M. Scott Peck: The People of the Lie

In progress:

How to regard or deal with evil in therapy is very difficult and challenging. As Peck teaches, these people do not come to therapy for self improvement, as in the most fundamental sense they are not self critical (p. 66;150). Therapy is more likely to see the victims- such as the inner division resulting from the violation of the fundamental human sexual prohibitions, causing the inner division in personality called dissociative disorder of "schizophrenia." As said, schizophrenia seems to be a symptom with various causes, rather than a disease that is a cause, but that is one of the psychogenic causes. This would not be strange if the health of the soul is or includes justice, and evil were involved, and far deeper than we are aware. The human family and sexuality is a great mystery, but the fundamental structures of the soul and personality are likely to be the same throughout humanity.

Compulsory therapy, for criminals, ordered by courts must be very interesting, and in some cases become voluntary, but one would expect it is only the voluntary that would be helpful. People must get up themselves and walk toward the light and a better life.

All the evil are unjust, but not all the unjust are evil in the sense that a person can become evil. All the evil are mentally ill in one sense, while all the mentally ill are not even unjust, let alone evil. And some of the evil do not have impaired calculative or imaginative faculties, as is obvious from some successful tyrants and gangsters.

To identify some as evil and others as their victims is itself wrong in one way, but

necessary in another, as this is what we seek to avoid. All, as human, may be susceptible. But as though a line were crossed (p. 106; ), there is a difference, between this and the way in which all humans are sinners. Amid a warning of dangers involved in such a study, Peck opens his book with the saying of Augustine that we should "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (p. 15). Missler commenting on Rev. 2:6, teaches: "Notice He hates the deeds of the Nicolautans, not the Nicolautians"(Class on Revelation, Session 3). Forgiveness may be also for the sake of the one forgiving, or even especially so, and that requires some reflection. Forgiveness is separate from action to oppose evil, and is the opposite of the anger sometimes required to move action. Evil may be more something that some fall into or are possessed by, rather than a characteristic of the person, who may have been weak or selfish. One example of the line crossed is that in some forms of first degree murder, it may be that the murderer puts out his own light, and can no longer repent. Hence, to join some groups, one must be a murderer, and it is difficult to avoid characterizing these as evil. The question, like so many on this topic, must remain open.

Peck addresses his topic very carefully, denying any satisfaction to the lurid attractions to the heinous of studies such as Mind Hunter, on FBI profiling of serial murderers. As a result, he barely scratches the surface of the problem of psychology, psychiatry and evil. What we find refreshing is the study of whether evil should be named synonymous with "mental illness." But that would provide a clue as to why our value- free scientific psychiatry is a failure. Yet Peck holds full confidence in psychotherapy regardless.

Peck writes a great paragraph on psychotherapy which harmonizes well with the Socratic teaching regarding self knowledge, or his reverence for the saying of Apollo at Delphi, "Know thyself." He writes (p.33):

As I said, I'm glad your feeling guilty If you didn't feel bad about taking the easy way out, no matter what,then I wouldn't be able to help you. You've been learning that psychotherapy is not the easy way out. It's a way of facing things, even if it's painful, even if it's very painful. It's a way of not running away. It's the right way, not the easy way. If your willing to face the painful realities of your life,- your terrorful childhood, your miserable marriage, your mortality, your own cowardice- I can be of some assistance. And I am sure we will succeed. But if all you want is the easiest possible relief from pain, then I expect that you are the devil's man, and I don't see any way that psychotherapy can help you.

   In his opening chapter, Peck tells of a client characterized by obsessions who thought he had made a pact with the devil, even though he did not really believe that the devil exists. I was impressed with Peck's unraveling of this case. At p. 29, he does not know how to respond to George, and admits he does not know what to say. I would have been tempted to attempt a magic word, as George suggested earlier, like a placebo to treat an imaginary illness, but it turns out there was much that George was not yet saying. Then soon Peck says to George:

...I think you really did make a pact with the devil, and because you did, I think for you, the devil became real. In your desire to avoid pain, I think you called the devil into existence. Because you had the power to call him into existence, I think you also have the power to end his existence. Intuitively, in the deepest part of me, I feel the process is reversible. I think you can go back to where you were. I think that if you change your mind and become willing to bear the duress, then the pact will be voided and the devil will have to look elsewhere for someone to make him him real.

