The psychology of evil

[Rocky]

Here's a TED talk that you may or may not find interesting. I see some parallels with TWI.

[Twinky]

Interesting talk, Rocky. Lots to think about.

[Kit Sober]

As Bible and Jesus Christ person:

-- My works will not amount to a hill of beans, ever, no matter what. (Even Jesus said, "without the Father I am nothing." John 5:19).

-- Jesus Christ was never startled or marveled at wickedness. The only marvel he did was at the Centurion's faith. Faith is a marvelous thing. And everything in the world conspires against it.

-- Wickedness is a given in the world. Marvel not that the world hates you. I believe that hatred includes what is within the natural man, and is what psychologists try to pin down as self-destruction or self-hatred. Because Jesus specifically identified that the world, which is temporarily controlled by the adversary, hates us. That hatred is within us, and the only freedom from that hatred is by the renewal of the Lord Jesus and being born again.

-- Met Steve Hill, the evangelist who preached the Brownsville Revival (1990s, Pensacola Florida), through watching videos and reading his books. He wrote in White Cane Religion:

The beautiful thing about God is that He can change a pig into a gentle lamb! He also transforms barking, yelping, and whining dogs into gentle lambs. As soon as the Holy Ghost begins to move, things begin to change. Old things become new right in front of your eyes. Before you know it, the dog begging for flesh as disappeared and a lamb seeking the pearls of God appears.

The twi version of "once a goat always a goat" was a prison to me because I knew that if Jesus couldn't make me new, I was consigned to the hell of being a pig and going to hell. I knew that without the Lord I was hopeless. and it was only outside of twi that I found safety and the hope that Jesus Christ was a wonderful savior to me, too.

-- We indeed are wicked beyond imagination without the Lord replacing our heart of stone for a heart of flesh. He did it for me. I know He can do it for anyone.

[waysider]

Peer pressure and conformity were a huge part of the various "training" programs.

[Rocky]

Peer pressure and conformity were a huge part of the various "training" programs.

They certainly were. And wasn't a demand for loyalty made part of LCMs reign of terror during the "fog years?"

[krys]

Indeed, it was!

[WordWolf]

I think there's a distinction between INTENT and "the banality of evil", as the video spoke of.

With "the banality of evil", they spoke of how many people can move along like drones and

act in accord with others, in an "I was only following orders" fashion.

IIRC, it was Edmund Burke that said that the only thing evil needs is for good men to

do nothing.

There's also the INTENT differences, which he closed with- where people CHOOSE to get involved

and act, or choose NOT to get involved with something and harm. Simply put, the intent of evil

is about who matters- with evil, self and the people around self matter, BUT NO ONE ELSE.

Evil people have no problem prospering AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS-others do not count.

Evil people are not required to SEE themselves as evil, either- often there are rationalizations

and excuses for the self. Hitler called himself the savior of the German people and, apparently,

bought into his own hype about being a great benefactor of them. The fact that he was getting

them money by seizing the assets of Jews and other whom he wanted killed off was worthy of a

footnote at best-as he saw it. vpw saw nothing wrong with his deliberate decisions to set up

a twi structure that made it EFFICIENT for him to exploit young people, including molesting

and raping women, whenever he wanted. In his final days, after years of doing that while

advocating morals in public and discarding them in private, he apparently had no comprehension

that he'd done wrong in the process.

For fun, a friend and I considered the AD&D (1st/2nd edition) Alignment Graph recently.

That's the thing with 2 axes- one for Good, Evil and Neutrality towards both,

and Law (Order, Structure), Chaos (Independence, Impulse) and Neutrality towards both,

with 9 possible results for the personality of a character or even a living person.

(People don't have a writer to answer to, so they don't always seem easy to classify,

especially when we don't have access to all of their lives.)

http://www.easydamus.com/alignment.html

http://www.easydamus.com/alignmentreal.html

http://www.easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html

We examined the characters of the television show "the Big Bang Theory." Surprisingly,

we agreed instantly that one main character was "Lawful Evil"-Sheldon Cooper.

Sheldon IMAGINES himself as "Good", and when he plays games where he can choose alignments,

seems to choose Good aligned characters like all his friends.

However, no matter what he tells himself and them, Sheldon is Evil by Alignment standards.

Sheldon doesn't think anyone else matters other than him-until their existence impinges

on his own. When a FRIEND gets good news or congratulations, he is ambivalent and never

responds with congratulations- unless he's TOLD he's supposed to congratulate others.

