Reply #55: ponerology is pseudo-science

[Fulcanelli]

How do you quantify "evil"?

Psychology is the sloppiest of sciences. There is no "science" in this book. It is a sloppy attempt to quantify that which cannot be quantified. There is no "evil" gene or atom. One cannot measure how "evil" a person is by anything that can be examined with an objective eye. Therefore ponerology is a pseudo-science put forth by pseudo-scientists.

If someone steals a loaf of bread - this is wrong. But is it evil?

What if they are stealing the bread to feed their children?

Is it still evil?

The right wing fascists would love this idea that evil can be quantified. Protestors against the war or against nafta could be seen as evil for protesting. What if one throws a rock or a bottle? Is that person now evil?

The entire idea that there is a science of evil is actually evil itself.

What if the psychopaths become in charge of the institutions that define evil? They are psychopaths so we know that they will stop at nothing to crawl their way into some level of credibility and respectability, so why wouldn't they pose as the arbitors of who and who is not evil?

There is a serious lack of critical thinking going on here and I think we need to examine this more clearly.

So how can evil be quantified?

If it cannot be quantified - then it is not a science. For science is only concerned with that which can be measured.

This is why the book never saw the light of day. And why it was not published by a major publisher. The idea is not only pseudo-science and ridiculous, it is dangerous.

What is going on here is that"evil" is a very clear spiritual problem. But instead of examining this aspect they are trying to find a way to explain this concept through a scientific modality.

It doesn't work. That is why we must examine those who would put forth such a philosophy.

The fact that there are so many at DU who have no idea what science is supposed to do is the most disturbing part of this problem.