Are psychopaths evil personified? Perhaps not.
I once asked the question: Can Psychopaths become Christians? This not only generated discussion at the time, but continuous to be one of the most searched for pages on this blog.
In view of this, it’s obvious this question perplexes many, and I occasionally still receive emails, most of which are born from intimate experience with a psychopath, and predominantly answer this question forcefully in the negative.
In the back of my mind, whilst composing that question, I subconsciously conflated the notion of evil with psychopathy, and specifically the trait of an apparent absence of conscience.
But was I right in taking this approach?
M. Scott Peck in his book: The People of the Lie, takes a different line, making an interesting distinction between the psychopath and evil, especially relating to the issue of conscience:
A predominant characteristic, however, of the behaviour of those I call evil is scapegoating. Because in their hearts they consider themselves beyond reproach, they must lash out at anyone that does reproach them. They sacrifice others to preserve their self-image of perfection.
[.....]
Scapegoating works through a mechanism psychiatrists call projection. Since the evil, deep down, feel themselves to be faultless, it is inevitable that when they are in conflict with the world they will invariably perceive the conflict as the world’s fault. Since they must deny their own badness, they must perceive others as bad. They must project their own evil on to the world. They never think of themselves as evil; on the other hand, they consequently see much evil in others.
[.....]
Evil, then, is most often committed in order to scapegoat, and the people I label as evil are chronic scapegoaters……in other words, the evil attack others instead of facing their own failures. Spiritual growth requires the acknowledgement of one’s need to grow. If we cannot make that acknowledgement, we have no option but to eradicate the evidence of our imperfection.
Strangely enough, evil people are often destructive because they are attempting to destroy evil. The problem is that they misplace the locus of evil. Instead of destroying the sickness within themselves. As life often threatens their self-image of perfection, they are often busily engaged in hating and destroying that life – usually in the name of righteousness. The fault, however, may not be so much that they hate life as they do not hate the sinful part of themselves.
[.....]
What is the cause of this failure of self-hatred, this failure to be displeasing to oneself, which seems to be the central sin at the root of the scapegoating behaviour of those I call evil? The cause is not, I believe, an absent conscience. There are people, both in and out of jail, who seem utterly lacking in conscience or super-ego. Psychiatrists call them psychopaths or sociopaths. Guiltless, they not only commit crimes but may often do so with a kind of reckless abandon. there is little pattern of meaning in their criminality; it is not particularly characterised by scapegoating. Conscienceless, psychopaths appear to be bothered or worried by very little – including their own criminality. they seem to be about as happy inside a jail as out. They do attempt to hide their crimes, but their efforts to do so are often feeble and careless and poorly planned. They have sometimes been referred to as ‘moral imbeciles’, and there is almost a quality of innocence to their lack of worry and concern.
This is hardly the case with those I call evil. Utterly dedicated to preserving their self-image of perfection, they are increasingly engaged in the effort to maintain the appearance of moral purity. They worry about this a great deal. They are acutely sensitive to social norms and what others might think of them.
[....]
The words ‘image’, ‘appearance’, and ‘outwardly’ are crucial to understanding the morality of evil. While they seem to lack any motivation to be good, they intensely desire to appear good. Their ‘goodness’ is all on a level of pretense. It is, in effect, a lie. This is why they are people of the lie.
Actually, the lie is designed not so much to deceive others as to deceive themselves. They cannot or will not tolerate the pain of self-reproach. The decorum with which they lead their lives is maintained as mirror in which they can see themselves reflected righteously. Yet the self-deceit would be unnecessary if the evil had no sense of right and wrong. We lie only when we are attempting to cover up something we know to be illicit. Some rudimentary form of conscience must precede the act of lying. There is no need to hide unless we first feel that something needs to be hidden.
We come now to a sort of paradox. I have said the evil people feel themselves to be perfect. At the same time, however, I think they have an unacknowledged sense of their own evil nature. Indeed, it is this very sense from which they are frantically trying to flee. The essential component of evil is not the absence of a sense of sin or imperfection but the unwillingness to tolerate that sense. At one and the same time, the evil are aware of their evil and desperately trying to avoid the awareness. Rather than blissfully lacking a sense of morality like the psychopath, they are continually engaged in sweeping the evidence of their evil under the rug of their own consciousness.
[....]
The problem is not a defect of conscience but the effort to deny the conscience its due. We become evil by attempting to hide from ourselves. The wickedness of the evil is not committed directly, but indirectly as part of a cover-up process. Evil originates not in the absence of guilt but in the effort to escape it.
M. Scott Peck, The People of the Lie – The hope for healing human evil – Pages: 82-85
August 5th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
I think this is a very interesting and novel approach to the subject. I have only come across true psychopaths a few times in my life and I have been struck by the fact the ones I’ve met have on first meeting seemed like really good people. So much effort is put into outward appearances and they (unlike those with other personality deficits) know how to make the most of social cues. Yet I have been almost in awe of their sense of self-importance, of their all encompassing narcissism, which is often the giveaway that something is very wrong at the heart of these people.