What is said about this- Jung notwithstanding- is that while God is, was, and will be, the Devil was, is not, and is to go to perdition (Revelation, 17:8). This statement is understood in contrast with He who "One who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" (1:8). Evil in a certain sense does not exist. But as the Ouiga board can have effects, these are coming from the human soul, and not the painted cardboard. These things can have no effect if we do not give them reality. But there is another sense in which it is Jesus, not we, who commands spirits, and so, we pray in the name of Jesus. I would have told George at page 26 to repent and turn toward God, repent all his sins, and pray that the Holy Spirit intercedes (Romans 5; Luke 10:17-20 is an important teaching). If there is a Devil, there is also a God, and if an Antichrist, the Christ is true. One must find it amusing when Milton's Satan accuses God of injustice, admitting implicitly that justice is. Oddly, in our age, Satanism preys upon the atheism resulting from science, though this would seem to refute Satanism as well as all other things assumed to be mere "myths."

That was Peck's first experience with one who thought he had made a pact with the devil. Such a pact has become a part of our music lore, and is known from the German story of a Dr. Faustus. In his Fifth chapter, Peck addresses exorcism, again very humbly and carefully. In one case, of an acquaintance, I joked- "We have lawyers. We can get you out of it." the argument is that one cannot sell what one does not own, and in the most fundamental sense- relative not to other men but to this cosmos, we do not own ourselves. But comedy is suitable to many of these things. As we say to children, "tell the monsters under the bed they are not real- that always gets them, and they go away. It is good to teach ourselves and children to be fearless in the dark.

I was taught the principle of Luke 10 in a dream: I was visiting the old woman across the street, when the Devi appeared as a specter on the wall of her living room. I ordered it, "Go back to Hell where you belong." It only laughed at me, and I was terrified. Then I remembered, and ordered it "In the name of Jesus...," and the specter vanished.

Another time, one appeared possessed in a critical care ward, and said to me, "I hate you." I said to her, "What is YOUR name." It growled at me, "You think you are so smart!" But this is from the story of Jesus and the Gerasene daimoniac. This countered the possession by recalling the person to herself, while at the same time using that thing about how names give authority over these things. Abuse causes confusion in one subject to it, until he finds the word, "bully."

There is some question, though whether and when one should mention such things at all in a particular therapy circumstance. To talk of possession and demons and such in a wrong way can give these things that reality they lack, fed with the blood of our own imaginations and bad passions. Anger projects intention where there is no conscious intention, though these things too are often just below the surface, and one may not awaken them until they can be dealt with. There is a sense in which the desire for tyranny can be said to lie beneath in every soul that does not do the painful ascent, or find penance, and so most will be susceptible in various ways. There is a strand of Biblical and Christian anti-idolatry that rejects superstition, and in common with science, welcomes the purging of the air of the spirits once thought even by men as Augustine to inhabit there. Peck seeks a science of evil and a medical model (p.36), and suggests that evil be recognized as a psychiatric category. These things can be addressed by common sense, law, and by science on the basis of an appeal to nature- evil is real in the injustice humans do: the hatred, malice, envy, shame-hiding and scapegoating (Peck, p. 72-3 ), such that indeed can possess a human soul- and to which we are all susceptible.

One distinction is that between what might be called "mythical evil as the things of imagination, and genuine evil, such as tyranny. The relation of twentieth century totalitarianism, on both the left and right, to the rise of the anti-Christian in modernity is noted by Jung, if by few others. We are not so concerned about the obsessions of George, so long as he does not hurt someone. Another joke is that a certain musician is "Not a REAL Satanist- he never beat a woman who did not consent." The line is in that evident, and the distinction.