Despite having a HIGH genius IQ, he legitimately doesn't understand the simplest things

about other people-because he doesn't CARE to. This is the same man who studied Finnish

to kill time while waiting for a computer operating system, but has never put in an afternoon

to understand people at all. Sheldon wouldn't even HAVE friends except that Leonard considers

him one (and signed a friendship CONTRACT to that effect), and introduced Sheldon to Penny, Raj and

Howard, who in turn introduced Sheldon to Bernadette and Amy. The only character Sheldon's ever

made friends with by himself was Wil- after considering him an enemy for years, until Wil

gave him a rare gift. He only ever tried to make a new friend (Barry Kripke) because he wanted

favors from him. Sheldon always has to have things HIS WAY and will overlook others completely,

In fact, when a friend is troubled and needs a sympathetic ear, Sheldon will FORGET THEY ARE IN

THE ROOM WITH HIM. His own status as a boyfriend is in spite of his lack of doing any of the

traditional boyfriend things- and his girlfriend clearly WANTS him to do some and has to verbally

remind him of anything-despite even having a GF/BF CONTRACT specifying his duties. He has no

trouble whatsoever remembering when they suit him, but he has to be goaded into doing anything

SHE wants to do.

So, there's what I might consider "oblivious evil" -drones propping up systematic evil because

they can't be bothered to know what's going on around them, and there's "evil intent"-

someone making deliberate decisions to marginalize others and elevate themselves at the expense

of others. Evil is about the exercise of power, and the attitude towards others,

as I see it.

[Steve Lortz]

I don't know if a person with autism spectrum disorder can be accurately located on the AD&D alignment plane! (not being argumentative, my wife has autism spectrum disorder, and she likes watching "Big Bang Theory" because she can relate to the characters, not always an easy thing for her to do)

One time I was thinking about how the biblical duality of legalism/license would fit onto AD&D's alignment chart. The puzzle was that legalism/license seemed like lawful-evil/chaotic-evil, but there was no neutral in between, and no good. Then it struck me that in reality, the good alignment option that stands between evil legalism and evil license is walking by the spirit!

I hope this makes sense, at least to those familiar with AD&D!

Love,

Steve

[WordWolf]

I don't know if a person with autism spectrum disorder can be accurately located on the AD&D alignment plane! (not being argumentative, my wife has autism spectrum disorder, and she likes watching "Big Bang Theory" because she can relate to the characters, not always an easy thing for her to do)

Everyone has morals, whether good or evil. Everyone either cares about others

or considers them merchandise. Everyone has a tendency towards order and structure,

or to independence and impulse. Game alignment charts aren't precise tools for real

people, but the general tendencies can be mapped.

There's things I can relate to about the characters, but that doesn't make me the

characters or ENTIRELY like them. I can relate to how Sheldon can't relate to the

average person- but not how he discounts them so completely as people.

I doubt your Mrs only sees people as "tools I can use" like Sheldon does.

One time I was thinking about how the biblical duality of legalism/license would fit onto AD&D's alignment chart. The puzzle was that legalism/license seemed like lawful-evil/chaotic-evil, but there was no neutral in between, and no good. Then it struck me that in reality, the good alignment option that stands between evil legalism and evil license is walking by the spirit!

I hope this makes sense, at least to those familiar with AD&D!

Love,

Steve

I got part of it, but you drifted into a mental shorthand and I can't read your mind.

What did you mean by "the biblical duality of legalism/license"?

[Rocky]

I think there's a distinction between INTENT and "the banality of evil", as the video spoke of.

With "the banality of evil", they spoke of how many people can move along like drones and

act in accord with others, in an "I was only following orders" fashion.

IIRC, it was Edmund Burke that said that the only thing evil needs is for good men to

do nothing.

There's also the INTENT differences, which he closed with- where people CHOOSE to get involved

and act, or choose NOT to get involved with something and harm. Simply put, the intent of evil

is about who matters- with evil, self and the people around self matter, BUT NO ONE ELSE.

Evil people have no problem prospering AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS-others do not count.

Evil people are not required to SEE themselves as evil, either- often there are rationalizations

and excuses for the self. Hitler called himself the savior of the German people and, apparently,

bought into his own hype about being a great benefactor of them. The fact that he was getting

them money by seizing the assets of Jews and other whom he wanted killed off was worthy of a

footnote at best-as he saw it. vpw saw nothing wrong with his deliberate decisions to set up

a twi structure that made it EFFICIENT for him to exploit young people, including molesting

and raping women, whenever he wanted. In his final days, after years of doing that while

advocating morals in public and discarding them in private, he apparently had no comprehension

that he'd done wrong in the process.

For fun, a friend and I considered the AD&D (1st/2nd edition) Alignment Graph recently.

