What keeps us humble is not prejudging what works but using experimentation and testing to find out. Sometimes both/and works best. Others times laser focus on a leverage point works best. It is not humble to assume to know in any case which one is best without testing them out or at least applying some process to consider the question in a way that reduces bias.

You are basically giving an argument against dogma. But meanwhile you seem to be claiming that both/and is always a better approach in all situations. I think that is dogmatic. I believe both/and is one strategy that works best in some situations but not others.

Relevant to this is a book that introduces the concept of scientometrics, “the science of science” — The Half-life of Facts: Why Everything We Know Has an Expiration Date by Samuel Arbesman (Release date: September 27, 2012). Arbesman is an applied mathematician and network scientist. His writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Wired, New Scientist, and The Boston Globe.

Brief book review by David Pitt, from Booklist: “There are facts, and then there are facts. We expect some facts to be fluid—the population of Earth, for example—but, as it turns out, we probably shouldn’t expect anything we know to remain static. Things that feel like unalterable truths, like the number of chromosomes in human cells (which was 48, until somebody noticed it wasn’t), can suddenly shift….Knowledge, like life itself, evolves; science regularly revises its truths to include new discoveries… scientometrics, “the science of science” is a way of quantifying the growth of ideas. The author shows, too, how the principles of scientometrics can be applied to other fields.”
(http://www.amazon.com/Half-Life-Facts-Everything-Know-Expiration/dp/159184472X/).

It’s not as easy as just saying both/and is better and leaving it at that. The concept of leverage points exists because that simply isn’t always the case. There are many cases where focusing more energy on the root of a problem is far more effective than spending much of it on non-root symptoms. Whether that is the case here I don’t know. If racism is, as you say it may be, largely an emergence tied into psychopathology, then it may well be strategically less effective to focus on racism directly than on psychopathology for a variety of reasons.

But I am not well-versed enough to claim to know if this is the case. It may or may not be. I’d leave it to people who have more experience in investigating the roots of racism to decide whether psychopathology is a key leverage point or not and, if so, to what extent it would be more effective to concentrate energy on that root.

You mention that people are different and, thus, different approaches wake them up. But it’s important to realize that the concept of leverage points also applies to groups of people. Not everyone’s changed mind is equal on a particular issue. For example, in The Tipping Point, we learn about how certain influencers have far more impact than others in a society. So if you want to change culture, you may not need to focus on everyone and every different type of person. You may need to focus more on particular people in particular positions.

It can be easy to just assume things like both/and and using a wide variety of strategies to reach a wide variety of people are best because it sounds good on the surface. But strategically, for many reasons that tie into systems thinking, that is not an assumption that’s valid to make.

So you might be right that in this situation those approaches are most effective. But I don’t think that can be assumed. It is something that should be really investigated and we should allow the evidence to reveal what is more effective. I’ve never seen anyone actually try an approach of focusing on psychopathology education as a way of reducing racism. I’d at least like to see it tried and then compare results rather than just assume which approach is more effective.

I feel strongly, however, that, in general, when it comes to pathological symptoms, the dispersal of energy on disaparate symptom-focused causes has been part of the problem, not the solution. It is keeping too many people from focusing on the leverage point issue of psychopathology.

Now I’m not saying you can’t use the concrete examples, as you say, as an inlet. But hardly anyone I’ve heard uses them to lead back to the core issue of psychopathology. They use them and then stick to that issue, not going further toward root causes to reveal what’s really driving the symptom after all. That is a big problem and, in my view, likely serves to support the maintenance of pathological systems.

I agree that, when someone first learns about these issues, there is a risk of projection and of becoming paranoid and seeing pathology everywhere. But that is also an issue of healing and education about the issue. That is also not an issue that is likely to be healed until we focus on the influence of pathology directly.

Of course, as Milgram showed us long ago, questioning authority is key.

I am also heartened to see growing awareness on this issue. That’s why I started PonerologyNews.com to help reinforce that inspiring pattern.

