{"id":2383,"date":"2005-02-08T12:24:02","date_gmt":"2005-02-08T17:24:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/?p=2383"},"modified":"2024-10-27T17:59:45","modified_gmt":"2024-10-27T21:59:45","slug":"a-strange-omission-wheres-scott-peck","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/?p=2383","title":{"rendered":"A Strange Omission: Where’s Scott Peck?"},"content":{"rendered":"

There’s a big article in The New York Times right now<\/a> about defining evil, in terms of human psychology. The opening paragraphs state:<\/p>\n

Predatory killers often do far more than commit murder. Some have lured their victims into homemade chambers for prolonged torture. Others have exotic tastes – for vivisection, sexual humiliation, burning. Many perform their grisly rituals as much for pleasure as for any other reason.<\/p>\n

Among themselves, a few forensic scientists have taken to thinking of these people as not merely disturbed but evil. Evil in that their deliberate, habitual savagery defies any psychological explanation or attempt at treatment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The article goes on to talk about particularly heinous crimes – John Wayne Gacy, for example. Are there some people, on this planet, who are not just deranged, or cunning criminals, or off-the-charts violent … but actually EVIL? Dare we even ask this question? Religious people ask it all the time, but psychiatrists?<\/p>\n

The article pisses me off on a ton of levels – it’s condescending, some of the quotes drip with moral relativity (you know: abu Gharib compared with the beheadings by terrorists – only they’re called “insurgents” in the article) – you know. All that CRAP.<\/p>\n

But what REALLY bugged me is that Scott Peck’s name is not mentioned ONCE in this article about investigating the nature of evil. He wrote the book on this! People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil<\/a>\"\"<\/i>, his follow-up to The Road Less Traveled, Timeless Edition: A New Psychology of Love, Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth<\/a>\"\"<\/i>, is an investigation into evil. Peck is a psychiatrist, and so he had much trepidation about even “going there” – because a psychiatrist isn’t supposed to judge, isn’t supposed to have that kind of thinking going on. But through his many years of working with people (especially with kids) he came to believe that there are people on this earth, he calls them “people of the lie”, who are evil. They are not outwardly villainous, or BAD. As a matter of fact, they are the opposite. They are smiling, VERY concerned with appearances, outwardly impeccable, and inwardly impervious to their own imperfections. Not only impervious, but unWILLING to believe that they are not perfect.<\/p>\n

Peck came to this unorthodox belief in working with troubled teens. The teen would come into his office, sullen, obviously depressed, whatever. Peck would try to draw the teen out. The teen would be very teenager-ish and incommunicative. So Peck would ask to meet with the parents. And time and time and time again, Peck would realize that it was the PARENTS who were “sick”, the PARENTS who were “wrong” – that the teen’s depression was NOT a sickness, but a rational response to the inherent un-healthiness of his parents. It’s subtle, too – Peck is usually not talking about open physical abuse. He’s talking about those people on the earth who ACTIVELY cut off their children’s growth. It’s chilling to think about, but I’ve met a couple people like that … I’m sure you all have, too. (And in movie terms, I would say that Mary Tyler Moore in Ordinary People<\/i> is a perfect example of a “person of the lie”. She cannot grow. She cannot admit that she even NEEDS to grow. Deep in her heart, she wishes that her older son had survived and her younger son died. And she punishes her younger son for living. And yet when she is confronted about this, she REFUSES to even consider that it might be true. HER behavior is above reproach. She cannot bear criticism, or examination of any kind. She is cunning, intelligent, and puts on a good act. Everything she does is a LIE. Peck calls this evil.) Anytime Peck would mention to the parents that maybe it was THEY who might need to change, the resistance that would come up was usually so rock-hard and so ferocious that they would pull their kid out of therapy and disappear forever. “No, no, it’s not US – there is NOTHING wrong with us … NO, it’s HIM, it’s our SON, what is wrong with our son???”<\/p>\n

A fanatical resistance to change, introspection, and examination.<\/p>\n

If you haven’t read People of the Lie<\/i> – it’s fantastic. If anything, it will really get you thinking.<\/p>\n

I don’t know why Scott Peck’s name isn’t mentioned in that article I linked to – it seems quite strange. One of the themes of his “lie” book is that psychiatrists are afraid to even TALK about this stuff … because labeling someone as “evil” is a grave grave responsiblity, and obviously one that should not be taken lightly. You must know what “evil” is, and in terms of PSYCHIATRY – there is no definition yet. See what I mean? Priests could tell you what evil is. They don’t have a shyness when it comes to admitting that there IS evil. The therapeutic community, though, is necessarily cautious about admitting this.<\/p>\n

Scott Peck was calling for his fellow therapists and psychiatrists to at least open the door to the possibility that real evil exists.<\/p>\n

Anyone who takes up this field of study would HAVE to acknowledge their debt to him.<\/p>\n

\n