Week 2: The Myth of Pure Evil

Our discussion this week was interesting yet frustrating due to the surrounding questions regarding the definition of evil and the complexity of evil. The narrow definition of “pure evil” that make us think of evil and good as dualities is not as definitive or as simple as we’d like. Many people believe that evil is easily identified and that people who commit “evil” acts are the embodiment of this, inflicting harm on innocent others for the joy of it, without any remorse or empathy for their victims is an overly simplistic viewpoint that. This idea makes it easier on witnesses because it allows us to think that people who commit evil acts can be easily written off as terrible people who deserve any repercussions they may face. This idea also makes us think that we ourselves are not capable of committing acts, and that we ourselves will never deserve any misfortune we face at the hands of “evil”. The reality of evil is so much more complex, as we see from the perspectives of those who committed evil acts that were present in Baumeister’s book. One example brought up in our discussion was the Korean women who planted a bomb on the plane. From her perspective, she was following orders and would receive respect and rewards from her superiors for pulling this off. She was showing her patriotism and thought that it would benefit her country. This forces us to face the reality that evil is not a defining quality of people who commit atrocities but is more of a role that people step into under certain circumstances, suggesting that the average person may be capable of evil. But by believing this myth of pure evil we label anyone who opposes us or are unknown and potentially dangerous to us as evil, leading to quick and harsh judgements that have been seen during wars, where people rationalize killing others by labelling them this way to absolve themselves of any empathy or guilt over harming them.

A study by Webster and Saucier (2018) created terms based on Baumeister’s model of the “myth of pure evil”. From this they created a measurable construct called the Belief in Pure Evil (BPE), where people believe that evil is the infliction of harm on innocent people, lacks empathy, and promotes chaos. An opposite construct, called Belief in Pure Good (BPG), is the belief that pure good exists and is about intentional help of others, which is motivated by pure altruism with no expectations in return. Through several studies, they found that these measures were reliable and stable across time. The two measures are not correlated with each other and predicted opposite traits and worldviews. People who believed in pure evil were more likely to be high in aggression and pessimism. They were more likely to believe in a just world and were less generous in their attributions of the actions of others. When it came to social issues, they were more likely to support the death penalty for criminals and oppose criminal rehabilitation. They also found that people high in BPE were more likely to see the world as dangerous, to be pro-violence and pro-military in international affairs, to be prejudiced towards Muslims and Iranians, and to be pro-torture. On the other side, those who were high in a belief of pure good were more likely to be optimistic, to make more generous attributes towards other’s actions, to oppose the death penalty and support criminal rehabilitation, to be high in empathy and to promote diplomatic solutions in international affairs. People who were religious were more likely to believe in pure good, but not pure evil. This study is important because it shows that the belief of pure evil could be linked to harsher ideas of the world, which promotes harsher attributions of others, and the idea of “othering” people who are in opposition to them, which, as we’ve discussed in class, lowers their empathy towards them and allows them to commit atrocious acts towards these “others”. While this is correlation and we can’t say whether one causes the other, the chance that these beliefs result in such different views of the world and of people and result in drastically different reactions to ‘evil’ warrants a deeper look into these beliefs and the potential of changing people’s pessimistic and prejudiced views by dispelling the myth of pure evil.  

A recent news story made headlines due to Pasco County Sherriff Chris Nocco’s label of a murder as “pure evil”. A 21-year old man was driving in his car when he saw a 75-year-old man with a walking stick walking down the side of the road. After passing the man he did a U-turn and accelerated to hit the man with his car at high speed, killing him. The driver was later caught after he ran in to an electric pole, which caused his car to break down. When questioned, he admitted that he went for a drive for the purpose of finding a pedestrian to kill. He told police that he was smiling and laughing when he hit the man and recalled the look of terror on the man’s face before he hit him. Nocco said “There are some cases we hear about that absolutely, even for us in law enforcement, make us just realize and remind us that there is pure evil in this world. This headline of this story supports that people believe in the concept of “pure evil” and that certain people may fall close to this construct. However, we know that this belief is connected to some rigid and aggressive ways of thinking that could lead to quick judgements and a lack of perspective taking, which ultimately leads to a lack of empathy for those classified as “evil”. In this specific case it seems that the man who committed this act classifies as a remorseless killer, but we should at least question the possibility of the news sensationalizing this. We should see this as an extremely rare case of a person with poor morals rather than a support for the idea of pure evil. Even if there are a few people who fall under the definition of ‘pure evil’, assuming that everyone who commits harmful acts is an example of this is a shallow way of thinking.

Webster, R. J. & Saucier, D.A. (2013). Angels and demons are among us: Assessing individual differences in belief in pure evil and belief in pure good. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(11), 1455.

White, D. A. L. (2020, January 14). Sheriff Calls 75-Year-Old Hudson Man’s Killing Act Of ‘Pure Evil’. Retrieved January 19, 2020, from https://patch.com/florida/newportrichey/sheriff-calls-murder-75-year-old-hudson-man-act-pure-evil