The Social Psychology of Good and Evil

Abstract

ARTHUR G. MILLER (ED.): The Social Psychology of Good and Evil. New York: Guilford Publications, 2004, 498 pp., $60.00, ISBN 1-57230-989-X The tragic events of 9/11 dealt a shattering blow to the lives of its and their families as well as to the collective political innocence of the American public. The fear and horror generated by this heretofore unimaginable catastrophe will undoubtedly be embedded in the minds of millions of Americans for many generations to come and, much like the Holocaust, many will continue to search, perhaps fruitlessly, for words and insights adequate to explain how anyone, or any group of individuals, could perpetrate such unspeakable acts of inhumanity. The President and his minions rose to the challenge by choosing to use evangelical rhetoric about evildoers that initially resonated with a public desperate for apprehension and, certainly in many cases, revenge. Yet, when the terms and evildoer began to be used by the President to broad-brush whole countries allegedly representing an axis of evil, it required little reflection to recognize that he was indulging in phantasmagoric excess and, as a result, these moralistic terms were largely, though not entirely, dropped from his political lexicon. Obviously a national crisis of this kind called for something more definitive, objective, and morally nuanced. Thus, it is apt and timely that this book about the nature of good and evil has been recently published. It is a book of eighteen chapters in all, each authored or co-authored by academicians, social psychologists, mostly from major American universities. The first chapter, written by Philip G. Zimbardo of Stanford University, makes a cogent case for the transformative power of social situations to induce rather ordinary individuals to inflict pain or harm upon others. In one of his experiments, subjects who could hide behind the shield of anonymity-deindividuation-were more likely to inflict shock upon victims than those who were made to feel uniquely identifiable. In another experiment, using the quotidian streets of the Bronx and PaIo Alto, Zimbardo abandoned used but good-conditioned cars. Within ten minutes the car in the Bronx was vandalized and within two days nothing of value was left to strip. By contrast, the car in PaIo Alto remained unscathed over a period of five days. Zimbardo explains the disparate outcomes on the basis of differences between how much or how little residents care about what happens on their own turf in their respective communities. In one of his most telling and renowned experiments, Zimbardo recruited subjects from the community and university to serve as guards and prisoners in a simulated prison. This experiment was prematurely terminated because the guards soon became overly sadistic and the prisoners showed signs of emotional breakdown. Zimbardo wisely advises that we must, to combat malevolent transformations, learn to appreciate the extent to which ordinary people can be induced into committing evil deeds. The 2nd chapter, written by Ervin Staub, of the University of Massachusetts, explores the origins of helping and harming others. When basic needs are thwarted or frustrated, Staub posits, a sense of well-being is undermined, replaced by an inability to self-soothe and a tendency to engage in harm-doing. As Staub points out, because basic needs are varied and often conflict with one another, a person may do something interpersonally harmful or self-destructive, even though that individual may also harbor the need for physical security. A case in point would be the suicide bomber. Others may act contrary to the need for security by saving lives, as did many rescuers of Jews in Nazi Germany. Staub concludes this chapter by recommending that we evaluate the goodness of societies in terms of how well they fulfill basic human needs. In the 3rd chapter of this book, Roy F. Baumeister, of Florida State University and Kathleen D. …