Saturday, April 20, 2013
No Reason Needed
Dostoevsky explored the concept of freedom perhaps better than any other writer. Part of that exploration included an exploration of evil. People are always looking for "reasons" why people do evil. But perhaps doing evil, like doing good, is an end in itself. Perhaps people commit evil acts simply because they want to do something evil.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Josh, I rather take the opposite or veering understanding of Evil. Evil is perverted good. It was well expressed by Lewis in his writings.
ReplyDeleteFor instance: A person wishes security and safety; these are goods in and of themselves. However if the person uses torture and murder of others to gain that security, then they have done evil.
So what if someone does an action, something destructive and sadistic because it gives them pleasure? Pleasure is a good. Feeling warm, content, etc. is not in and of itself evil. It is the pursuit of that pleasure that makes it evil.
Evil is a good pursued by an anti-divine fashion. I don't see that evil can be pursued simply for its own sake, but as a means to another thing that is good.
Now I would completely agree that a miscreant saying, "It was fun" is no reason we tend to think of as rational. We are flummoxed and horrified by those who use their own petty pleasure as a rationale for harming others.
Frankly empowerment, that feeling that you can act upon and control your world, is a reason for doing evil. My guess is those-we-are-not-mentioning will be found to have done what they did to feel that they have power over their world; that they exist; that they matter.
What is more we are told of saints who have done what they have done for its own sake. Simply to be good. Martyrs crucified under Nero certainly did good without any comingling of pleasure at all. Dreadful as that sounds; it seems clear evidence of good being done for itself.
Therefore if what you mean by doing evil for its own sake is because it "feels good" we may be in violent agreement. But I just can't come up with an evil, not genocide, not rape, not a killing spree such as just happened, that is done for its own sake. Girard portrays evil as a parasite upon human life. Evil is un-able to exist on its own, it must cling to The Good or it cannot exist.
God is Good and the good that comes therefrom is the standard from which all things are measured. It can stand alone, whereas evil simply cannot.
Of course whether we agree or not on this is utterly beside the point. Let us go and do good and not count the cost.
I agree that evil is derivative. I don't think that martyrs' sacrifice includes a complete lack of self-interest. There is something of self-interest in every human act. The martyr knows the testimony their act makes for their faith, and seeks heaven. Evil is parasitic, but that doesn't mean it doesn't "exist" in some sense. Cancer is purely parasitic, but surely it is true that cancer exists. Dependent existence is still existence. Let's say someone wants to do evil because of the thrill of rebellion. This is the thrill of being a god unto oneself. Perhaps one even acknowledges God, but seeks to hurt him. This is roughly much like cancer. I don't see why this isn't evil for its own sake. That is just what evil means, as I see it.
Delete