The study of evil itself is suggested to cause madness for some, or result in a madness (Peck p. 260-262; See Carl Jung, The Red Book). Another effect can be the brightening of the light against the background of the cruelty of which some inhabiting the human form are capable. The just and true appears most brightly against the background of the lie or crime.

The first thing an encounter with evil might do is make us vengeful, spiteful, etc, and this would be to succumb. Self purification was a method in preparing for demonstrations led by Martin Luther King Jr. The teaching here is that of Jung regarding shadow and the projection of the shadow (Peck, p. 46), in what can be called the first layer of the soul, the "personal" unconscious. Most men may spend most of their lives in faction with their fellows, fighting shadows, attributing intention where there is none. Evil, vice, sin and badness admit of subtle and various degrees and kinds of intention difficult to discern, but discernible. In court men are sometimes convicted of crime, which must be intentional. in the legal sense. That no one does wrong willingly, making themselves worse, is a Socratic teaching. This is the same, and may considered as preceded by, the teaching of Jesus regarding the log and splinter (Matthew 7:3-5), the very teaching behind what usually appears as a paradox: Judge not, lest ye me judged, measure for measure. What we do to others is done to our souls, and conversely, it may be that if we do no injustice- or did none- nothing at all could harm us. Minding our own business is then another first rule, properly understood, avoiding first the temptation to return injustice for injustice. The Hippocratic oath is "do no harm," and Socrates teaches that the just man harms no one (Republic Book I).

Peck notices that when people lie, they know the truth about justice and assume it in evading it (p. 76). At the basis of an appeal to nature regarding a psychiatry of evil might be a hypothesis such as that the soul of man is good by nature, while evil and injustice then necessarily result in inner faction. Our true selves- a faculty called "intellect" or nous in the Greek, this sleeps in man, and is suggested to be the cause of natural as distinct from conventional conscience. As Paul writes, the truth about natural right is apparent in a way to all men, in a way that is sufficient for some purposes, despite human ignorance (Romans 1). A study of the nature of the soul may be the first armor in the study of evil, as the more collective or deeper levels have been known to leave some in madness, even if they avoid vengeance or returning evil for evil. Retaining the distinction between nature and convention, on one hand and the ancestral and the good on another, Socrates turns philosophy to the question of the nature of the soul and the good of the soul by nature. Here we see for example that wholeness" is not both good and evil, but simply good, and the evil cannot be whole. There are different kinds of opposites- some complementary and some factional. A suitable symbol indicating the mystery might be the statue of Mary standing with the moon beneath her feet.

That no one does wrong willingly, because it is contrary to our own self interest in the most significant of all senses of self interest, that of our true selves- because of this teaching, the question arises of compassion for the wicked- since they are suffering a fate worse than anything one evil could do to them. Compassion for sinners is a mark of the genuine Apostles and visions such as Fatima. Yet the hope that these might simply cease to be rather than be separate eternally, is not granted (Letter of the 12 Apostles).

Our psychiatry attempts to be value free like social science, then suddenly, regarding narcissism, sociopathy and psychopathy, we again encounter certainty regarding first principles- thankfully if there is a theoretical inconsistency. One word that comes up as a principle is empathy- the evil of course do not regard or care for others as themselves, violating the "golden rule." This rule itself assumes that we know our true self interest, and do not wish harm to ourselves. Suicide and murder are subtly related, as in either case, one strikes at man.

Peck mentions these two categories, but surprisingly says that what he means by evil is something different (P. 75). He focuses on the wolf in sheep's clothing, which would pertain also to the psychopath. This is different still from the persona that attends the shadow, as discussed by Jung- it would be a more intentional use of the mask. Evil being adept and versed in contemporary psychology, we see tyranny intentionally use the mirror accusing opponent of versions of what they themselves have done or are doing, neutralizing public or voter opinion by the time their crimes are revealed. One committing election fraud can get their opponent to criticize questioning elections, etc.

