Diagnosis: "Evil"

A few days ago, the New York Times ran this article, "For the Worst of Us, the Diagnosis May be 'Evil'", reporting that, with respect to some "predatory killers," "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."  However, the Times assures us, "[m]ost psychiatrists assiduously avoid the word evil, contending that its use would precipitate a dangerous slide from clinical to moral judgment that could put people on death row unnecessarily and obscure the understanding of violent criminals."

The article is quite informative, and well worth reading.  It sounds some reasonable cautions about the mis-use of a term like "evil."  I cannot help thinking, though, that there is something jarring, troubling, and even -- well -- sad, about an account that, in my view, reveals how far "expert" thinking has travelled from traditional moral intuitions and commitments.  I was also a bit put off by the suggestion in the article that experts' desire to avoid imposition of the death penalty -- a desire I share -- warrants avoiding calling "evil" by its name.  As I have suggested elsewhere, arguments against the death penalty that require or invite denying the realities of human agency and moral evil are not, in the end, likely to amount to much.

Rick