Why? Because people are different — diverse levels of intelligence, stages of development and awareness. The approach that works for some people will not work for others to truly understand that evil is real. Denial is an easy path when people need to feel they live in a world that is safe and makes sense. We all require some degree of denial to cope. Afterall, existential angst is real. Life does not come with an instructional manual.

My AND/BOTH position is based on my personal journey toward becoming increasingly conscious (always in progress) as well as my professional experience working with diverse populations as a mental health professional. People’s levels of awareness can be blunted and blocked for a variety of reasons, including abuse in childhood and adulthood, substance abuse, accidents and injuries, environmental and genetic factors.

AND, the reality is that many things we learn in childhood needs to be unlearned and/or updated for our effective functioning as adults. That’s just a reality we cannot escape due to the unfolding of psychosocial developmental stages of life.

Some people need concrete examples and others can work with abstract concepts.
There is no one size-fits-all, as you know.

Besides, until all human beings accept their own capacity for doing evil, people will not be able to easily distinguish between what is choice and what may be biologically-rooted in ourselves or others.

EXAMPLE: Many people become stuck in child-like ways of viewing the world if they are not nurtured properly or they otherwise lag in maturing psychologically as they become adults — and this does not contradict the fact that they may be very talented, skilled and intelligent in subject matters. As a result of immaturity (not willing to take personal responsibility,etc.), they may “project” their Shadow self onto others — seeing “badness” out there (external to them) in order to protect their ego from awareness of their own potential for doing wrong, even if their sin is not evil per se.

This is one reason that people who have had personal and direct experience with sociopaths (whether in their family or with a significant other) often begin to think there’s a sociopath hiding around every corner. As they heal, they come to understand their own ulterior motives may not always be pure. As they develop clearer boundaries, they learn to have a greater sense of ownership about what thinking and behavior is theirs and what thinking/behavior belongs to someone else.

And most people at some point in their journey of growth must reconsider beliefs they were raised with in order to ask themselves are their beliefs borrowed from others (parents, teachers and other authority figures) or are their views based on their own sense of truth rooted in learning and life experience.

I think the gift of having a conscience speaks to why so many basic moral values and ethical principles are shared by people the world over. That’s one reason why many people also have a hard time embracing the reality that some human beings (primitive or pathological people) do not abide by the same dictates that influence the conscience and empathy-based perspectives espoused by normal people.

Martha Stout, author of The Sociopath Next Door, wrote a list of 13 recommendations people can use to prevent themselves from being manipulated by sociopaths, particularly in order to avoid doing unnecessary harm to others. One of those mandates is to question authority. I would add it’s not simply a matter of being rebellious, but more for the purpose of determining the motives of those in authority and not assuming that those with authority always have good intentions. Are they contributing more to harm or to the greater good?

I will end on a positive note: I am extremely encouraged by the growing levels of consciousness I see in America and across the globe. It is a beautiful development to witness.

I offered more examples than just racism and sexism. I also mentioned our relationship to the ecosystem. And there are plenty more examples. In different societies, pathological forces affect different people in different ways. Why one pathological system harms one category of people more than another is a whole study in itself. This is discussed a little bit in my ponerology page.

But the point is that everyone is at risk when pathology is allowed to dominate. We never know who will happen to become the victims or scapegoats in any particular case. Pathological people can be quite fickle. If they had a bad experience with a certain type of person, the next thing you know that’s the type they are obsessed with exploiting. How can you possibly predict this kind of thing? You can’t. Thus, it’s in the best interest of everyone of conscience to resist the domination of pathology for its own sake.

Ideally we would resist pathological values because they pose an inherent threat and a risk, without having to argue about which group is more affected in any case vs. another.

I see all of the problems you list - racism/sexism/classism as well as abuse on the domestic and family level and national disputes and ecological crises ALL as possibly linked to pathology. And I would like us to focus in and determine to what extent this one common thread - psychopathology - is involved in all of these. That’s what leverage point thinking is about. Finding the root and focusing on it rather than focusing on the symptoms.

