The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty by Simon Baron-Cohen

Apr 06, 2013 ♆ BookAddict ~ La Crimson Femme rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction

This is more a 2.5 star which as people who follow me know, I truncate, not round up. This book started out very riveting. The theory proposed in this book is about the impacts based on the lack of empathy. There were two interesting concepts of Zero Negative and Zero Positive people. Basically Borderline, Psychopaths and Narcissists all fall under the Zero Negative. Different forms of autism falls under the Zero Positive.

The ideas in this book are interesting to read. What Mr. Baron-Cohen post...more This is more a 2.5 star which as people who follow me know, I truncate, not round up. This book started out very riveting. The theory proposed in this book is about the impacts based on the lack of empathy. There were two interesting concepts of Zero Negative and Zero Positive people. Basically Borderline, Psychopaths and Narcissists all fall under the Zero Negative. Different forms of autism falls under the Zero Positive.

The ideas in this book are interesting to read. What Mr. Baron-Cohen postulates did make me think. I can see his point regarding the how a person with zero negative and zero positive would behave. His research and theories on why these people became w/o empathy dropped me from a 4 star down to a 3 star. Yes, at the beginning, the first two chapters were very good and had me at a 4 star. At chapter 3 I started to lose interest. This is because he correlates a person with zero negative stemming from how their mother raised them. In each example, it was abuse, neglect, etc from a mother. Where is the father in all of this? Were these children through immaculate conception? This immediately made Mr. Baron-Cohen lose respectability in my eyes. To his point, he does point out it is genetics and a combination of nurture which causes a person to be a zero negative. The examples he chose left a bad taste in my mouth and I'm not even a mother.

This "mommy didn't love me enough" or "daddy abandoned me" type of victimized mentality doesn't work for me. Whenever I read this, I consider the writer yet another 1st world privileged philosopher who is only looking at "1st world" problems. Is this judgmental? You betcha. I'm tired of people using their parents as excuses for their behaviour. The victim mentality is detrimental because it focuses on how the person is helpless. I'd rather focus on the series of events which shaped a person and for them to be a survivor.

Now, Mr. Baron-Cohen did indicate while an abusive or neglectful mother isn't the only variable causing a child to become a psychopath, there was a positive correlation. He does also mention that the tie can't be that strong because otherwise, we'd have more psychopaths running around in the world. However, the book is already tainted for me because his victim theory.

Now, there are some concepts in here that are interesting. He explains that it's not that people are evil. It's because their lack of empathy which causes them to behave in manners that don't make sense to the general populace. If people w/o empathy treat the another person as a thing, one can understand how atrocities such as Jew concentration camps and the genocide of Armenians can occur. With this, I agree. That is why the military teaches it's soldiers to call them "targets". It removes the humanity of it.

Still, this book is running at a 3 star, especially the section on the zero positive. I couldn't stop thinking of the Observers from Fringe when he describes the pattern recognition in the zero positives. The highly functioning abilities of systematizing is fascinating. What was disturbing is seeing how I possibly could have been categorized as a zero positive in my early teens.

Chapter 6 is what brought the book down another 1/2 star. While it is nice to think every person can be "rehabilitated" with the single flower nurtured in the desert analogy, it's a fantasy. Here's the problem, in order for rehabilitation, the person must want to rehabilitate. I don't believe people want to change. In fact, I'd like to propose that more than the majority of people prefer not to change. I see it time and time again in both personal and professional life. People don't like to know their flaws and they don't want to improve. They'd rather hide their flaws from themselves and rationalize it is other people. So his idea to help people overcome their "lack of empathy" while noble is a pipe dream in my book. If he had specific methods of how to accomplish this, it would be a different story. Instead, he concludes the book with condemning the death penalty and explaining that "evil" actions of people are not exactly under their control. Instead, it is a combination of chemical, genetic and nurture. We should instead try to help rehabilitate all these people rather than sentence them in jail for years or kill them. These are the fancies of an ivory tower academician untouched by the stubborn people of the real world.(less)

7 likes · like · see review

Mar 05, 2012 Avolyn Fisher rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2012, psychology, nonfiction

I find that this book could be a lot shorter than it is, for the fact that it is repetitive and offers a lot of hypothesis and questions rather than answers or true discoveries. It regurgitates what has already been mentioned about narcissism, autism, antisocial disorder, and borderline disorder. I am not an expert on psychological studies but it appeared to only state what has already been stated and suggest that there are links between those disorders and levels of empathy in certain individua...more

5 likes · like · see review

Oct 19, 2011 Richard marked it as to-read

Shelves: evil, non-fiction, philosophy, really-deep-thinking

Yet another book to add on evil. I probably should start a separate shelf.