And is it just "me," or do our humanistic psychiatrists not focus more on "narcissism" than is warranted? An interesting test study might show that such personalities tend toward psychiatry. Yet none of these cite the teaching of Aristotle regarding magnanimity, let alone the two thousand year tradition of the virtue of humility. Lao Tzu is even older: "Merge with dust."

Bullying too may be identified as a category on the way to sociopathy, if not quite there yet, picking on certain ones, rather than the whole of society. Sociopathy in the descriptions seems related to psychopathy as second to first degree crimes, characterized by outbursts, rather that slow, methodical, deliberate plotting.

The first answer of Plato and Socrates to therapy for evil might be law and punishment, and the strength and certainty of law may be the crucial way to limit the effects of evil generally. Socrates argues that the just man harms no one, and that deserved punishment is a benefit. Peck opens with the Augustinian teaching to hate the sin and love the sinner, but punishment of crime is not contrary to forgiveness and mercy. Forgiveness takes us out of the inner division that results in our anger when we encounter genuine what is called evil. While no one knows what it is, everyone knows that it really exists, as demonstrated by the extremes.

The work of Peck- the author of The Road Less Traveled, raises the question of Christianity and psychology or therapy. Christians as such rarely practice psychotherapy, though The very word therapy comes from an early Egyptian Christian sect, referring to the catharsis or purging of Christian penance. But psychotherapy is a different tradition, arising out of science and medicine. Jung teaches that we have a psychology today because of the loss of faith, and the psychoanalyst replaces for us the priesthood and confessional. Hence, few Christians practice clinical psychology or psychotherapy as such, and as with the priesthood, it may be a rare soul that is able to care for souls or can do more good than harm in a clinical setting. Accusing psychiatry of sophistry, we like to say, "Look what happened LAST time we had knowers of the soul!

Power as an end and the duplicity of the lie are two characteristics of persons who have succumbed to evil, and these are both going to be difficult to understand, as well as why they go together. p. 176-7 What is said about this by the philosophers is that power is, like money by nature a means, to be used to some purpose, these means somehow become ends or take the place of ends, and so are unlimited desires that cannot be fulfilled. The lie, in the eponymous sentence of the book (p. 75). A third point is that evil has to do with murder, somehow centrally (p. 42). Peck focuses on how evil aims to destroy life in general, especially in the analogical sense spoken of by Jesus (p. 43). This can be broadened by reference to the imago Dei that man is. The murderer tries to put out his own light in the enterprise of the lie, since the light in us also convicts us. The evil choose to side with the wrong side of themselves.

In his second chapter Peck encounters a set of parents who gave as gift to a younger son the very gun used by his older brother to commit suicide. This is a very strange action and therapeutic event. While one might agree with relocating the kid out of the house, the confidence of Peck in sending him into the system- where drugging would be assured even then- may not be the cure he seeks.

One attractive point about Peck is that he has a place in his psychology for the question of the health of the soul, the unspoken assumption at the root of every diagnosis. He addrsse this on p. 125, where he writes that while there are of course many differentces of opinion regarding"exactly what constitutes human potential," still...

there are a sufficient number of men and women in all cultures and at all times who have achieved in their full adulthooda kind of gracefulness of existence so that we can generally say of them" "They have become truly human." By which we mean their lives seem almost to touch on the divine. And we can study these people and examine their characteristics [here Peck refers to Maslow, Motivation and Personality] Briefly, they are wise and aware; theyenjoy life with gusto, yet face and accept death; they not only work productively,but creatively, and they obviously love theoir fellow human beings, whom they lead with a benignity of both intent and result.

One does not recall Maslow addressing leadership, as it is called, nor that it matters much in his study what these men and women are doing with their time spent 'in the zone.' There is a thing called grandmother virtue, a wisdom that emerges naturally, more and less guiding each family and tribe. We suggest that it is theoretical wisdom regarding the nature of man, and that is this that is the genuine psychology as well, with every practical implication regarding the things said and done in counseling and therapy.