That's the thing with 2 axes- one for Good, Evil and Neutrality towards both,

and Law (Order, Structure), Chaos (Independence, Impulse) and Neutrality towards both,

with 9 possible results for the personality of a character or even a living person.

(People don't have a writer to answer to, so they don't always seem easy to classify,

especially when we don't have access to all of their lives.)

http://www.easydamus.../alignment.html

http://www.easydamus...gnmentreal.html

http://www.easydamus...gnmenttest.html

We examined the characters of the television show "the Big Bang Theory." Surprisingly,

we agreed instantly that one main character was "Lawful Evil"-Sheldon Cooper.

Sheldon IMAGINES himself as "Good", and when he plays games where he can choose alignments,

seems to choose Good aligned characters like all his friends.

However, no matter what he tells himself and them, Sheldon is Evil by Alignment standards.

Sheldon doesn't think anyone else matters other than him-until their existence impinges

on his own. When a FRIEND gets good news or congratulations, he is ambivalent and never

responds with congratulations- unless he's TOLD he's supposed to congratulate others.

Despite having a HIGH genius IQ, he legitimately doesn't understand the simplest things

about other people-because he doesn't CARE to. This is the same man who studied Finnish

to kill time while waiting for a computer operating system, but has never put in an afternoon

to understand people at all. Sheldon wouldn't even HAVE friends except that Leonard considers

him one (and signed a friendship CONTRACT to that effect), and introduced Sheldon to Penny, Raj and

Howard, who in turn introduced Sheldon to Bernadette and Amy. The only character Sheldon's ever

made friends with by himself was Wil- after considering him an enemy for years, until Wil

gave him a rare gift. He only ever tried to make a new friend (Barry Kripke) because he wanted

favors from him. Sheldon always has to have things HIS WAY and will overlook others completely,

In fact, when a friend is troubled and needs a sympathetic ear, Sheldon will FORGET THEY ARE IN

THE ROOM WITH HIM. His own status as a boyfriend is in spite of his lack of doing any of the

traditional boyfriend things- and his girlfriend clearly WANTS him to do some and has to verbally

remind him of anything-despite even having a GF/BF CONTRACT specifying his duties. He has no

trouble whatsoever remembering when they suit him, but he has to be goaded into doing anything

SHE wants to do.

So, there's what I might consider "oblivious evil" -drones propping up systematic evil because

they can't be bothered to know what's going on around them, and there's "evil intent"-

someone making deliberate decisions to marginalize others and elevate themselves at the expense

of others. Evil is about the exercise of power, and the attitude towards others,

as I see it.

I'm unfamiliar with AD&D, but relate completely to your analysis and comparison to Big Bang Theory.

And I agree that evil is about the exercise of power, but would add that it generally involves deception.

Exercise of power, or authority, in and of itself, is not necessarily evil.

I think you've got the right idea regarding reflecting back on our experience in TWI.

[Steve Lortz]

As far as autism spectrum disorder goes, it IS a spectrum, and difficult to judge the degree of intent in the heart of the person who suffers from it, especially since it can be such a wide range of neurological disorder. I have learned that there are some ways in which my wife cannot relate to me the way some other people can, but it's not a matter of intent in her heart. That's part of the reason that Christ ALONE can judge.

As far as the "legalism/license" = "lawful evil/chaotic evil" duality goes, it came to me while I was thinking about Galatians 5, particularly verses 1 and 13: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" and "For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another."

These verses seem to me to set up a dichotomy between legalism and license, but neither one of them is good, and there doesn't seem to be a neutral position. The phrase "occasion to the flesh" in verse 13 reminded me of Romans 8:4, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The duality that seems to arise most frequently in Paul is the duality between flesh and Spirit.

It seemed that the true position between legalism/license would be "walking after the Spirit" rather than any kind of "neutral".

Arneson and I used to kick around the idea of a "believers'" role playing game set in the two year period when Paul was at Ephesus, and all those who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks (Acts 19:10). The player characters would be people who became Christians under Paul's ministry in Ephesus, and went out as "WOW ambassadors" to other cities in Asia. So we DID discuss these things in a role playing frame of reference.

Oh, what good memories this post brings back! Not memories of TWI leadership, but memories of the fun Arneson and I had together with games AND the Word!

Love,

Steve

Edited January 11, 2014 by Steve Lortz

[WordWolf]

If everyone will indulge me, here's a bit on how the old alignment system worked.

It can still make for interesting discussions.

http://www.easydamus.com/alignment.html

(There's links there for pages entirely about an alignment, and one about

discussing using the system with real people, also.)