A collection of reviews —
• Read the informative New York Times review: From Hitler to Mother Teresa: 6 Degrees of Empathy .

• Another more personal review is at the GuardianUK, subtitled A book that gets to the heart of man's inhumanity to man .

• The Wall Street Journal is mildly critical: The Problem With 'Evil' .

• And one more from The Economist: Medical diagnosis of malfeasance .

For the record, my Empathy Quotient, per t...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jul 23, 2011 Cecilia Solis-sublette added it · review of another edition

The study of empathy has always been an interest of mine because it seems there is scarcity of it in today's day and age. When a person texts and drives, are they thinking empathetically or are they being selfish? What about the psychopath who can kill her own child in cold blood and then go about partying as if nothing has happened? The author of this study attempts to explore these phenomena in this book as he tries to redefine evil to mean an "absence of empathy". Of particular interest, is t...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 24, 2013 Owen rated it 4 of 5 stars

This is a good read on the nature of empathy and how the lack of empathy manifests itself in different ways. It presents a lot of good facts and various perspectives on how empathy or the lack therof operates. I found his breaking down the lack of empathy in narcissism, psychopath, and borderline personality (Type-N, Type-P, and Type-B, respectively) to be extremely information and helpful way to classify 'evil.' Furthermore, his explanation that empathy sometimes temporarily fades is helpful wi...more This is a good read on the nature of empathy and how the lack of empathy manifests itself in different ways. It presents a lot of good facts and various perspectives on how empathy or the lack therof operates. I found his breaking down the lack of empathy in narcissism, psychopath, and borderline personality (Type-N, Type-P, and Type-B, respectively) to be extremely information and helpful way to classify 'evil.' Furthermore, his explanation that empathy sometimes temporarily fades is helpful with dealing with more real world situations (as behavior is combined not just by traits, but by situations that may lead to the suppression of otherwise dominant traits, such as empathy in some people). Finally, Baron-Cohen draws on a great observation on the extreme Systematizing tendencies of people with autism, and explaining how that inhibits empathy, but for positive purposes.

However, one major point of critique: The author places an extreme emphasis on empathy as a solution to the problems. In the end, he suggests it so much so that super-empathy would be a beneficial response.

However, I would suggest that empathy is only part of the solution; empathy is a response to attempts to response and help those who are hurting or to prevent from hurting someone else. AS such, it is always seeking to reach towards an ideal of the other being in a happy, well-functioning state. However, the the nature of reality as such is that we can not always help, and sometimes we must pick winners and losers. For instance, if we witness a potential murder in progress, it would be counterproductive to empathize with the aggressor; to do so would prevent protecting the victim. There is a winner and a loser; and empathy inappropriately place allows the aggressor to be the 'winner.'

This is the sort of drama that plays out in the legal world (although with actually committed crimes), where rules have a greater prominence that just empathy. It is the rules about how to determine an oppressor and a victim that regulates empathic feelings towards persons, as sort of a 'codified' expression of cultural sympathies and empathies that tells individuals who to empathize with (a fusion of justice and empathy, two initially divergent strands in Western theorizing on morality). Unlimited empathy constantly runs up against the reality of a limited good. However, Baron-Cohen argues fora different direction with showing greater empathy towards perpetrators and against the death penalty. Perhaps Baron-Cohen is correct in that regards, but seems to show an unbridled expectations on the value of empathy.

All-in-all a very good read and very scientific (although, the theory as presented is oversimplified). However, keep in mind his expectations on the value of increasing empathy is not as scientific.(less)

like · see review

Sep 15, 2012 Bob Nichols rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This is a disappointing book. The author overstates the case for empathy. "Empathy itself is the most valuable resource in the world," he writes. Since uncaring leads to cruelty and inappropriate social responses, he argues that we need more empathy. If it were as simple as asserting that it be so.

The author defines empathy as only a good thing as far as social relationships are concerned, but some have argued that it is this capacity to identify with what goes on in others that gives sadists p...more This is a disappointing book. The author overstates the case for empathy. "Empathy itself is the most valuable resource in the world," he writes. Since uncaring leads to cruelty and inappropriate social responses, he argues that we need more empathy. If it were as simple as asserting that it be so.

The author defines empathy as only a good thing as far as social relationships are concerned, but some have argued that it is this capacity to identify with what goes on in others that gives sadists pleasure or possibly underlies homophobia. Still, we know that the author doesn't mean that kind of empathy. He says the good kind of empathy varies across a range (the empathy bell curve) from zero to much, and argues that both environmental and genetic factors interact in ways that determine where one falls within that range. That suggests we can work on enhancing empathy (teaching, good habits, etc.), but it also suggests that a good part of human kind is inherently predisposed to anti-social behavior.