I understand what you mean about institutionalized structural racism or sexism vs. simply individual prejudice. And my point is that systems that have institutionalized discrimination not based on any form of merit may likely simply be different faces or expressions of pathology. We would do better, I think, to stop getting caught up on the different faces or expressions and look at what’s behind the mask that’s in common.

>>All systems of pathology touch other systems, and this overlap is inevitable due to the course of any destructive force that has no intervention — whether it is a physical or psychological disease.

Exactly my point. Which is why I think focusing in on the pathology itself is the highest leverage thing we can do. That’s quite possibly the root of the symptoms that spread through all these areas.

>>Remember the classic statement (paraphrased here): “First they came for the handicapped, then the gays, then the gypsies, then the Jews….and now they’re coming after me/us….”

Funny I was going to quote that one myself just before I read you mentioning it :) That quote is why I think we all should come together around ponerology rather than get caught up on and divided by a focus on any particular type of harm to any particular group. The point of that quote is not to focus on discrimination against any one group but rather unmerited discrimination as a principle. I just take it one step further and say we should focus on the pathology that motivates the discrimination which I think is even more at the root.

>>Sociopaths are anti-humanity, other beings in general. They will exploit and view anyone as objects. But you know as I do that we will never be able to look at someone and say definitively that they are a sociopath. We will only be able to glimpse their lack of empathy and no-conscience by observing patterns of thinking and behaving and how people operate in the world….and so it is easy for many sociopaths to hide in plain sight, all the more so when they are not under suspicion due to “privileges” and benefit of doubt accorded to them due to race, gender, income or other reasons.

Well on the new site I do document the growing body of evidence on brain and genetic differences in psychopaths. We are learning more and more to recognize markers. I don’t know how far that will get and if we’ll ever be able to identify such people reliably enough. But there is a huge discussion and debate around that.

I just posted yesterday about an essay by Adrian Raine in the Wall Street Journal relevant to this. Raine is someone I wrote about before who (quite controversially) advocates screening children for psychopathy.

I of course understand that it is the hijacking of normals by pathological people that allows pathological power to be so influential. But the fact remains that these normals do still have a biological capacity for empathy and conscience. Our best hope is to reawaken it and I think a big part of that comes from education and awareness about the nature of the pathological so normals come to see them for what they are. The Milgram subjects would not have gone along with the experimenter if they realized it was just an experiment. Hopefully when people realize the pathological are what they are, they will be less willing to follow along.

But don’t get me wrong. I am fully aware that this may not be a successful effort in the end. I simply see it as the best bet.

Yet, with that said, am I correct that you apparently view racism and sexism as “group” problems? I recognize the need to integrate the race/gender information in understanding how systems of sociopathy operate versus seeing them as “group” problems since these issues impact ALL OF HUMANITY to some extent, IMHO.

I ask this based on the point you make: “I simply refuse to take any one form of prejudice, whether racism, sexism or any other and claim it is primary. We have countries in the world right now where female babies are killed just for being female and little girls are killed for trying to go to school.”

What you describe in the examples you cited are in fact among the mainfestations of sexism. By defining racism and sexism SIMPLY AS forms of prejudice, you leave out all the systemic factors involved in pathology. It is NOT EITHER/OR. IT IS BOTH/AND.

It is NOT EITHER/OR. IT IS BOTH/AND. It is about racism/sexism/classism and other sociopathic systems AND it is about ponerology on macrosocial levels…..

BTW, my passion isn’t simply about addressing racism. My passion is about promoting mental health. And so any systems that negatively impact mental health are concerns of mine. I support the rights of gay people to love and marry whomever they choose as consenting adults, but I am a heterosexual woman. I am able to be concerned for children of any race who are harmed by abuse. We all have particular areas of specialized knowledge, and social justice and mental health are among my areas of interest and expertise.

I really think that part of the disconnect I’m sensing in our discussion is that we use language terminology differently — our definitions of racism and sexism apparently differ in major ways.