The human capacity for the honorable, the noble, the beautiful, the virtuous, excellence, and the wise- these things may also be what allows for the perversions of the human soul beyond the animal. One is example is psychopaths targeting women or children in some hate-filled obsession, unmistakably related to the anima or child archetypes in the soul- if it is difficult to say just how they are related.

It could once be said, and in a slightly modified form might still be said, that no one mistakes the hero and villain in a human drama. This is to present an argument contrary to the Jungian Joseph Campbell, who considers the hero to be a conjunction of both good and evil. Indeed, human character and person has various fascets- sometimes we are in the position of the hero, with an opportunity to protect the vulnerable from abuse by the powerful. Other times, the same one may have to take care that he does not become as the villain. In one facet, he is nephew, but in another uncle, sometimes as Abel to his bother, but is there a danger of becoming as Cain? So the human soul is cut, shaped and polished in its relations.

All evil is injustice, but not all injustice is evil. While justice is the whole of "ethical" virtue, evil, we hypothesize, is a corruption of the mind, or what the Aristotelians call "passive intellect." It may be thought or imagination that is corrupted, if mind is assumed incorruptible.

The Catholic rite of baptism includes a renunciation of evil in its vows: The baptized one is asked, Do you renounce Satan? And all his works? And all his pomps? the one baptized answers, "I do."

Plato's Republic (382a-c) contains a statement that is a bit mysterious in the context of the purging of Homeric poetry: The lie between the soul and itself- one would least want to hold a lie in that place. In arguing that the gods do not lie, Socrates tells Adeimantus:he section reads:

That surely no one wishes to hold a lie about the most sovereign things to what is most sovereign in himself. Rather, he fears holding a lie there more than anything...

"...to lie and to have lied to the soul about the about the things that are, and to be unlearned,and to have to hold a lie there is what everyone would least accept- and that everyone hates a lie in that place most of all."

And here Socrates explains: For the lie in speeches is a kind of imitation of the affection in the soul

It is quite likely that one's view of the cosmos- the two and three part cosmos- goes with or corresponds to the orders of one's soul, which is about the ends and hence the priorities, and how these compare to the nature of the soul in general. This would occur by nature if the soul is indeed the imago Dei (Genesis 1:26; 9:6). The Allegory of the Cave and Divided Line are more about these forms than linguistic universals.

One hypothesis addressing the difficulty of why projection of the shadow should occur in the first place is that even as all men by nature seek to know, the soul itself by nature seeks self knowledge- so much so, and so naturally that we will be shown our flaws and sins one way or another, and so if we do not look at ourselves with this first level of the unconscious, we will fight shadows outside ourselves. The added anger is a clue when facing genuine sin in others, which projection aside, does exist- thought projection adds to the natural perception.

For some reason, I have been unable to read Dante and Milton. I do not think the scriptures are Homeric? I'm not sure why- I love Milton's prose. It IS hard to imagine things like Luke 10 with Rev. 12, for example, and one would think any attempt would be helpful- like the joke that Satan objects to tyranny!

Jesus on the Beam and Splinter

https://mmcdonald77.wordpress.com/2016/04/09/jesus-on-the-beam-and-splinter/ via @mmcdonald77

Jesus and the Geresene daimoniac

https://mmcdonald77.wordpress.com/2022/11/02/jesus-and-the-geresenes-daimoniac/ via @mmcdonald77

This shows a rare example of someone doing something that actually makes things better:

Rabbi And The KKK, Snap #809 - The Klan http://www.wnycstudios.org/story/rabbi-and-kkk-snap-809-klan/ via @snapjudgment

Peck draws from two studies of especial note that I will add to my reading list, and should have read already:

Erich Fromm. The Heart of Man: It's Genius for Good and Evil.

Buber, Martin. Good and Evil.