Then there are the empirical measures the author uses for empathy. Empirical suggests scientific, but the measures seem subjective and likely miss the essence of what he's after. Among his top ten measures, he asks whether one enjoys caring for others, whether it's hard to know what to do in a social situation, and whether it bothers one to be late meeting a friend. It's common enough to not really "enjoy caring" for others, but that's not the same as wishing them ill and acting to harm. It could be the awkwardness of a social situation is due to boredom or frustration with superficiality. As for lateness, does this mean a good part of the non western world is not empathetic? If these questions seem nit picky, look at these measures from another perspective: Are some "non-empathetic" sociopaths good at manipulation because they are acutely aware of how others will react to what they do?

Something more fundamental is missing from this discussion of "the science of evil." The widespread cruelty throughout history by leaders and collective groupings of people points in the direction of deeper biological factors that override empathy. These, for example, may involve the role of alpha leaders and their followers, and tribal dynamics that result in the need to hate, demonize and dehumanize. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Jul 26, 2012 Kristi Thielen rated it 4 of 5 stars

Not an agonizing recitation of evil acts, this book is about scientific studies to determine why some people are so lacking in empathy.

The environment vs. genetics issues are explored and how a deadly mixture of both may create the monsters who engage in cruel acts. But the book also explores the minds of people who seem to lack empathy, but do not commit evil acts, because they have a very structured moral code. (People who fall somewhere on the autism spectrum.)

As the mother of a 27-year-old...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jul 17, 2012 Painting rated it 5 of 5 stars

I am no scientist but I found this a very accessible book on the complex and interesting subject regarding what is a very key aspect of human personality. My feeling is that this author wants to reach anybody who is dismayed and confused about news reports on the rise of autism and what appears to be a frightening increase of anti social behavior. I really like how the author proposes the importance of empathy as a basis to further research and and clarify the current definitions of problem pers...more

like · see review

Jul 05, 2012 Michael George rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: psychology

The Science of Evil
S. Baron-Cohen
Basic Books, 2011

What is evil? This is a question that is addressed in the first chapter of this book. The point of view is adopted to discuss this from the standpoint of a lack of empathy. In the second chapter, empathy is discussed as if it were a measurable characteristic, with a variation in the human population characterized by a “bell-shaped curve”. The concept of “empathy quotient”, or EQ, is introduced, and we are introduced to a questionnaire whose resul...more

1 like · like · see review

Jun 06, 2012 Niall rated it 4 of 5 stars

I would suggest there is little in this book that is actually new, although it is useful to have a comprehensive argument about the nature of human cruelty in one place.

The book discusses the physiological and genetic links to poor empathic response as well as various forms of zero-negative expressions of zero empathy (Borderline Personality Disorder; Anti-Social Personality Disorder; Narcissism) as well as zero-positive ones like Asperger syndrome.

It does, in spite of the often difficult subjec...more

like · see review

Feb 21, 2012 Ryan rated it 3 of 5 stars

These are always hard reviews to write. Why? I am not anywhere as close to as educated or intelligent as these people. I do my best, but I believe I really just suck up the outline and carry on.

The author just so happens to be a professor of Developmental Psychopathology in the Departments of Psychiatry and Experimental Psychology at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom. As well as the Director of the University's Autism Research Centre, as if he wasn’t busy enough with the other e...more These are always hard reviews to write. Why? I am not anywhere as close to as educated or intelligent as these people. I do my best, but I believe I really just suck up the outline and carry on.

The author just so happens to be a professor of Developmental Psychopathology in the Departments of Psychiatry and Experimental Psychology at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom. As well as the Director of the University's Autism Research Centre, as if he wasn’t busy enough with the other engagements. On top of those achievements he also has a host of rather famous family members. Simon has a son who is an independent film maker and a daughter who is a song writer. Also, two brothers who are award winning film directors. His cousins are a famous computer scientist, a composer, film producer, playwright, University of Washington professor, and of course the famous comedic actor Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat.) Simon also has over thirteen independent book authoring's in the field of psychiatry. Impressive really.

In any event, in this short book, The Science of Evil, Simon attempts to root out what in the human condition or physiology causes evil. He starts by taking a very broad generalization of the Nazi experiments on Jews during World War 2 and then attempts to explain it as a series of empathy failures cause by dysfunctional parts of the brain. As the book progresses, Simon gives you more information about which parts of the brain make up what he calls the 'Empathy Circuit' and gives real world clinical examples of people that suffer some shortage on the empathy scale which can be directly attributed to reduced or no activity in these portions of the brain. The clinical studies are interesting; actually the whole book is interesting but starts to drag at the end. The last heading particularly feels like more of a rant or diatribe than any sort of case study. Simon, at the wrap, states that he feels that the current DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is currently wrong, more to the point that it needs to be revised. According to Simon, nearly every mental disorder can relate back to a failure in empathy and that this is in fact the one unifying thing about mental disorders. If we could, for instance, re-categorize anorexia using the empathy classifiers (as anorexia patients display many of the same signs of other mental illnesses when using the empathy grouping system) would actually do a lot of good for the patient (hearing disorder in relation to their sickness only embellishing the issue and does not help to solve it, whereas hearing that it might simply be a lack of activity in a certain portion of the brain removes the blame and hurt associated with the illness.)