Prejudice is not the same as racism. Racism is an ideological system, an entity of sorts. Prejudice is about attitudes — something all individuals have in common since we are prejudiced against something.

Hypothetically — Let’s say I don’t like you because you are a man. You can say so what, right? But what if I have institutions and ideology I can use to dehumanize and oppress you…this would make a difference in whether my prejudice against men can impact your life or not, and to what extent. And what if I had power through position and a lot of enablers who supported me (and others like me) in my prejudice toward you — and went along with decisions I made to exclude you and others in your male group from upward mobility on a large scale?

You have already clearly articulated the dynamic research you outline on these pages. Everything you describe about pathocracy and ponerology fit with how racism operates. Sociopathy always spreads its poison from original targets to targets who are secondary — that is the nature of pathology, that everything in its path will become infected.

So, it is indeed true as you said that, “these pathologies also play out in other forms of prejudice and exploitation besides those based on race,” and that “There are pathological societies where we see pathological leaders preying on people who share their own race.”

And are we not talking about the ISM of classism here? Does this support in part some explanations for why extreme income inequality has been able to spread more and more to impact the lives of more white people, including the middle class?

All systems of pathology touch other systems, and this overlap is inevitable due to the course of any destructive force that has no intervention — whether it is a physical or psychological disease.

Remember the classic statement (paraphrased here): “First they came for the handicapped, then the gays, then the gypsies, then the Jews….and now they’re coming after me/us….”

And so it is. When we look the other way or enable sociopathy that affects one group or another on a large scale, the pathology ultimately encompasses the rest of us in some way or form over time….

Sociopaths are anti-humanity, other beings in general. They will exploit and view anyone as objects. But you know as I do that we will never be able to look at someone and say definitively that they are a sociopath. We will only be able to glimpse their lack of empathy and no-conscience by observing patterns of thinking and behaving and how people operate in the world….and so it is easy for many sociopaths to hide in plain sight, all the more so when they are not under suspicion due to “privileges” and benefit of doubt accorded to them due to race, gender, income or other reasons.

Regarding your point: “Remember, by far the vast majority of people are not biologically pathological. They do have the capacity for empathy and conscience.”

But many people’s conscience is deadened and their capacity for empathy extends only to that which affects themselves or those closest to them. This diverse group are among those who enable sociopaths in different ways, to be able to maintain influence.

I’m sure you are familiar with studies on people who have authoritarian personalities, who do whatever their leaders (civic, church/religious, social, political leaders) tell them because they do not think for themselves. Because they do not want the existential angst of having to struggle with uncertainties and despair. Because they can avoid true freedom and full responsibility by not thinking for themselves. So that they can have someone else to ultimately blame in some way, in part.

M. Scott Peck suggested that laziness (in thinking) may be mankind’s original sin. I happen to agree. Few people are willing to truly engage in ongoing personal growth inner work as a lifetime journey if they are comfortable and not challenged enough to explore life on many levels — whether through new experiences beyond their comfort zone or encounters with pain, suffering or from seeing someone close to them suffer….

It is what it is.

I agree with you that throughout history, in various places, pathology has manifest in racism. And I am very interested in understanding what role psychopathology plays in racism. But these pathologies also play out in other forms of prejudice and exploitation besides those based on race. There are pathological societies where we see pathological leaders preying on people who share their own race.

It goes completely against what I’m after to become overly focused on any one form of injustice where psychopathology may play out. A huge goal of the writing was to get people to focus on the more transcendant issue of ponerology and realize that it is primary. You said it yourself in your first comment: when we fail to do this:

>The most important characteristics to consider — matters of character and whether someone has a personality disorder — then get easily overlooked as a result.

Matters of character and whether someone has a personality disorder that affects conscience need to be viewed as primary in my view.

Now I don’t have a problem at all if each group uses a strategy where they focus on their pet issue as a starting point to then bring into the open the role of ponerology. But that larger viewpoint should be the goal, in my opinion.

