Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Milgram's experiment and the situation
Stanley Milgram’s interpretation of the results from his experiments
The psychology of evil summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Milgram's experiment and the situation
Evil is a part of all of us, and is often cultivated by circumstances and situations that one finds themselves in. People that are unable to empathize with others are considered evil and due to their lack of empathy, place their own needs and desires above others. They exhibit self-absorbed, selfish and narcissistic behaviors. In contrast, people who are considered good are very selfless, empathetic, compassionate, altruistic and sacrificial. This paper examines the nature of evil and how it relates to the human mind and religion. It defines evil and seeks to examine the contribution of the person and the situation to evil events. If the person or situation is at blame. The study examines the role of evil in psychology studies like Milgram’s experiment and the Stanford Prison experiment. It also compares and contrasts individual evil to collective evil. Finally, it examines collective evil in situations and systems that enable it.
Good and Evil
In trying to define evil, “The Free Dictionary” presents; that which is “morally bad or wrong; wicked”. That which
…show more content…
They told her to go back home because there was a road block ahead where people who didn’t speak a certain language were being stopped and killed. She immediately turned back, but was considerably shaken by the experience. It is also one I will never forget because I nearly lost my mother.
There was an entire semester where we could not attend school. We would go to school once a week to pick up homework packets and turn in the ones we had previously worked on. There were weeks where we could not go out to eat because my city was covered in smoke and my school received bomb threats. I remember my librarian crying because her husband was in town when a bomb went off and she didn’t know if he was okay. I remember my friend joking on the tear gas that suddenly enveloped us while we tried to study algebra.
Claudia Card sees evil as “foreseeable intolerable harms produced by culpable wrong doing”, thus she builds her theory and views around this definition (Card, pg.3). She distinguishes wrongdoing and evil acts by the consequences and results of those actions, and to what extent they harmed the victim. She sees evils as actions that ruin people’s lives that achieve significant harm that causes permanent or difficult to recover from damage (Card, pg.3). However, she does make a point of differentiating evildoers from evil people, as they do not always have the purposeful intention to do the evil that they cause (Card, pg.4).
The problem of evil is inescapable in this fallen world. From worldwide terror like the Holocaust to individual evils like abuse, evil touches every life. However, evil is not a creation of God, nor was it in His perfect will. As Aleksandr
Claudia Card describes the harm of evil as an intolerable harm. An intolerable harm, Card means a harm that mak...
Shirley Jackson’s short story “ The Possibility of Evil” is about a little old lady named Miss Strangeworth. She thinks she’s in charge of the town and to make sure it’s free from all evil because her grandfather built the first house on Pleasant Street. At first Miss Strangeworth is a nice little old lady, worrying about people and wondering what others are up to. Then in the middle of the story she becomes a little rude to a few of the townspeople. In the end Miss Strangeworth thought she was getting rid of the evil in the town, but in reality she was causing evil in the town by showing her true colors and being extremely mean and cruel to others. Don’t judge a book by it’s cover because people aren’t always what they seem to be.
In the world of the living, evil is not inherent and can change or influence a person’s aspect of the world based on the community they are in. Evil is the force of things that are morally wrong and the matter of suffering, wrongdoing and misfortune (Merriam Webster). Evil is not inherent because an evil community can change or influence a person’s way of thinking, can consume people the more they are relinquished to it, and can mold a person when a person has power or feel a certain way. Furthermore, evil can be claim as not inherent from reading about Josef Mengele, Stanley Milgram, and the Stanford Prison Experiment. I will persuade my point that evil is not inherent from the sources that depicts the claim of evil.