He starts to lose me in the diatribe at the end. Not that I can dismiss the arguments, but simply that I do not necessarily agree with some of his conclusions. For instance, while Simon is vehemently against the death penalty for anyone showing a lack of empathy in a killing (because they were in essence experiencing brain malfunction), I openly welcome it. Furthermore, when he goes to explain and tie together the conclusion about how the Nazi's could systematically (nearly) wipe an entire sect of people without a single empathetic person in the process I think he fails.

Basically he breaks it down to:
Person 1: My job was to arrest the people on the list. That's all.
Person 2: My job was to ensure that these people got on a train. That's all.
Person 3: My job was to ensure that the people got off the train and through the door. That's all.
Person 4: My job was to ensure that the people got into the room. That's all.
Person 5: My job was to ensure that I pulled the lever once the people where in the room. That's all.
Person 6: My job was to move and dispose of the recently deceased. That's all.

This seems shallow and I can't condone the thought that these people didn't know what was going on. I think Simon's epithetical argument makes sense on a one off 'mental disorder' situation but not in a culture wide setting. It just felt like a cop-out to me. He also postulates that a lack of empathy is the reason the world is going to shit, and if only we could all possess more empathy the world would magically fix itself. I personally find the notion romantic and whimsical, but exactly that.

Overall, I would suggest Jon Ronson's 'The Psychopath Test' before this and if they enjoyed that, would I than shoot them to this book. Perhaps that’s simply personal choice as a reader.
(less)

like · see review

Dec 12, 2011 Oscar rated it 4 of 5 stars

Simon Baron-Cohen addresses the question of evil with an emphasis on moving away from biblical or religious theories towards scientific and psychiatric explanations. Baron-Cohen argues that much of what can constitute cruelty towards others is a result of a lack of empathy, that is, lacking feeling towards the victim and seeing them more or less as objects. In the book, Baron-Cohen argues that empathy exists on a spectrum, and while anyone can lack empathy for a brief moment, the book argues tha...more

1 like · like · see review

Nov 25, 2011 Laura rated it 3 of 5 stars

Recommended to Laura by: NPR

Shelves: being-human, headology, madness

Baron-Cohen (cousin of Sasha) is a professor of developmental psychopathology, specializing in autism research. He wrote this book to suggest that the scientists shouldn’t leave evil to the theologians; that much of it could be researched and quantified. Often using machines that go ping!

I think he’s right about that. People with certain disorders that damage their ability to have empathy for others (psychopathic, narcissistic and borderline personality disorders specifically) are overrepresent...more Baron-Cohen (cousin of Sasha) is a professor of developmental psychopathology, specializing in autism research. He wrote this book to suggest that the scientists shouldn’t leave evil to the theologians; that much of it could be researched and quantified. Often using machines that go ping!

I think he’s right about that. People with certain disorders that damage their ability to have empathy for others (psychopathic, narcissistic and borderline personality disorders specifically) are overrepresented in prisons, while those on the autism spectrum aren’t. So it’s not just lack of empathy that drives criminal behavior. Prof. Baron-Cohen suggests that the difference comes from the fact that those on the autism spectrum develop systems to understand the world, which leads to codes of behavior; those in the unholy trinity of P/N/B don’t. My mind goes to Dexter Morgan. And Batman.

But as the book forthrightly acknowledges, it doesn’t deal with evil on a national level; the sort of horrific cruelties an individual can commit as part of communal exercise – like forcing parents to kill their own children, or men in the death camps being forced to put the noose around their friends necks -- then go home and be kind to their own children. There’s no real answer offered to Eichmann in Jerusalem. Or how a doctor in Utah (who he singles out) could put a target on the body of a man tied to a chair for five volunteer members of a firing squad to shoot at.

Having done some death penalty work in my time, I’m struck that juries in my state tend to give mercy when the defendant asks for it, and offers some reasons for it. Maybe that gives the jury, even a death qualified one, the opportunity to develop empathy. Not sure how that works in other states.

He suggests that we could reduce the violence in the world if we were all more empathetic. Well . . . maybe. Individual on individual violence? Sure. But as long as violence is a way systems enforce themselves, it’s gonna be used.

