As a psychologist, I'm not sure that labeling and classifying
individuals as "evil" actually gets me anything. It doesn't help me
understand it (What makes them evil? What they do. Why do they do it?
Because they're evil.), it doesn't help me prevent it or treat it (were
I in the treating business).
Right now istm that we're in the midst of some sort of socio-cultural
blowback from overzealous political correctness (not that all political
correctness is bad; much of it has done us good). We've sort of been
afraid to call things evil (for PCness, as well as other, better
reasons), and somehow or another (can I say 9/11 + GW?), it's become
legitimate to use that term in public discourse.
I can understand it as some sort of psychological desire to have the
world make sense, and sometimes even circular explanations are adequate
for that sort of thing -- on a personal level. But I'm not sure
psychologists and psychiatrists need to be promoting it. "Evil" is a
value judgment, not a diagnostic category. It, by definition, is a
moral judgment, and that's not what science is for. If someone wants to
redefine "evil" into something other than a moral judgment, why not just
pick another term?
Dr. Stone may feel that "evil" is "the proper appellation," but I sure
don't -- at least, not as a psychologist. Perhaps at some time for some
group of people it may seem appropriate to call someone "evil," but we
should know by now that times, people and values change -- if they don't
already vary.
m
--
Marc Carter
Baker University Department of Psychology
Assistant Professor, Itinerant Scientist,
Inveterate Skeptic, Former Surfer.
---
...asked Wednesday whether it would fair to describe the proposed
accounts as having "no effect whatsoever on the solvency" of Social
Security, a senior administration official said, "That's a fair
inference."
---- LA Times, 3 Feb 2005
-----Original Message-----
From: Beth Benoit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 11:18 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: Evil in pathology (NYT)
A very interesting article appeared in today's New York Times about evil
in psychopathology. I was surprised at the lack of inclusion of Scott
Peck, who first pointed out that the concept of evil was not included in
psychiatry, in his book, People of the Lie, in the 90's (paperback came
out in 1997), wasn't included. I always think of him as the daddy of
the concept of evil in pathology. Perhaps he shot himself in the foot
in psychiatric circles, because he went off the deep end (imho) in later
works with "spiritual growth" and that scene. (People of the Lie also
included a final chapter about the devil and exorcism I found
fascinating, though I'm not a believer in the devil or even in
religion.)
Be sure to click on the link at the right of the article for
"Multimedia." Here's the link for the NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/08/health/psychology/08evil.html?oref=log
in
Beth Benoit
University System of New Hampshire
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
