The Myth of Pure Evil

This is just a quick response to part of Tuesday's discussion. I want to quote a few parts of The Happiness Hypothesis by Jonathan Haidt, a professor of psychology, that seem relevant and insightful.

Most psychopaths are not violent (although most serial murderers and serial rapists are psychopaths). They are people, mostly men, who have no moral emotions, no attachment systems, and no concerns for others. Because they feel no shame, embarrassment, or guilt, they find it easy to manipulate people into giving them money, sex, and trust. (p. 137)

Haidt cites studies by Cleckley, 1955, and Hare, 1993, to support this statement.

In Evil: Inside Human Cruelty and Aggression, [social psychologist Roy] Baumeister examined evil from the perspective of both victim and perpetrator. When taking the perpetrator's perspective, he found that people who do things we see as evil, from spousal abuse all the way to genocide, rarely think they are doing anything wrong. They almost always see themselves as responding to attacks and provocations in ways that are justified. They often think that they themselves are victims.  (p. 74)

According to Baumeister, we "have a deep need to understand violence and cruelty" through what he calls "The Myth of Pure Evil." (p. 74)

The Myth of Pure Evil

• Evildoers are pure in their evil motives (sadism and greed)
• Victims are pure in their victimhood (they did nothing to bring about their victimhood)
• Evil comes from outside (a group or force that attacks our group)
• Anyone who questions this moral certainty is in league with evil

The myth of pure evil is the ultimate self-serving bias, the ultimate form of naive realism. And it is the ultimate cause of most long-running cycles of violence because both sides use it to lock themselves into a Manichaean [good vs. evil] struggle. When George W. Bush said that the 9/11 terrorists did what they did because they "hate our freedom," he showed a stunning lack of psychological insight. Neither the 9/11 hijackers nor Osama Bin Laden were particularly upset because American women can drive, vote, and wear bikinis. Rather, many Islamic extremists want to kill Americans because they are using the Myth of Pure Evil to interpret Arab history and current events. They see Americans as the Great Satan, the current villain in a long pageant of Western humiliation of Arab nations and peoples. They did what they did as a reaction to America's actions and impact in the Middle East, as they see it through the distortions of the Myth of Pure Evil. However horrifying it is for terrorists to lump all civilians into the category of "enemy" and then kill them indiscriminately, such actions at least make psychological sense, whereas killing because of a hatred for freedom does not. (p. 75)

The four main causes of Violence and Cruelty

Obvious causes

1. Greed/ambition (violence for direct personal gain)

- Explains only a small portion of violence

2. Sadism (pleasure in hurting people)

- Explains an even smaller portion of violence

Biggest causes

3. High self-esteem

- Unrealistic or narcissistic self-esteem is easily threatened by reality

- In reaction to those threats, people often lash out violently

4. Moral Idealism

- Good vs. Evil (your violence is a means to a moral end)

- The ends justify the means

The major atrocities of the twentieth century were carried out largely either by men who thought they were creating a utopia or else by men who believed they were defending their homeland or tribe from attack. Idealism easily becomes dangerous because it brings with it, almost inevitably, the belief that the ends justify the means. If you are fighting for good or for God, what matters is the outcome, not the path. People have little respect for rules; we respect the moral principles that underlie most rules. But when a moral mission and legal rules are incompatible, we usually care more about the mission. The psychologist Linda Skitka finds that when people have strong moral feelings about a controversial issue - when they have a "moral imperative" - they care much less about procedural fairness in court cases. They want the "good guys" freed by any means, and the "bad guys" convicted by any means. It is thus not surprising that the administration of George W. Bush consistently argues that extra-judicial killings, indefinite imprisonment without trial, and harsh physical treatment of prisoners are legal and proper steps in fighting the Manichaean "war on terror." (p. 76)

Source:

Haidt, Jonathan. The Happiness Hypothesis. New York: Basic Books, 2006.