Good and Evil
In the world of good and evil
Recent events have prompted me to think more deeply about man, the horrible acts he can perpetrate and the reasons why these things occur. This contemplation and re-examination of mans status, has lead me to the following point of understanding.
After listening one evening to the always bombastic and megalomaniac Michael Savage, who always talks about how smart he is and proves his point by having his callers vetted to make sure only the most adoring and logically inept get through to him, the mystery was revealed to me.
Previously the Doctor had went on for weeks about “Weinergate,” ranting every night about the deviant Congressman, claiming that he the brilliant Doctor, with degrees and dozens of books could not understand why, how, or for what reason that someone could do what David Weiner did.
On the night of my epiphany, the yappy Doc was doing his usual lunatic rant about the mass killings in Norway by a Christian Terrorist and once again could not understand how someone could do this. Ultimately falling back on his religious beliefs rooted in time honored dogma, labeling the man who committed these barbaric acts as being evil.
And it hit me.
There is a reason why, few new religions have been created in the last 600 years. Religions were originally created by ignorant man to explain the unexplainable in ways they could understand. Once man began to distribute knowledge in-mass through books, create science to explain, thus challenge the assumptions once dictated by religious leaders, religion began loosing its power to manipulate people.
One of the primary tenants of most religions is the belief in good and evil. An easy out, in explaining how people can so cold heartedly lie, cheat, steal and murder without remorse, while all those around them do not.
“Evil” is the perfect explanation that no one questions, since it is intrinsically vague, widely assumed and universally perceived. It is taught as a spiritual flaw in man that is beyond our ability to conquer and requires our acceptance of its continued presence among us, to be endured and dealt with through penal means when exceeding social norms.
But what if evil does not exist? What if; that which we perceive as evil is in fact a mental disorder. A psychotic anomaly so profound in some individuals as to radiate intense negative energies that can be picked up by those who come in contact with it, thus implying some sort of “spiritual” derangement.
I have written several times about Dr. Hervey Cleckley’s work in revealing to us the psychotic anomaly that infects up to possibly a third of the population. Cleckley’s work exposes the probable genetic defect that keeps certain individuals from being fully human, a mental derangement that inhibits them from feeling empathy, thus depriving them of the ability to function properly within social settings and norms.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sanity_1.PdF
These “Mask of Sanity” wearers as Dr. Cleckley’s terms them, seem normal, act in ways that allow them functionality within society, yet are individuals that are fully psychotic and capable of social deviations that range from the daily mundane to the extreme.
These wearers of “The Mask” are business persons who easily climb their way to the top, stepping on anyone and everyone in their way, politicians capable of telling anyone what they want to hear in order to gain the votes, seemingly kind individuals who serial kill and those whom we deem “evil” that never bother to cover their face with The Mask.
All of them share a common bond, in their desperate need to feel. People who search daily for the experience that will allow them to feel what others around them take for granted – empathy.
One of the most revealing conversations I’ve ever had, was with an acquaintance who upon hearing the word “empathy”, said this; “It’s something I’ve never been able to do, so I just watch how other people respond and emulate them”. Which is how the Mask Wearers assimilate within our societies and pass for human beings so easily.
Which brings us to this observation.
If we know that inhuman Mask Wearers walk among us, probably making up a majority of our business, political and community leaders. If we can see clearly that those who perpetrate grotesque absurdities of death and destruction without any sign of remorse and can see in children early signs of the mask, then do we not have the power to prevent?
However, this means a complete rethink of man’s perception of evil. It requires a complete re-design of our social norms, since we can predict who will become brutal towards others in any aspect of our lives. It means we have the power to create a significantly more peaceful world, a more loving world and a safer world for everyone.
It would also mean that many of our leadership would need to be removed, many of our citizens treated in some manner and religion re-evaluated for it’s relevancy in today’s world. A daunting recovering program indeed.
But the first step in any recovery process is to accept that you have a problem and until we all understand the widespread destructive nature of those who wear The Mask, employees will continue to be abused, the electorate coned and the masses murdered in endless wars and local random events.
Ugh, Michael Savage. Truly the most pig-headed, self-interested, lying SOB in a field (talk radio...or, for that matter, political punditry in general) almost entirely populated by pig-headed, self-interested, lying SOB's.
The response to the Norway terrorist attacks by the pundits here in America was as sickening and repulsive as it was predictable. After some insincere asides about how horrible the tragedy was, it was then debated whether this lunatic is a "liberal" or "conservative," about his religious beliefs, and all that other completely irrelavant nonsense. Hardly surprising, though, since they did the same thing with the insane young man who shot Congresswoman Giffords and really with any other lunatic mass murderer in recent memory. I think the final nail in Sarah Palin's coffin in terms of public perception was when, after the Giffords shooting, she seemed much less concerned about the tragedy than she was about arguing with people who claimed she bore responsibility since she had placed Giffords in crosshairs in a fundraising appeal. Those accusing her of responsibility because of that graphic were terrifically asinine, of course, but her reaction to them sealed the perception of her as a me-first diva. Anyway, point is, even vast human suffering is not enough to sincerely distract the pundits and the political class from their childish sniping and character assassination.
As for more specific discourse regarding the original topic...good and evil, like you touched upon, are empty terms used by people who lack critical thinking skills and who subconsciously split people into "good" or "bad" instead of realizing the arguably more troubling reality that most people are capable of both terrifically kind and terrifically evil actions, and that often all it takes to push someone from "good" to "bad" is a little clever manipulation by a charismatic leader and/or from a doctrine that gives an individual a deceptively easy answer to a dire and looming concern of theirs.
I recently read a book called "The Psychopath Test" that discusses the trait of psychopathy, as well as how being a psychopath (in the literal sense, not in the inaccurate figurative sense as a synonym for a general crazy person that people usually think of) can often be a terrific asset for those in the fields of business or politics. If a lot of our current politicians and business leaders lack the empathy to feel bad for the awful consequences of some of their actions, it would certainly help to explain why they seem so apt to make decisions that are self-beneficial but hurt so many others.
As for religion, I think that we will see a rapid decline in religious faith over the next century, mostly as a result of technology. People may remain spiritual and feel connected to a higher power or something larger than themselves, but I think that fundamentalism in all forms will be dealt a near death-blow by the Internet...and that would be a fantastic development for free thought.
The wearers of the mask are rewarded in our society. These are the individuals who thrive in corporate and institutional enviornments. All they need to do is play the game well and empathy as well as compassion don't get in the way since they have a genome that doesn't express those emotional and behavioral traits.
So it is survival of the fittest. Those who have a DNA with more empathy and compassion in their neural network are at a disadvantage until the circumstances change. The wearers of the mask will thrive and multiply.
Perhaps when something major happens these mask wearers will no longer be well adapted to the enviornment and will perish. But for now they are in charge.
As for religion, it is a method of control. It is undeniable that the great majority of humans have religious feelings about something divine. This has been indoctrinated into them since childhood but it must also be genetically determined in our DNA. It was adaptive because control equals better cooperation and less strife since individuals delay gratification in the present, expecting their reward in the afterlife.
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.