A quick read – I read it in one sitting – with a nice empathy test in the back and some tips for spotting other people’s personality disorders.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Sep 21, 2011 Tom rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: medical-behavioral-psychology, non-fiction

I picked up this book because the dust jacket mentioned the role of mirror neurons in how people understand one another. Baron-Cohen argues that mirror neurons are only a small part of a more elaborate system he calls the empathy circuit. Using a questionnaire (a copy of which is in the book) that measures empathy, what he calls the empathy quotient, he focuses on those who measure zero. As you might anticipate, psychopaths are on this end of the scale. What is interesting is that he also places...more I picked up this book because the dust jacket mentioned the role of mirror neurons in how people understand one another. Baron-Cohen argues that mirror neurons are only a small part of a more elaborate system he calls the empathy circuit. Using a questionnaire (a copy of which is in the book) that measures empathy, what he calls the empathy quotient, he focuses on those who measure zero. As you might anticipate, psychopaths are on this end of the scale. What is interesting is that he also places borderline personalities and the narcissistic personalities there as well. He calls this group zero negative, meaning, they measure zero in empathy and have negative personality traits. Naturally, there are a range of scores that can be found in these groups and, when you look at the questions used in the instrument and try to imagine someone who scores zero, you know they are, thankfully, rare. Perhaps more interesting though, he describes those with Asperger's syndrome and autism as zero positive, meaning that though they have zero empathy, they do not generally hurt others. Rather, they choose to avoid social situations altogether. They may be strong in something he calls the systemizer quotient meaning they are able to see patterns where others don't.

These classifications are underpinned by reference to neuroimaging studies that have focused on those areas of the brain that have been found to be involved in empathy. Those who score low or zero in empathy have underactive empathy pathways as demonstrated by these studies.

The framework described here leads to lots of questions: what problems are encountered by people who score very high on the EQ? What environmental cues are important in encouraging and empathic state (as distinct from trait)? This is especially interesting in the health care setting where, I expect we have many situations that blunt people who are normally empathic. However, is it always useful to be very empathic? If a surgeon were to be highly empathic, would he/she be able to do their job? (less)

3 likes · like · see review

Sep 16, 2011 Lumpenprole added it · review of another edition

Shelves: 2011, autism-spectrum, philosophy, politics, psychology, borrowed

I can't really review this book, for the simple reason that I do not trust it, and am simply unsure what to believe and what not to. Perhaps my attitude is unfair, but it was these two passages that pushed me into Sgt. Schultz mode:

Some people compare him to the character that Dustin Hoffman played in the film Rain Man, which was based on a real person (Kim Peek) with autism, because... (p. 106, my edition)

Consider that back in 1542 Martin Luther wrote a pamphlet entitled Against the Jews (calli...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jun 30, 2011 Diana rated it 4 of 5 stars

Simon Baron-Cohen tells us that what we call "evil" is in reality a total lack of empathy, the result of either genetics, abuse, or both.

Recently, I happened to catch on TV part of the current Casey Anthony trial. A forensics expert had been called to testify regarding insect activity present in the deceased child's body when found. While he was giving his testimony the camera panned to Ms. Anthony. Considering the graphic nature of the subject and the fact that the deceased was her own child,...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jun 27, 2011 Kate Woods Walker rated it 3 of 5 stars

For those who follow this subject, there's not much new here. And I don't necessarily agree with all the author's assertions. (Are psychopaths, borderlines and narcissists all truly "zero empathy?" I doubt it.) But he presents his case fairly well, and every genuine voice in the battle against "evil" deserves a hearing.

Baron-Cohen's work in The Science of Evil rests on the narrow fence between pop psychology and serious research. And with glaring flaws like the twice-made proposition that the wo...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jun 22, 2011 Ed rated it 5 of 5 stars

I met Simon Baron Cohen in 2004 as part of my exploration of the role of empathy (and lack of it or autism) in my field of conflict research. He is an extraordinary person to discuss these issues, with and his knowledge and compassion for the children he treats for development disorders strongly evident. His book 'The Essential Difference' played a major role in the evolution of my theory of 'induced autism' in conflict.

His latest book extends his thinking into the role of zero degrees of empat...more I met Simon Baron Cohen in 2004 as part of my exploration of the role of empathy (and lack of it or autism) in my field of conflict research. He is an extraordinary person to discuss these issues, with and his knowledge and compassion for the children he treats for development disorders strongly evident. His book 'The Essential Difference' played a major role in the evolution of my theory of 'induced autism' in conflict.

His latest book extends his thinking into the role of zero degrees of empathy in the commission of acts of extreme evil. Since I met him, neuroscience has moved on rapidly and his latest book brings up to date the 10 areas of the brain that seem most implicated in empathy, or its lack, and also the half a dozen or so genes whose expression also contributes a genetic dimension to empathy or its absence. Identical twin research suggests that empathy has about 60% heritability, but the sample size and peer review process is probably not complete for that to be taken as proven.

