrontation, maybe that’s why I don’t have any boundaries. I don’t think I let myself get angry, that is why I am always making excuses for people. I wasn’t allowed to show anger as a child either.
That was smart of you to say something nice about the nasty woman on the reptile site, you are right about the positive energy!! Hopefully you’ll get it back!
“no conscience”
A guy in HS befriended me ”“ he told me he’d thought I was cool and we had some things in common, and he lived close. He was introverted but played varsity basketball, dateless but had a car, had poor grades but his father was a doctor. I wasn’t perfect either, so I hung out with him, and helped get him get assimilated into my buddy group.
He’d initiate discussions about the teen angst we shared. He was obsessed about having not been popular at school. Then he confided in me that he’d taken his unloaded hunting rifle to his mothers head and clicked the trigger, but he didn’t know why. I should have taken that as a bad sign.
His entire family of two parents and two boys was like your ex ”“ cold and distant yet they coexisted because they “didn’t much care one way or the other about most things” and generally avoided each other. It was weird being in a house where nobody’s talking to each other.
A few of us persuaded him to drive us to a party, but he kept stewing about the girl who was throwing that party. As soon as she opened the door to greet us, he punched her in the mouth. You can imagine our shock. I started pulling away from that relationship, and his sarcasm increased.
Then I went through a rough patch (in college), and he told me that I was “no fun anymore”. I never saw him again. He took my buddy group with him. I was hurt for a while, but it turned out for the best. Later, he did time in prison for dealing drugs, taking a couple of those guys with him.
I’ve dealt with a lot of other people since who had similar characteristics. The only thing that kept them from being ’legally psychopathic’ was they had normal levels of anxiety. Their agreeableness (and the empathy that grows from that), and their conscientiousness (and the ability to value honest work ethic), was both very low. They had con artist talents or skills, but didn’t appear to actively pursue the exploitation others (though they would exploit if the opportunity fell into their laps). I think their anxiety over possible consequences was the only thing that held them back.
The last ISTP (strong T) I did business with was at the job where I was under political attack by a successful sociopathic manager (for not doing her dirtywork). I helped him out after work with a run down property he’d bought. I assumed that I was building an ally in my fight against the SS, but learned too late that he’d report back to her henchmen everything I’d been telling him. His sense of right and wrong went no further than his wallet.
Ever since (and I apologize to all the normal and healthy ISTP’s out there), I refuse to trust anybody with low agreeableness and low conscientiousness. They may make good emergency fighters, technical experts, activity partners, and usually know how to turn a wrench. But sooner or later these people will abandon you, or worse, snap.
I agree with the statement that you know evil when you see it. When I think back to the relationship I had with my sociopath, I realize that the first time I met him, I thought he had cold eyes. At the time, he was in a conversation with another man about a theft that had taken place, and so I attributed his “cold eyes” to what had taken place. The next time I saw him, he was sweet and warm, and I didn’t see that coldness. After I discovered his numerous lies (basically from the first day we met and we were together more than five years), after he devastated my home and finances, and broke my heart (and my daughter’s heart as well), I realized that I should have gone with my instincts — he was cold. Any warmth that I saw in his eyes during the time we were together was fake.
When someone makes the hair on your neck stand up or gives you chills when you meet them, when someone smiles at you but his or her eyes are flat, you’re looking at evil. Because what you see in someone’s eyes during that first meeting tells you a lot.
I may be wrong, but I think, as adults, we’ve learned to ignore our instincts about people. A child’s instincts are strong; a child may not be able to verbalize it but he or she knows when someone makes him or her uncomfortable. And a child has no problem telling a parent about those feelings. But, as we grow and are exposed to people we may not ‘like” at school and in the workplace, we start to stifle those instincts. We may brush it off by saying that we “got off on the wrong foot” with someone, especially if we see other co-workers getting along with the person. And, probably in a majority of the cases, it may be true that we got off on the wrong foot with someone.
Evil is not an easy concept to define. Religious or spiritual persons see evil as those who defy the laws of a “higher power,” whether that be God, Allah, Buddha, or some other spirit. Many of us were raised with the religious concept of good vs. evil — that a “godly” person is good but an “ungodly” person is evil. But, then we grew up. And maybe we did things as adults that our religious upbringing considered “ungodly” (i.e., engaging in premarital sex — and not just with a person we were to marry but perhaps with multiple partners; or we acknowledged that we were gay and began relationships with partners of the same sex). But, although these acts may have been shunned by our church of choice, we knew that we were not EVIL; we knew that these acts did not make us EVIL. We knew that we were compassionate with others, we helped the less fortunate. Basically, we lived most of our lives in what would be considered a “godly” fashion with a few minor transgressions. Surely, our minor transgressions did not make us EVIL. Right?