There's 2 axes, ethics and morals. Ethics is Law vs Chaos, morals is Good vs Evil.

Law refers to order and structure, chaos refers to independence and impulse.

Good refers to caring about others, evil refers to only caring about oneself.

Then there's neutrality toward either axis.

So, Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good.

Lawful Neutral, "true Neutral" (neutral neutral), Chaotic Neutral.

Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Evil.

Lawful Goods follow the rules and structure and say that benefits the most people.

(Superman, Captain America.)

Neutral Goods try to benefit the most people, whether by the rules or by breaking them if needed.

(Classic Star Trek's Captain Kirk-the new movie one's different.)

Chaotic Goods try to benefit the most people, and feel structures prevent that from happening.

(Errol Flynn's Robin Hood.)

Lawful Neutrals believe in structure and order and otherwise don't get involved with others/are indifferent.

(The Transporter of the movie series, Captain Jean-Luc Picard.)

I'm skipping "true neutrals" because I consider that, generally, a copout.

Chaotic Neutrals believe only in freedom and in themselves.

(Captain Jack Sparrow.)

Lawful Evils believe in a structure, and believe it's there and others are there so they themself can be in charge.

(Saruman, Sauron, Darth Vader, Darth Sidious/Emperor Palpatine, Darth Tyrranus/Count Dooku.)

Neutral Evils believe they should be in charge, but will use structure or go off the map, whichever they

think benefits them the most at that moment. (Jafar from Disney's Aladdin.)

Chaotic Evils act solely from impulse and without a real blueprint, and will do whatever they want

no matter who it hurts. (Gollum, Jason Voorhees, Charles Manson.)

Sometimes, for fun, people will discuss who would fit which alignments in fiction or IRL, and why.

They can make for interesting discussions of the source material, which is why I was doing it recently.

Example: Indiana Jones. Someone claimed he's Lawful Good. I disagree.

Henry Jones Senior is Lawful Good. Henry Jones Jr is "making it up as I go along."

Maverick heroes in general, those who dash off without a plan and rely on luck and audacity,

those circle around Chaotic Good and are fun to watch in action movies.

People usually don't want to watch a movie about someone who believes in the system and tries

to make it work, (Jaime Escalante of "Stand and Deliver"), but rather someone who gets to break all

the rules and jump to the top inside of 90 minutes. The establishment characters are usually

supporting ones, as people see them.

[WordWolf]

As far as autism spectrum disorder goes, it IS a spectrum, and difficult to judge the degree of intent in the heart of the person who suffers from it, especially since it can be such a wide range of neurological disorder. I have learned that there are some ways in which my wife cannot relate to me the way some other people can, but it's not a matter of intent in her heart. That's part of the reason that Christ ALONE can judge.

I'm not in this discussion to psychoanalyze your wife-that's your business as I see it.

I refuse to step out of discussing what alignment Big Bang Theory characters are

on your say-so, however. And since you brought it up, I'll explain a difference, again.

Seeing something to sympathize with does not make someone similar to a character,

in and of itself. Someone jokes I'm like Sheldon Cooper and can't see it. That's

probably because I have my own sense of how things are ordered, and don't relate that

well to them because I'm a lot smarter than them, and have some interests in common

with Sheldon. The differences end rather sharply because the same person would have to

freely admit I socialize freely with them and would gladly volunteer help with a smile

with no plan to get a return favor, and even prefer to offer one in return along with

profound thanks and gracious acceptance when being given a favor by them.

Sheldon Cooper refuses favors from others, and refuses gifts. He considers them all

OBLIGATIONS and will calculate, to the dollar, the value of a gift to prevent himself

from feeling the slightest degree of being beholden to them. He has friends he's been

almost forced to accept, several of whom are scientists. When they get accolades, awards,

or other acknowledgements of their achievements, he NEVER has a good word for them about

them and NEVER thinks they are deserved-in fact, he often has a MEAN COMMENT while the

others are all congratulating the friend. When his girlfriend was excitedly telling him

about her paper making the cover of a peer-reviewed journal, he ignored her, and

interrupted her to gush about having 100 Twitter followers at that moment. Sheldon has

written up himself, and insisted on, signed contracts with his friend Leonard and with

his girlfriend, Amy. Whenever one of them has an obligation to fulfill as written,

Sheldon will immediately remind them. When he has an obligation to fulfill as written,

he generally will go out of his way to try not to fulfill it and complain when they

are brought up- and saw nothing wrong with blackmailing Leonard into signing a different

agreement Sheldon freely admitted was phrased specifically to benefit Sheldon more than

the previous, more reciprocal one.