I literally read this book in one sitting (despite the trans-Atlantic jet lag) and would strongly recommend it to anyone interested in the problem of evil from a scientific viewpoint, and especially if you are interested in reducing it! Though the author warns at the onset: don't read this book if you are sensitive to descriptions of appalling evil, as that is how he starts out defining what he is trying to understand, though there is far more to the book than this. He systematically un-picks the different empathy deficiencies of borderline personality, psychopath and narcissistic disorders and how they have at their extreme zero degrees of empathy. His accounts of the genetic and developmental causes of these disorders is strongly evidence based, though in the case of extreme narcissism the research is so far limited.

He also builds on his work in The Essential Difference on the systematizer/empathizer contrast and provides a convincing case that many of those with zero empathy are not borderline, psychopath or narcissistic but in fact use their strong systematizing to build very rigid moral structures. Extreme systematizers also have given us most of our science and technology.

The only weak part of the book is that Simon stops too soon and his phenomenal ability to develop ways to address issues of autism is not fully deployed. He ends with ten steps to increase empathy in the world and even grow in those with zero degrees. I would have loved another full chapter on where now.(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Dec 06, 2011 Ishmael Seaward rated it 4 of 5 stars

The word "evil" is a label we attach to people who do bad things. That doesn't mean we really understand what is going on. The author is quite specific in what he wants to accomplish: Stop talking about evil, which can't be defined or measured, and talk about empathy (or the lack thereof). Empathy can be measured; this is supported by years of research. With the advent of fMRI, parts of the brain can be identified that are involved in empathy. There are 10, and the author describes each one, whe...more

1 like · like · see review

Dec 07, 2012 Sue T rated it 2 of 5 stars

Headline - very interesting stuff, but a lot wasn't new enough for me.

The major point is that people deemed "evil" (brutal killers, cold-blooded criminals, sociopathic manipulators, etc.) lack the capacity for empathy. Baron-Cohen (a very famous autism researcher and cousin of Ali G/Borat/Bruno!) puts forth data and theory on all the various contributors to that absence of empathy. It is a good conceptualization, in that he covers biological differences and early environment. The early environm...more Headline - very interesting stuff, but a lot wasn't new enough for me.

The major point is that people deemed "evil" (brutal killers, cold-blooded criminals, sociopathic manipulators, etc.) lack the capacity for empathy. Baron-Cohen (a very famous autism researcher and cousin of Ali G/Borat/Bruno!) puts forth data and theory on all the various contributors to that absence of empathy. It is a good conceptualization, in that he covers biological differences and early environment. The early environment theories are based in attachment, which is one of my favoite families of theories, so I didn't learn much new there.

Baron-Cohen tries to coin some terminology to describe people on various positions on the Empathy Spectrum. He says people with Borderline, Antisocial (Psychopaths), and Narcissistic Personality Disorder (which he annoyingly calls Type B, P, and N) are "Zero-Negative" on the empathy scale, while people with Autism are "Zero-Positive." That whole labeling and comparison felt a bit forced. He formulates that the thing that makes people with Autism's "Zero" a "Zero-Positive" is that their brains are also strong at systematizing. That holds water to a small degree, but it is a reach for me to consider the trait of systematizing to be the differentiator between a person with Autism Disorders and a Sociopath.

He does cite lots of interesting brain imaging research that points to the existence of "empathy circuitry" in various parts of the brain as well as the potential for "empathy genes." Fascinating stuff!! I also really "got" the distinction between the two components of empathy - the affective part and the cognitive part. The idea that different brain regions light up for those aspects is really cool.

Overall -- There was some interesting research and some interesting conceptualizations. For people who are curious about the origins of Borderline, Narcissistic, and Psychopathic Personalities or who don't know about the importance of early attachment to the development of empathy, this book would be a lot more interesting.
(less)

like · see review

Sep 29, 2011 Scot rated it 5 of 5 stars

Those looking for lots of data and a plethora of polysyllabic terms to discuss nuances of neuroscience taxonomy will probably find this volume skimpy, but I enjoyed this quite readable summary translation for the layman of current work on studying how and when empathy is evoked and transmitted through the human neurological system.

The author--a cousin of the famous actor Sascha Baron Cohen (he of Borat fame)and a leading expert in his field of psychopathology--also provides a framework for testi...more

1 like · like · see review

Jun 11, 2012 Brian Clegg rated it 3 of 5 stars

I've been a real fan of previous books by Simon Baron-Cohen like The Essential Difference, so opening this was one was a pleasant prospect. What I found was a book that wasn't bad... but that could have been a lot better. I got the impression of a book that had been rushed out without a lot of work going into it.