I don’t believe only intellectuals or HSP’s can learn about or take interest in ponerology. Indeed, that’s exactly why I started PonerologyNews.com - to offer evidence that, in fact, there is a fast-growing amount of attention on subjects related to ponerology all throughout our society and in every form of media. Many people are absolutely fascinated with material related to ponerology and it isn’t just intellectuals and HSP’s. Look at the popularity of shows like Dexter throughout the population, for example.

Remember, by far the vast majority of people are not biologically pathological. They do have the capacity for empathy and conscience.

I can tell this topic is very important to you and I can understand why. And I don’t want to diminish any of what you said because we do agree on much.

I agree with you that racism is and has been a huge problem in many societies.

I agree with you that those who have been hurt by racism have much to teach us as a result of their experience.

I agree with you that many who have been hurt by racism likely have a deep first-hand experience with certain forms of pathology and hopefully some of them have come to realize that and place some of the focus on that aspect of it.

However, I simply refuse to take any one form of prejudice, whether racism, sexism or any other and claim it is primary. We have countries in the world right now where female babies are killed just for being female and little girls are killed for trying to go to school. And the relationship of humanity to the rest of the ecosystem has plenty of examples that challenge the relationship between the races for cruelty and consciencelessness. There are plenty of incredibly pathological things that happen based on divisions other than race. What ties all of these things together is the lack of conscience and empathy involved. And that is the division I want to get people focused on.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with minimizing or trying to deny or avoid awareness of the importance of racism. It is a strategic decision to place these things in what I believe is an accurate context that leads us to a more effective leverage point.

I don’t expect any of what I said to make you feel any less passionate about focusing on the racial aspect of this. Given your experience, it would make sense that that is the particular manifestation of these dynamics that feels closest to you and most intense. I would simply say that there is a fine line between using racial examples to help open people’s eyes to the underlying pathology and becoming so one-track focused on racism to the exclusion of other forms of pathology that you lose the ability to cross over and reach people for whom racism does not feel like the closest, most intense aspect to them.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate your passion for improving the world, which we share. I hope you’ll understand this not in any way as an attempt to diminish your experience, but simply as a strategic discussion of what is the most likely approach to bring about widespread awareness and change. And I’m sure with our different backgrounds, but similar interests, there is much we can offer to help each other learn more about that.

Let me state clearly that I completely respect your intelligence, Howard. We really are on the same page, but coming at it from different angles. The angle I offer helps bridge the gap for understanding ponerology from an abstract concept to concrete awareness, and makes room for many paradoxes we must integrate in our understanding of evil, in order to fully grasp how it is manifest in reality and does tremendous damage to humanity and human lives.

Howard, you wrote: “Many of the tactics pathological people use are designed to exploit the loophole that exists due to our society’s failure to adequately recognize and take seriously just how much damage emotional harm, even on its own, can do. It’s scary how many people get away with emotionally harming others repeatedly, often with the victims later being blamed for the consequences that flow from the trauma, because without a physical trace there is no way to really hold them accountable.”

You are describing racism and the psychosocial and emotional toll it takes on people, not to mention the real-life impact on reducing options including quality of life indicators due to discrimination that limits and prevents people from access to various opportunities. Race is used to promote inclusion or exclusion; insider versus outsider dynamics, in terms of access to resources. Some exceptions to all rules are applicable, of course, but we are talking about how the masses of people are impacted by systems.

No doubt individuals of all races may be affected by a pathological parent, partner or supervisor at work. But we need to distinguish between individual versus group dynamics, because it is through influencing larger populations that sociopaths are able to inflict far greater damage.

This is where conscious and decent white people often get stuck. They really don’t understand that racism is one form of psychopathology — and a major one! So they have a hard time wrapping their mind around the fact that most people of color intuitively understand how sociopaths operate due to our experiences with racism. So we all can use this point of reference to better understand the larger concept of ponerology.

Many whites across the globe have either been unclear about what constitutes racism, oblivious to racism when it happens, or have in some ways benefitted directly or indirectly from privileges associated with the system of racism. Some whites (as well as diverse people of color) have been complicit, often in roles as enablers to sociopaths.