When we see Sheldon doing something nice for someone, it's always been due to one of

2 things: A) he's been scolded by another character for failing to do it and

reluctantly admitted he was supposed to

B) he's preparing to ask someone else to do something nice for them and is trying to

butter them up first

If you're married to someone who sounds like that, who never thinks of you unless

she wants something from you, who never is happy to see you or others just because

it's nice to see you, or a family member or friend, who never would offer to do

something nice without being pushed into it,

then ok, she really is like Sheldon Cooper and I'll concede the point.

(And pray for you both.)

As far as the "legalism/license" = "lawful evil/chaotic evil" duality goes, it came to me while I was thinking about Galatians 5, particularly verses 1 and 13: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" and "For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another."

These verses seem to me to set up a dichotomy between legalism and license, but neither one of them is good, and there doesn't seem to be a neutral position. The phrase "occasion to the flesh" in verse 13 reminded me of Romans 8:4, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The duality that seems to arise most frequently in Paul is the duality between flesh and Spirit.

It seemed that the true position between legalism/license would be "walking after the Spirit" rather than any kind of "neutral".

Arneson and I used to kick around the idea of a "believers'" role playing game set in the two year period when Paul was at Ephesus, and all those who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks (Acts 19:10). The player characters would be people who became Christians under Paul's ministry in Ephesus, and went out as "WOW ambassadors" to other cities in Asia. So we DID discuss these things in a role playing frame of reference.

Oh, what good memories this post brings back! Not memories of TWI leadership, but memories of the fun Arneson and I had together with games AND the Word!

Love,

Steve

Using liberty as occasion for the flesh often would look like Chaotic Evil

because Chaotic Evils do what they want at the moment no matter the consequences

for others.

The yoke of bondage would look a lot like Lawful Evil because it would inflict

a set of rules and regulations on people which allowed them to be exploited.

The twi system, with its draconian regulations and 15-minute intervals,

very much looks Lawful Evil. It's designed to use the rules to put others

in subjection and enslave them for the benefit of a few and at the expense

of the many.

"But by love serve one another" doesn't fit in the Evil part of the axis at all.

It would fit in the Good axis in one of the 3 boxes, depending on how it was done.

A lot of the Groovy Christians arrived Chaotic Good, with no long-term plans on

HOW to love one another, just a conviction to do it. Equally, there's Christians

who are convinced a system is the best way to serve others- Billy Graham seems to

be a great example of that. That would make him seem Lawful Good. In fact,

the current Pope appears to be saying much the same thing (unless he's deceiving

everyone, but the Franciscan Order as a whole seems oriented towards that.)

Lacking a writer to confirm it, people are not as easy to classify as fictional

characters, but general tendencies can be discussed.

I'm unfamiliar with AD&D, but relate completely to your analysis and comparison to Big Bang Theory.

And I agree that evil is about the exercise of power, but would add that it generally involves deception.

Exercise of power, or authority, in and of itself, is not necessarily evil.

I think you've got the right idea regarding reflecting back on our experience in TWI.

What I meant was, power FOR ITS OWN SAKE, power AS A GOAL and MOTIVATOR,

that can be seen as an indicator for Evil. Those who want power because they want to

wield the power for themselves and have no thoughts for those who they will have

power OVER, they would appear Evil. Those who would use rulership specifically to try

to benefit the ruled, they would appear Good. (Strider/Aragorn of Lord of the Rings

is an obvious example of the Good, and Denethor of Lord of the Rings is an obvious

example of the not-Good.)

Edited January 11, 2014 by WordWolf

[waysider]

It's all too far over my head.

(Said the miner, whilst contemplating his freedom)

It reminds me of

song.

[Kit Sober]

It's all too far over my head.

(Said the miner, whilst contemplating his freedom)

It reminds me of

song.

What wayside said, except I can't hear the song.

[Rocky]

What wayside said, except I can't hear the song.

The main idea of the song is "it's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack." :)/>

[Kit Sober]

Thanks. Appreciate your kindness.

[WordWolf]

The main idea of the song is "it's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack." :)/>/>

I got that without listening to the song.

I clicked on the link, got the song title and artist,

then did a websearch on "lyrics" "*song title*" "*artist name*"

Then I read the lyrics as if the poster had posted a direct link to them.

[krys]

It's fascinating. I don't understand it all either because I didn't take the time to read and study (internalize) any of the qualities as they were laid out. When I was young, I used to think that everybody was different. Lately, over the past decade and a half, I've come to see that that isn't so. People are more alike than I'd thought. Placing them in groups such as this dynamic makes it easier to categorize.

I'm not sure that there are only 3 dimensions, but that certainly stands for now.