Dimitris said:
The need, demand or Search for Meaning is, therefore, a phenomenological corner-stone (a key criterion) for the possession of a Soul before AND after its confrontation with Evil which is the absolute negation of Meaning. In this sense, Evil often functions as an 'acid-test' for the Soul, for the flowering or suppression of its halmarks (eg empathy, virtue, capacity to love etc).
But this does not mean that this is either the "meaning" or the cause or, indeed, the abstract Reason of Evil.
I agree. The healthy human psyche thrives upon and is oriented toward Meaning. Existential angst is generated upon confronting the Meaningless, and often one tries to impose a meaningful context to Evil to decrease that angst.
Meaning (as the cornerstone of the soul's existence) is natural to the healthy human constitution, while the Meaning-less is Alien and destructive. Whatever the cause or causes that have placed Meaninglessness in Existence there is no reason to imply usefulness to the healthy human condition because of this causality. Learning to overcome disease has one purpose: health.
Yet that does not mean disease is necessary for one to enjoy health. Overcoming Evil is only necessary for healthy becoming as long as that Evil exists. Insofar as healthy becoming is, in its essence, independent of Evil, the latter has no inherent meaning other than as possibly an unavoidable byproduct of a greater existential Movement or Cause.
In other words, the Meaningless may be an effect of a greater Cause based in Meaning, but in and of itself is a toxic result that has no place in healthy existence, and its overcoming is simply a clean-up operation to complete the original Causal Movement that generated it. Thus, I believe, Evil is not an inherent part of reality, but a result of a transition not yet completed, meaningful in a greater context, and meaningless in and of itself.
Dimitris said:
Although I have great respect for Lobaczewski's "Ponerology", as an empirical description of a particular manifestation of Psychological Evil (Psychopathy) from the perspective of mainstream psychiatry, I don't think that such an empiricist clinical methodology can make us any wiser about the causes and mechanisms whereby Psychopathy becomes so pervasive in the higher echelons of political, economic and military Power as to merit the term 'Pathocracy'.
I disagree. Psychopathy, the corruption of the psyche, is the causal foundation of Pathocracy (its organized collective form). Empirical understanding such as that of Ponerology may not be the complete picture of the phenomenon, but it is the basic de-mystified picture, where the psychopath is stripped of gaudy trappings of the ritual, hyperbole and myth used to manipulate and deceive.
An artist learning to draw the human form, must understand human anatomy, and the first and foremost part of anatomy studied is the human skeleton. Ponerology provides this bare-bones view of the psychopath and pathocrat. It may not be the full, detailed and embellished view, but without it there is grave risk of confusion and getting lost in the hyperbolic complexities of the psychopathic construct.
The reason Empirical Science developed in the first place was to overcome the manipulative confusion of religious superstition, and the vast array of disempowring fiction passing off as esoteric knowledge (such as that which resulted in the burning of "witches"). In dealing with the psychopathic and pathocratic phenomenon empirical methods are the last thing a rational human being would want to neglect.
Dimitris said:
But I would still doubt that such a 'diagnosis' or 'label' can make these traits, utterances and actions more comprehensible than they already are to those - like our friend, Durand - who simply brand them as "evil men" and refuse to have anything to do with them - "period!"
It is neither diagnosis nor label, but a comprehensive set of observations upon which rational responses can be based. Unfortunately, although we may try to "refuse to have anything to do with them" such an attitude is unrealistic and one of denial because THEY certainly insist on having something to do with us!
In addition, limiting understanding to the empirical methodology described in Ponerology is precisely that:
Limiting the understanding, and there is absolutely no reason to do so. Coming to the conclusion that empirical descriptions, however, contribute nothing to understanding the psychopathic and pathocratic state of affairs is simply limiting the understanding from another direction.
Dimitris said:
Let me put my earlier question about Cryptocracy and its Occult underpinnings in another way: What is the crucial qualitative difference between, on the one hand, the psychopathy of American serial killers (like the Boston Strangler), ritual mass murderers like Charles Manson or a serial child killers trading in "donor organs", and, on the other hand, the above-listed assortment of 'Pathocrats'?
I do not believe one needs to necessitate Occult Initiation as the difference. For one, because serial killers (otherwise termed violent sociopaths) have often had Occult inclinations and have used Occult symbolism in their gruesome "work". Manson is, in fact, a case in point here.
Second, all psychopaths are not violent sociopaths, and few psychopaths can organize others of their kind into pathocratic organizations. Even so, psychopaths of all varieties can be involved in the Occult, yet not all are. I must note here that I do not deny the existence of an Occult Cryptocracy both as a front to manipulate the masses and as a source of empowerment and "diabolic inspiration" for Pathocratic systems.
I do believe, however, that to see these Cryptocracies as more than a specialized expression of Pathocratic tendencies would be an unecessary complication of the issue, similar to saying every Pathocrat is the pawn of some kind of extraterrestrial influence, and waste time trying to deal
exclusively with the influence instead of the Pathocracy that is its tangible expression.
That many are may be true, but without an empirical understanding of the psychopathic/pathocratic phenomenon all we do is place the phenomenon in the context of a paradigm whose elements have been moulded mostly by the Pathocrats themselves in order to give them an aura of invincibility. The same is true for the Occult influences.
Occult Initiation is a formalization of expressions of spiritual or esoteric entropy. In a way, it is of a religious nature, with its own hierarchical structure. A healthy human may or may not be religious. If he/she is, that religion is of a benign nature. A psychopath may or may not be religious. If he/she is, that religion is of a diablic nature. In both cases of psychic health and psychopathy, furthermore, a more spontaneous esoteric tendency can be evident, and in the psychopath this takes the form of anti-spirituality or entropic esotericism.
This I believe is a symptom of psychopathy, and useful as such in understanding it. I do not believe, and see no evidence, that Occult or Cryptocratic organization is
the distinctive hallmark of a Pathocrat, although it can be a common symptom in Pathocratic organizations and as such should not be neglected.
In my view, empirical understandings such as Ponerology can be the bare-bones foundations of approaching psychopathy. The more organized esoteric forms of Pathocratic expression, on the other hand, including non-physical influences not of our conventional perceptual framework, can be the flesh that covers the skeleton, and activates its organic mobility. Without the skeletal foundation, however, I believe that ultimately any attempted understanding of psychopathy and Pathocracy, including Cryptocracy would end up in a collapse of utter confusion.