Racism is what allows sociopathic white males to be assumed as “normal” in leadership roles despite their obvious pathology. This makes it possible for them to be able to go undetected (as the pathologicals they really are), operating in plain sight. Let that sink in.

The masses of white people don’t recognize how they have been victimized by the same white male sociopaths who have victimized people of color — the victimization just happens in different ways. Racism is a RELATIONAL DISORDER. Racism is defined on a basic level as a SYSTEM of privilege for some and victimization for the many.
It is the equivalent of white supremacy, a false ideology that results in the imposition of propoganda, intimidation and violence in many forms to enforce the system. PSYCHOPATHOLOGY IS A RELATIONAL DISORDER — psychopaths relate to other human beings across demographic groups, as if people are objects. Let that sink in.

If you find yourself resisting these facts, it may be an instinctive or defensive reaction to resist the reality that white people can actually learn from people of color. Racism has “programmed” many white people to not consider that people of color as a whole can be as intelligent and insightful about some matters that white people may not be as aware of. If this is hard to wrap one’s mind around, it may be indicative of some aspects of racist ideology being more ingrained than one expects within oneself.

Let this sink: Racism is a major piece of the puzzle for grasping the reality of how psychopathology is manifested in the real world, in real life.

Howard, you wrote: “What I really would like to see is these various aggrieved groups of all races, classes, gender, etc. that are working for a healthier, more sustainable system in a disconnected fashion based on identity politics to realize the common issue that empathy-reducing psychopathology represents for them and come together to pour their efforts into awareness of that leverage point issue by focusing, for example, on ponerology.”

Focusing on ponerology is important, but that approach can only work with intellectuals and other deep-thinking or highly-sensitive people (HSP) whose empathy allows them to really relate to what other people who are different from them, experience.

We have to offer concrete information and examples to the masses who are average in how they think. Racism is more concrete than ponerology. Sexism is more concrete than ponerology. Classism as a system is more concrete. But all three serve as specific ways in which ponerology can be understood. These examples help explain systems of ponerology by starting out with concrete examples and then moving toward abstract concepts to tie together all the “isms” and other forms of harm caused by pathological people.

Howard, we really are on the same page. But you seem to have an instinctive reaction — similar to what I see among other white people — to want to downplay or diminish the true and full impact of racism and the recognition of racism as the original expression of pathology not only in American history and culture, but in some form throughout the world.

I think decent white people as a whole have a concern about being linked with the guilty white racists who actively perpetuate racism, and there is a tendency to become defensive or to feel like one should not have to pay the price for what a small group of people in one’s race has done or continues to do.

Let’s flip the script. I am an intelligent black woman but I have had to pay the price of being perceived and treated in certain ways despite the fact that I don’t fit most accepted stereotypes about black women. ALSO Keep in mind that black people as a whole have suffered to some extent due to MANY negative stereotypes imposed on us, regardless of how decent and empathic we may be as individuals.

Ponerology is a new science but it defines evil as both biological and acquired pathology — RACISM is an acquired pathology for the most part, but it may also be in the DNA of some people. Until you fully accept that people cannot create pathological institutions and uphold pathological systems without having ACCESS to privilege and power within those systems, you will not accept that racism is the foundational pathology from which other pathological systems take root.

Psychopaths are lazy — they use that which is the path of least resistance. Race is the one characteristic that can be used to achieve the greatest mileage through manipulation of the masses using ideology, group identity and associated factors (like making oppressed whites feel that they are at least “better than” those blacks and other color people). Let this sink in…

Promoting public education and consciousness can be advanced a great deal by a lot of decent, empathic and conscious white people doing the inner work first, then starting discussions within their own communities and social/professional circles. They can say that ponerology is a problem affecting all humanity, and that racism is a major example of how ponerology/evil is mainfested in the world.