The problem, from a Christian perspective, is that theology tells us that everyone is made in the image of God and no matter how distorted that image may seem, it is nevertheless redeemable – to say otherwise is to make nonsense of the Cross.
I do feel that many of us get bogged down in the notion of ‘feelings’ – we have to feel remorse and compunction before we can repent. However this in itself can be an exercise in narcissism and it is an unfortunate trait of the religiously devout, in particular, that they tend to get fixated on the ‘sins’ that bother their conscience, rather than those which hinder their progress as believers. Yes, the two can be compatible, particularly in the early parts of the journey of faith, but great care is needed not to get overly interested in what offends the self at the expense of what offends others and God. It is tempting to take pride in the fact that one has attended mass every day for the duration of Lent, that one has cheerfully given 10% of one’s earnings to worthy causes and overcome or avoided certain temptations; but if you treat the girl on the checkout at Tesco’s like scum or feel that you are morally superior to your follow parishioners, then whatever you give and whatever sacrifices you make are worthless.
The best way forward I have found with those with psychopathic tendencies is to be ruthlessly blunt in one’s conversation. As I wrote in a letter to a priest friend who at present is having problems with a parishioner with mental health problems: “What I have found particularly useful is the need to be clear in one’s communication. It is useless getting into complicated discussions and arguments: clear, unambiguous statements are far better than buttery English charm! This needs to be tempered with an obvious interest and compassion for the person afflicted by the problem. But I must stress, pussy footing around and leaving any ambiguity is useless and actually causes more problems. Bluntness is often the only way something can be understood – ‘You are doing X, because you want to achieve Y’ can be rather disarming!’
It is a difficult area Stuart – thank you for raising it.
As an aside, I must confess I inwardly smiled after reading the first paragraph of your quote: “A predominant characteristic, however, of the behaviour of those I call evil is scapegoating. Because in their hearts they consider themselves beyond reproach, they must lash out at anyone that does reproach them. They sacrifice others to preserve their self-image of perfection…”
It made me think of the current obsession some of Christian brethren have with all things tinged pink (i.e. homosexuality). I suspect the disproportionate interest some of our conservative chums have in the subject is rooted in a similar social and psychological mechanism as noted in this quote!
August 5th, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Some absolutely exceptional and insightful thoughts and analysis Fr Richard. Very knowledgable and completely in tune with ‘where I’m at currently’. So thank you.
There’s this little quote which so encapsulates your thoughts:
I believe this is an insight you have articulated on a few occasions, and I have been somewhat personally grateful for that, as someone who has struggled along these lines.
The theological problem you raise regarding ‘everyone made in the image of God’ is again very poignant and I suppose we could tackle that from the premise that those ‘evil’ or ‘psychopathic’ have likely been pushed into this, perhaps from traumatic childhood experiences. So not made that way, but moulded that way.
I absolutely loved this comment:
So much effort is put into outward appearances and they (unlike those with other personality deficits) know how to make the most of social cues.
It’s very astute to note the ability of some personality disordered to pick up social cues and then in a sense mimic these for their own gain. I would posit that narcissistic, histrionic, sociopathic, psychopathic, and the like, are skilled in the arena of correctly observing and manipulating social rules and cues to their own advantage.
As you rightly point out, other personality disorders are remarkably inept at decoding social cues.
Anyway, I had exactly the same thoughts as you regarding “scapegoating”, but you probably already guessed that.
One of the quotes from the book I declined as “Quote of the Day” basically questioned what better place for ‘evil’ to hide than inside the church, especially given their drive to appear outwardly so righteous and morally pure.
Food for thought.
Again thanks for taking the time with this comment and really engaging and striking at the heart of the post; got me thinking…..
August 5th, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Fascinating stuff, though not an area I’m competent to comment on. But intrigued to read and learn!
August 6th, 2012 at 7:54 pm
Thank you for reminding me of the original post, which I still find intriguing Stuart. I was particularly taken by this fragment from Lynda Alsford’s comment: I find it hard that someone could be born with a condition that prohibits them from finding God – in a real, personal way. It conflicts with my view of God as someone who can always save everyone. In fact it is situations like this which make me lean more towards the universalistic view point of salvation.
My view entirely.
August 6th, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Looks like the Church diagnosis of excessive scrupulosity and perverted pride got there before the psychiatrists diagnosis of scapegoating.
There is more to fear from the respectable pen pushing scapegoating psychopath than the rarer gun-toting variety.
August 7th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
In hoc signo vinces†
“The problem is not a defect of conscience but the effort to deny the conscience its due. We become evil by attempting to hide from ourselves.”
Scapegoating so close to what I term projected self-loathing – a collective psychopathy of race or/and cultural self-hatred that manifests itself as multiculturalism in order to destroy the race/culture they are in conflict with.