In my opinion, such rationale makes it easier for sociopaths to strike. As we all know (and has been repeated often on this blog), many sociopaths are charming, tuning in to our vulnerabilities and appearing to meet all our needs. But, if we were still attuned to our instincts (as children are), we might have noticed early on the truth that can be found in a sociopath’s eyes. And when a sociopath claims some type of religious upbringing (or even claims to be a regular churchgoer), it may be even more difficult for us to trust our instincts because it plays into our good vs. evil thinking. Again, we know that despite our minor transgressions, we are not evil; therefore, this person, who claims to have similar spiritual thoughts, cannot be evil. It becomes easy for our minds and hearts to overlook those initial “minor transgressions” that ultimately turn into major violations.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines evil (taking the spiritual out of the equation) as “causing ruin, injury, or pain.” When I think of evil, I think of serial killers who trade information about their victims in exchange for life sentences; rapists; and anyone who abuses or kills children, espcially infants. When I think of evil, I think of Susan Smith. These are easy examples. I also think about the CEOs of our financial system who made sure they (and upper management) were protected while the savings and retirements funds of so many were decimated. You’ve heard the saying: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. These people held power over the markets and their unchecked greed ruined many.
I have a problem with the definition “intentional malice” when applied to sociopaths. The word “intentional” means something is done deliberately or planned. I don’t think sociopaths plan or deliberate. Such attributes imply that sociopaths have consciences, which they do not. Sociopaths do what they do because it’s what suits them at the time. They don’t think about consequences because there aren’t any consequences for them — the pain, sorrow, and ravages are felt by the people they leave behind. Therefore, sociopaths are evil — in all its definitions.
The CEOs I mentioned before displayed intentional malice. They knew the “bubble” would pop and that the market would collapse. And despite running their companies into financial ruin, they continued to pay themselves millions of dollars in stock options and bonuses. Are these people sociopaths? Or are they simply greedy? Are they narcisstic? I don’t know the answers to these questions.
Sorry, if I rambled on. It’s late, and I think the philosophical question of evil just got me thinking.
Thanks, Oxy & Star. I’ve been back a few days but just reading to catch up.
The “BPD” argument…I settled on that one for my personal satisfaction in explaining my experience with my x-tox. The “fear of abandonment” seemed to be the key. From what I’ve read, a BPD also becomes more extreme in times of illness, loss of a family member, or “life changing” events (menopause, for example). Whether my view is right or wrong, this explanation finally, after 18 months, allowed me to accept what happened and no longer take it personally. I no longer was ruminating on the “what-ifs”….what I could have done to avoid the devalue and discard.
An interesting, and also probably the best thing, about my recent trip, was concern about my 24-year-old daughter. For nine days, I traveled with two people who showed no signs or “red flags” of disordered behavior. I had never experienced a vacation like that in over 25 years with my ex-tox. There were minor irritations, small frustrations, normal problems in schedules and arrangements…all dealt with, forgiven, dismissed, and forgotten. My concern for genetic traits in this daughter are pretty much gone.
That was a real reward.
Dear Jim,
That is wonderful that you are no longer concerned about your daughter’s “genetic” make up. Great!
This time since my non-P biiological son moved back home has been great for me too. We have had time to mend our relationship (which went down hill during the 7 years he was married to his X-wife who isolated him from the family) and since he is no longer stressed to the max, depressed, and unhappy, it is absolutely wonderful having him here and all the “minior” normal stuff that happens when people live in the same home and adjust to it is so MINOR and so OVER and so forgiven and forgotten. Every day there is so much laughter, joy and happiness here and so few irritations that it makes it a wonderful place for him to heal.
Just working outside at manual labor, enjoying the outdoors and no time clock is very theraputic for him. He will be working for the Boy Scout camp this summer with my other son D which I think will also be very good for them both….a “paid vacation” and a chance to get away from the farm and interact with others.
Though actually, the farm is again becoming the center of the hub around here, I had 10 (TEN) unexpected guests for dinner last night (fortunately 3 of them were young children) so didn’t run out of food!
Jim,
I don’t know if you are still reading this thread, but there is a good article on BPT in the Jan issue of Time that speaks to their fear of abandonment, emptiness and instable sense of self. Glad to hear you’ve attained some piece of mind.