The thesis at the heart of the book - that one of the important 'circuits' of the brain is the one dealing with empathy, and that individuals sit on an empathy spectrum, with some residi...more I've been a real fan of previous books by Simon Baron-Cohen like The Essential Difference, so opening this was one was a pleasant prospect. What I found was a book that wasn't bad... but that could have been a lot better. I got the impression of a book that had been rushed out without a lot of work going into it.

The thesis at the heart of the book - that one of the important 'circuits' of the brain is the one dealing with empathy, and that individuals sit on an empathy spectrum, with some residing at zero degrees of empathy - is an interesting one. Baron-Cohen introduces us to three key personality types he defines as 'zero-negative' including psychopaths, plus types that are 'zero-positive' like those with Asperger's.

In a way both of these definitions are odd, in that his zero-negatives can actually have a lot of the kind of empathy that involves being able to read another person's emotional state, and his zero-negatives can have a lot of the kind of empathy involved in sympathising with someone else's suffering. But this is certainly interesting stuff.

He also points out that empathy is important because arguably it is erosion of empathy that makes not only individuals do bad things, but states get into long term conflicts, like the situation in the Middle East.

And that's great as far as it goes (though he offers no actual significant mechanisms for dealing with these empathy issues). But the whole thing does not read particularly well. The worst section is the one where Baron-Cohen describes the different areas of the brain that seem to be involved in the 'empathy circuit' (not by any means a single region) this is dull and an impenetrable list of acronyms with very little benefit to the reader. For the rest, there is a lack of feeling of context. We are given this assertion about empathy, and these people with zero empathy (except where they aren't) without any way to make use of this information.

So, a disappointment. With a significant re-write, more context and more readability this would be the 'valuable' and 'significant' book the puffs on the back claim it to be, but as it stands it's not quite there. Or am I just lacking empathy?

Review first published on www.popularscience.co.uk and reproduced with permission(less)

like · see review

Aug 30, 2011 Phil rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

As I'm a layperson on the subject matter, (psychology, not Evil- though I hope never to be more than an occasional amateur in that) I'm not able to adequately comment on the scientific or clinical aspects of this topic. My most critical negative comment, however, is that this was what is precisely lacking here. The title presents the subject matter as 'Science of...' but the content was superficial. I appreciated the author's many assertions, and his theory, but I would have liked to see more ev...more As I'm a layperson on the subject matter, (psychology, not Evil- though I hope never to be more than an occasional amateur in that) I'm not able to adequately comment on the scientific or clinical aspects of this topic. My most critical negative comment, however, is that this was what is precisely lacking here. The title presents the subject matter as 'Science of...' but the content was superficial. I appreciated the author's many assertions, and his theory, but I would have liked to see more evidence. I recall that he only cited one original clinical study, and there wasn't enough hard evidence. More investigation is needed, and should be cited. This is not a book for the practitioner.

Those caveats behind me I can now go on to my other critical feedback. I largely agree with the framework the author presented for the basis of Evil being the lack of Empathy, in humans, and I believe that Evil is a human construct. I am an atheist who believed that Evil was in some way ignorance, a misdirection that could be carefully remedied through compassionate, persistent care by others. Evil, for me was a ghost, until like millions of others I witnessed the atrocities of the late 20th century. I remain an atheist, but I believe in Evil now, and this is what attracted me to this book. Was there a way to reconcile my ethical judgements and resentments of the actions of many fellow human beings with my humanistic perspective? Was there a solution here for one such as myself, adrift in the universe with only my firm belief in the scientific method to guide me?

Perhaps there is, but I want to see more clinical investigation to support this author's theory, this book is a start, and I hope we will see more in a future edition. I genuinely hope he will pursue his interest in this subject and will share his findings. I would like to see some peer reviewed science that is funded by scientific bodies without a biased point of view.

There was a lot of social commentary here, and there was a lot of opinion that could have been presented as an appendix. 3 stars, I enjoyed it, but it was television when I wanted a carefully planned and executed documentary.

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Apr 10, 2012 Vince rated it 2 of 5 stars

This is a "scientific" study of evil. I found it somewhat interesting but it, for me, bogged down in the brain and hormone oriented explanations. It struck me it was sort of justifying that the performers or evil might not be responsible due to their level of empathy.

With all the positive references to other researchers in the field I got the impression that maybe Baron-Cohen wants validation and acceptance of his theory of empathy re-inforced or validated. then I also got curious if he wanted t...more

like · see review

Feb 17, 2013 Bookseller Cate rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: subject-psychology, subject-neurology

This is my share of a dual review posted at Boxes of Paper.