What drives people to act in an improper way, is not evil, but rather a lack of empathy hardwired into their brain. When a
The scale of evil cannot be interpreted or defined. “Evil” does not even belong to a clear part of speech in the dictionary. Some argue that evil is a psychological complex, a noun. Others perceive it as a word attached to reality after the fact, an adjective. Joel Feinberg acknowledges the different layers of evil, but peels them back to reveal one common distinguishing factor, regardless of part of speech. While pieces of his argument are compelling, Feinberg ultimately argues that evil causes confusion beyond explanation. Feinberg’s argument crumbles when emotion is removed from the situation because “evil” is, oftentimes, the simplest resolution to a given problem. If these acts of evil are viewed with understanding, evil becomes entirely
The following analysis deals with the nature and source of evil and whether, given our innate motives and moral obligation, we willingly choose to succumb to our desires or are slaves of our passion. From this argument, I intend to show that our human nature requires that we play into our desires in order to affirm our free will. This is not to say that our desires are necessarily evil, but quite the opposite. In some sense, whatever people actually want has some relative value to them, and that all wanted things contain some good. But given that there are so many such goods and a whole spectrum of varying arrangements among them, that there is no way we can conceive anything as embodying an overall good just because it is to some degree wanted by one or a group of persons. In this light, there arises conflict which can only be resolved by a priority system defined by a code, maybe of moral foundations, which allows us to analyze the complexities of human motivation. I do not intend to set down the boundaries of such a notion, nor do I want to answer whether it benefits one to lead a morally good life, but rather want to find out how the constructs of good and evil affect our freedom to choose.
It is no revelation that humanity is fascinated by the subject of evil. So much th...
Are you evil? Is anyone really evil? What even is evil? Evil is an adjective and noun. In the noun sense it means something that is bad, not good, foul. In the adjective form it means that a person, place, or thing is bad in elementary terms and demonic to the extreme. In a religious standpoint, it means to commit sin, or something similar to Satan. Religiously, evil means sin, and we all commit sin, but that does not really make us evil. The fact that we all have sin in our body the second we are born gives us the ability to act out a sin. Take two major events, 9/11 and the Holocaust, are the people who committed them evil? We refer to those both days as a day when evil happened, but are the people evil, or did they take advantage of the
The battle between what is right and wrong is a classic struggle that has existed from the beginning of time. The most honorable people face the crossroad of choosing either the angel’s path or the devil’s; one path leads to an honest yet difficult life while the other is an easy and selfish one. Throughout history, women have been portrayed as the reason of Man’s downfall. The male dominated world has created stereotypes to blame females for their defeats due to ignorance. Leo Tolstoy’s “The Devil” explores the dichotomy of the objectification of women as the angel and the devil.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, the brilliant mind behind the 17th century’s epic poem “Faust”, illustrates a combining structure of desire and self-indulgence. His idea was to capture the ideal image of good vs. evil and how easily it can be misconstrued. “Of all the great dualities of hum an experience 'good and evil' have been the most instrumental in shaping the beliefs, rituals, and laws, of Homo Sapiens.”(Argano)
If evil cannot be accounted for, then belief in the traditional Western concept of God is absurd” (Weisberger 166). At the end of the day, everyone can come up with all these numerous counter arguments and responses to the Problem of Evil but no one can be entirely responsible or accountable for the evil and suffering in a world where there is the existence of a “omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God.” Does the argument of the Problem of Evil or even the counter arguments help the evil and suffering of innocent human beings across this world? No. However, the Problem of Evil is most successful in recognizing the evil and suffering of the world but not presenting a God that is said to be wholly good and perfect to be blamed and as a valid excuse for the deaths and evil wrongdoings of this world.
Good versus evil is an eternal struggle, conflict, war, or a unification. Good exists while evil does as well, this is because without evil, there can be no such thing as good, and without good, there can also be no evil. The question exists that if there is an all-good & powerful God who is omniscient; omnipotent; omni-benevolent; then how can evil exist within such absolute terms?
The society we live in today has had the very concepts of good and evil gelled to that from much of mythology, in which they were based on the gods and their archenemies, the demons. With this concept, many others follow, forming the broad basis on which ideal characteristics of human beings today are built on. (Side, Corrie et al.).