Decent whites would need to understand two basic concepts so they can distinguish the racism within themselves from racism found among the sociopathic:

1) Socialized racism — All people have been socialized to buy into various aspects of racism, including people of color who may be affected by what is known as “internalized racism” — so whether it’s a white person acting out racism or a black person behaving in ways showing self-hatred, it is a sign of the influence of pathological ideology and systems.

If we are all socialized to some extent to believe premises of racism (that some people are inherently superior or inferior based on external factors and related concepts), those of us who are not pathological — who have adequate levels of empathy and conscience — can also UNLEARN what we’ve been taught.

Anyone who says they are color blind is lying or in denial. You cannot live in America and not be influenced by the bombardment of racial messages, images, assumptions, stereotypes and perceptions that people operate from both consciously and unconsciously.

2) Sociopathic racism — This points to the fact that all racists are sociopathic because racism requires people to distort reality about themselves and others in ways that promote lies, false information and irrational ideology. ALL RACISTS are SOCIOPATHS, but NOT ALL SOCIOPATHS ARE RACISTS. Some sociopaths are serial killers. Some are corporate CEOs and others are in governmental roles; some are in prisons and some are in urban gangs — they are equal opportunity destroyers who will victimize anyone regardless of color, gender, age, etc. if they are motivated for their own benefit.

Pathology education requires an unfolding journey where we provide specific examples first, in order to help humanity arrive at the broader awareness of real-life evil — psychopathology, the skeleton in humanity’s closet, as one writer defined it. This is the path to helping people understand that psychopathology/sociopathy is an equal-opportunity disease — that people of all races, adult age groups and both genders — can be pathological.

Last but not least, Howard, using the term “various aggrieved groups” buys into the sociopathic agenda by leaving you and other white males who are generally decent, empathic and conscious, with the impression that the concerns of these groups are not relevant to you. IN FACT, these concerns affect us all because the sociopathic systems of exploitation overlap. Please let this sink in….

I am familiar with People of the Lie and have heard about some of its contents though I haven’t read it. I have read some of Fromm’s work.

I think you make an important point when you mention how we can “break” someone without physically harming them. Many of the tactics pathological people use are designed to exploit the loophole that exists due to our society’s failure to adequately recognize and take seriously just how much damage emotional harm, even on its own, can do. It’s scary how many people get away with emotionally harming others repeatedly, often with the victims later being blamed for the consequences that flow from the trauma, because without a physical trace there is no way to really hold them accountable.

As far as racism, I find it very interesting and heartening to hear that there are scholars that wrote about this topic from the perspective of psychopathology. I haven’t read those works but I’d be interested in hearing more about them. As you probably know, I agree with you that a focus on more superficial distinctions like race, gender, etc. serves to distract us from the more important distinction between (as Lobaczewski called them) the pathological and the normal. I think you made this point very well when you said:

>The most important characteristics to consider — matters of character and whether someone has a personality disorder — then get easily overlooked as a result.

I agree with you that systems of superiority/inferiority, whether between certain groups of people or even humanity and the rest of the ecosystem, can do great damage to those on both sides of the equation. But what makes the pathological different than the rest seems to be that, unlike the vast majority of us, they are sort of adapted to be able to participate in and encourage these sorts of structurally imbalanced systems without really experiencing much damage to themselves. Systems of superiority/inferiority are more of a natural habitat for them in which they apparently are quite comfortable, while the rest of us suffer on various levels in such circumstances.

I have a slight mixed reaction to your comment because, on one hand, you are agreeing with me that this focus on race and gender and so on distracts us from focusing on the more important pathological/normal divide. Yet, much of your comment itself focuses on the race/gender level. I don’t think there is anything wrong with spending some energy focusing on that level as long as we never forget that it is secondary and not primary.

What I really would like to see is these various aggrieved groups of all races, classes, gender, etc. that are working for a healthier, more sustainable system in a disconnected fashion based on identity politics to realize the common issue that empathy-reducing psychopathology represents for them and come together to pour their efforts into awareness of that leverage point issue by focusing, for example, on ponerology. Unfortunately, there are so many social and financial incentives for them to stay separated and each focused on their respective pet issues that this might be hard to accomplish. But I’d certainly like to see us try to move things in that direction as much as possible.

