The Psychology of Evil: Social and Clinical Applications

This 2-part workshop considers existential-humanistic perspectives on the psychology of evil. The morning workshop defines evil and considers why this topic is so important in contemporary times. Following a brief overview of the history of the concept of evil, three existential perspectives are considered along with social psychological perspectives. In the afternoon, the workshop considers misuses of the concept of evil in psychology and society. Building on the morning theoretical foundations, Drs. Hoffman and Granger discuss philosophically and research-informed existential responses to the problem of evil. These responses provide a path to hope.

Part 1: The Psychology of Evil: Theoretical and Research Foundations for Social and Clinical Interventions

In contemporary society, the label of evil is often utilized in potentially harmful ways. At the same time, we are witnessing an abundance of harm that could be labeled as evil. The nature of evil has been extensively debated in religious, philosophical, political, and psychological theory. In this presentation, we advocate that existential perspectives on the psychology of evil contribute theoretical insights that can inform both social and psychological interventions. A brief analysis of the history of evil informs a philosophically and research-informed definition of evil. The misuse of “evil” can be curbed through this definition. Common misuses include externalizing evil through metaphysical explanations, diagnosing and categorizing it as an oversimplification, and using the label of evil in social and political rhetoric to manipulate and influence people.

Three approaches to the psychology of evil can be derived from the scholarly literature. First, Rollo May (1969) developed an approach to understanding evil rooted in the concept of the daimonic, which he identified as natural tendencies or instincts that have the potential to take over one’s personality. This idea has been further developed by Diamond (2021, 2022, 2026). Second, Ernest Becker (1973, 1975) developed an approach to understanding evil rooted in the denial of death and perceived loss of personal significance. This theory has been further developed in Terror Management Theory (Burke et al., 2010, Pyszczynski et al, 2006, Pyszczynski & Diarra, 2026). Finally, Schneider (2013) developed a theory centered around polarization that can be applied to the concept of evil. An integration of these three theories with social psychological and depth psychology perspectives provides a foundation for understanding and constructively responding to evil in social, political, and psychological contexts.

Part 2: Clinical and Social Responses to the Psychology of Evil: From Despair to Hope

“Evil” has become a commonly used term in our society across social, political, and academic settings. Common misuses of the label or concept of evil include externalizing it through metaphysical explanations, diagnosing and categorizing it as an oversimplification, and using the label of evil in social and political rhetoric to manipulate and influence people. While the misuse of evil can cause harm, understanding these misuses and occurrences that can more properly be considered evil can be a source of hope. In this presentation, we begin by discussing in detail common ways that evil is frequently misused. Examples are used to clarify these misuses. Small group discussions are used to facilitate and deepen the understanding of these misuses.

Drawing on common misuses of evil, we draw on three established existential theories and relevant research to demonstrate responses to evil. First, we draw upon Rollo May’s (1973) concept of the daimonic, which is understood as “any natural function which has the power to take over the whole person.” Diamond (2021, 2022, 2026), drawing on May, has articulated how existential and depth psychologies offer constructive ways to engage with the daimonic, curbing its destructive potential and even channeling it toward constructive purposes. Second, Becker (1973, 1975) identified the fear of insignificance and the denial of death as sources of evil. Terror Management Theory, derived from Becker’s scholarship, has further clarified these processes and identified protective factors that can be applied to counter evil. Finally, Schneider (2013) discusses polarization in a way that illustrates its potential to cause harms that could be considered evil. He has further articulated strategies for depolarization (Schneider, 2020) that can help address these potential sources of evil. Illustrations are utilized to clarify social and clinical applications. Furthermore, an experiential activity is used to help participants develop strategies for responding to the potential for evil.

Know what’s Happening Next — before everyone else does.

Get App

Host or Publisher Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association