Like shelterdowns, the title of this book caught my eye, but in my case it was the term empathy. I've become interested in empathy since discovering the work of Dr. Brené Brown, who researches the connection between wholehearted living, empathy, vulnerability and shame.

One of Dr. Brown's catchphrase/explanations is "Shame is 'I'm bad"; guilt is 'I did something bad." This is echoed in The Science of Evil when the Baron-Cohen quotes Peter...more

like · see review

Mar 11, 2012 Dan rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: library

Having recently finished Steven Pinker's great book on the decline in balance, I wanted to go a little deeper into one of the topics that book covered - the role of empathy. The Science of Evil by Simon Baron-Cohen (Sacha's cousin; he briefly mentions him in the book) gives an enticing peek into the potential of neurological research into better understanding why people harm others. His hypothesis is that certain people lack empathy. Of these, some act in a socially negative way while others, mo...more

like · see review

Jul 17, 2011 Andrew rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is really an amazing book, maybe the best cognitive science book I've read this year. Baron-Cohen starts with a pretty simple premise on evil: that evil should be viewed not from the traditional Judeo-Christian definition or the modern western judicial definition, but rather as a failure of human empathy. From that point on, he discusses evil very little, and gives the reader a fascinating study of human empathy, and in so doing he writes a very moving case for why empathy is likely the mos...more This is really an amazing book, maybe the best cognitive science book I've read this year. Baron-Cohen starts with a pretty simple premise on evil: that evil should be viewed not from the traditional Judeo-Christian definition or the modern western judicial definition, but rather as a failure of human empathy. From that point on, he discusses evil very little, and gives the reader a fascinating study of human empathy, and in so doing he writes a very moving case for why empathy is likely the most important human trait we possess.

Baron-Cohen argues convincingly that human beings as a whole experience empathy on a spectrum, from very high to very low, with most people falling somewhere in the middle, and very few people falling at the extremes. At the negative extreme (which he calls Zero-negative) are people we classify as psychopaths, and at the other extreme are those rare people who feel empathy in such extreme degree that they virtually give their lives over to the well-being of others. He gives Bishop Desmond Tutu as an example of this kind of modern saint. Baron-Cohen also discusses in detail people he terms 'Zero-positive', people who are incapable of experiencing empathy because they suffer from conditions like autism and Asberger's, but who tend not to be violent and who can often use their conditions to make a positive contribution to society.

Maybe the most fascinating part of the book is Baron-Cohen's discussion of the most recent brain and genetic studies available on empathy. Having done many of these himself with various colleagues, he identifies specific genes that have been found to play a crucial role in how people experience (or don't experience) empathy, and he makes a lot of well-backed claims on what this might mean for the empirical study of empathy as a universal human trait. He draws equally on the years he's spent working in a clinical setting, so the reader here gets a very rare mix of touching anecdotal stories of actual patients and cutting-edge cognitive science. The book is short and very readable, and I really can't recommend it enough. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Jan 14, 2013 Victoria rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Light to moderate readers of science and pyshology

It was an interesting, easy-to-read exposition on what scientists think they know about why humans sometimes tend towards cruelty. The prose is extremely repetitive, which in some cases is needed, but in most it's a bit irritating. The book is already short enough, and I feel like there were some questions left unanswered. Basically the underlying message to take home from this book is that "evil" can be equated to a lack of empathy. The most adaptive and practical way to live is to have a moder...more

like · see review

Dec 17, 2011 Erin rated it 1 of 5 stars

This is by far the most unscientific and poorly written pop-psychology book I have ever read. The book opens with a paragraph about Jews being made in to lampshades & soap by the Nazis, which is propaganda that was clearly discredited decades ago and moves in to more personal anecdotes and mythology. It is hard to take seriously an author who would perpetuate such misinformation. It is also disturbing that someone with clearly very little basic understanding of his subject could have won awa...more

3 likes · like · see review

Apr 22, 2012 Christi rated it 4 of 5 stars

A very interesting book. There is a lot of info about specific brain regions and whatnot, however, that got a little too scientific and technical for me. As a parent of a daughter with aspergers, however, I found the info interesting but a little too science minded v/s real world applicable to really connect with.....I think sometimes you just have to be there to get certain things:)...no offense intended. I think overall Simon Baron-Cohen is one of the best in this field of research, but I thin...more

like · see review

title link	preview: The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty
avg rating	preview: The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty Goodreads rating: 3.59 (623 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11044200-the-science-of-evil?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1305334632l/11044200.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11044200-the-science-of-evil?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty by Simon Baron-Cohen[/url]

The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (9)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Simon Baron-Cohen

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Science of Ev...

The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combineOther Editions (9)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Simon Baron-Cohen

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Science of Ev...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (9)