I am an African-American psychotherapist and writer/editor. I have had a similar internal/external journey of coming into awareness of the systems approaches you outline. I have done extensive research on sociopathy (many consider pathological narcissism and psychopathology as interchangeable terms with sociopathy).

Power and control seem to be central issues with sociopaths, who lack an internal guidance system or refuse to access this universal source of knowledge since they seem to want to view themselves as God-like.

M. Scott Peck, MD, author of The Road Less Traveled and others books, wrote a book called People of the Lie (1983), where he encouraged a scientific study of evil. Erich Fromm and Dr. Peck used terms like malignant narcissism to describe evil.

Peck’s work on the psychology of evil said that People of the Lie deliberately deceive others and also build layer upon layer of self-deception. This characteristic of those who can be deemed evil is not the same as us average sinners who make mistakes and must learn to live with our imperfections. “Lies confuse,” Peck wrote, indicating that it is those directly affected by evil people – whether relative, spouse, friend, co-worker, etc. — who suffer the most.

“Evil is in opposition to life. Evil is also that which kills spirit. There are various essential attributes of life – particularly human life – such as sentience, mobility, awareness, growth, autonomy, will. It is possible to kill or attempt to kill one of these attributes without destroying the body. Thus we may “break” a horse or even a child without harming a hair on its head.” - M. Scott Peck, M.D.

People of color across the globe have experienced upclose the reality of psychopathology as enforced through the false ideology of white supremacy. Part of the problem in society is when some groups are presumed to be superior, they do not want to “hear” the legitimate contributions from others who have suffered from being deemed “inferior.”

Systems of superiority/inferiority are imposed delusions and not sustainable for humanity. They contribute to tremendous suffering and mental health problems for both those who want to believe they are inherently superior and those who are put in categories of the supposed inferior. As a result, society does not benefit from the contributions of diverse people who can add their voices to this very important discussion.

While many white scholars, philosophers, sociologists and psychologists have played crucial roles in our understanding of humanity, a small group of so-called experts have advanced theories about good and evil that essentially amount to scientific racism.
This framework based on race and racism, and people designated as experts to lead conversations on a variety of related issues impacting humanity, have been highly destructive. Yet scientific racism has been historically publicized as if based in truth due to political agendas to promote white supremacy, IMO.

Due to the lack of competence of scientists who promoted racist agendas, all of us have been led astray on many different levels, by allowing external factors about human beings to determine how we view people.

Psychopaths/sociopaths benefit from these divisions — whether they are based on race, gender, socioeconomic or other factors used to determine the “worth” of human beings. This makes it possible to take focus off of those who are truly evil — those without conscience, who lack empathy. As long as most human beings think in a lazy fashion, external factors like race and gender can be used by those who benefit most from manipulating and exploiting others. The most important characteristics to consider — matters of character and whether someone has a personality disorder — then get easily overlooked as a result.

Society has lost much knowledge and valuable insights contributed by women of all races and “minorities” who are excluded from the mainstream as a result of the social and political hierarchies imposed on humanity.

Many scholars of color have written extensively about the psychopathology of racism. Race is the path of lease resistance — a visible, simple and easy way to identify people, and from the privilege of racism, many actual psychopaths get to hide in plain sight because they are presumed to be normal when in fact they are among the abnormal. And they have many enablers who have been programmed to believe the illusion that color (as in race-based classification) is a defining factor in who is good or evil.

Bottom line is that sociopathy can be found among all groups of people (in the full range of adult ages, all races and both genders), but the world in which we live uses simplistic ways to identify good and evil.

Evil thrives from creating chaos and confusion. People have been historically defined in ways that complicate true understanding of who and what are really good and evil.

We have tremendous challenges ahead of us in attempts to raise consciousness. We must first come to terms with the many ways in which we have been lied to, programmed and misled.