EvilinModernThought:AnAlternativeHistoryof

PhilosophybySusanNeimanPrincetonUniversityPress,
358pages,
RenDescartes,thefatherofmodernphilosophy,begins
hisMeditations(1641)ontheselfanditsplaceintheworld
bysupposingthatademon,nolesspowerfulthanGod,
controlsrealityandsubjectshumanitytotheterrorof
illusion.Imagine,saysDescartes,thattheheavens,the
earth,colors,figures,sounds,andallexternalthings
cannotbetrustedtobetrue;nordoesthehumanbodyand
itssensesconveytheactualstateofthingstothemind.In
theseventeenthcentury,wrackedbyreligiouswarfareand
thewitchcraze,suchaclaimwasnotidlespeculation,but
spoketorealfearsthatpreoccupiedtheculturedelite.
TodaywecommonlyreinterpretDescartesproposalasa
thoughtexperimentremovedfromreality.Butshouldwe?
WhatifDescartesmethodologicalideaisnotan
intellectualexercisemeanttofreethemindfromreliance
ontradition,butaseriousanalysisofthepredicamentof
philosophyinthemodernage?Inhersuperbnewbook,
EvilinModernThought,SusanNeiman,Directorofthe
EinsteinForuminPotsdam,Germany,exploresthis
possibility.Sheassertsthattheproblemofevilisthe
guidingforceofmodernthought.Neimandefinesevilas
absolutewrongdoingthatleavesnoroomforaccountor
expiation.Evilismorethancrime:Acrimecanbe
ordered,fitinsomemannerintotherestofourexperience.

Tocallanactionevilistosuggestthatitcannot.The
contentofwhatisperceivedasevilmayvaryfromoneage
tothenext.Whatcountsislesstheparticularsofevilthan
itseffect.Evilthreatensourabilitytoactintheworldand
tounderstandit.Itraisesthefundamentalhumanquestion
ofintelligibility.Ifwecannotorderevil,thenbothpractical
andtheoreticalreasonarethreatened.Evilisjustlike
Descartesdemon:itshattersourtrustintheworld,
throwingusbackonourselvestotrytomakesenseof
thingsthataresenseless.
BeforetheEnlightenment,Christiantheologyinthe
Augustiniantraditionprovidedthedominantparadigmfor
interpretingevil.Calamitiesthatbefallus,whethertheyare
actsofnatureordeedsofmen,aretobeunderstoodas
punishmentforsinoraresultofdisorderthatenteredinto
creationwiththeFall.Ultimately,thepurposeofevilwas
todriveustorepentanceandrelianceonGod.Whenmen
ordevilscauseussuffering,saysMartinLuther,itisthe
alienworkofGodtoteachustohavepatienceandpeace.
NoCatholicofthetimewouldobjecttothisexplanation.
Nothingjoltsusmorerudelythanthisdoctrine,writes
Pascal,andyet,butforthismystery...weremain
incomprehensibletoourselves.
Certainlytherewerethosewhoprotestedtheological
acquiescence.Buttheywerefewinnumberandfrequently
condemned.NeimancitestheexampleofAlfonsoX,king
ofCastilleinthethirteenthcentury.Instructedinastronomy

byaJewishrabbi,thekingisreportedtohavedeclared,If
IhadbeenofGodscounselattheCreation,manythings
wouldhavebeenorderedbetter.Thislittlesentence,
writesNeiman,expressedtheessenceofblasphemyfor
closetohalfamillennium.Themisfortunesthatplagued
Alfonsosreignwereofferedasproofofhisguilt.Thestory
ofhislifebecameamoralitytalethatservedasawarning.
InhiscelebratedDictionary,PierreBayletookup
Alfonsoscause.BaylethoughtAlfonsorighttocomplain.
Realityisbadlydesigned,historylittlemorethanthe
crimesandmisfortunesofthehumanrace.Christianity
makesthingsworsebyteachingthetormentsofthe
damned.Evil,whethernaturalormoral,exposesthe
contradictionsofChristiandogmaconcerningGod.IfGod
isbenevolent,Hemustbeweak.Otherwisetheworld
wouldbebettermade.IfGodisomnipotent,Hecannotbe
benevolent.BaylemadeAlfonsothefirstEnlightenment
hero.Healsosignaledaseachangeintheunderstanding
ofevil.Acceptanceofevilasamysterywasnolonger
adequate.Eitherevilmustbeexplainedaccordingtohuman
reasonordefiedbythehumanspirit.
Neimansaccountoftheintellectualconnectionsamong
thosewhosoughttofitevilintoanorderedexplanationof
reality,especiallyLeibniz,Rousseau,Kant,andHegel,is
richanddetailed.LeibnizsTheodicy(atermhecoined)
rationalizedanddefendedthetraditionalviewagainst
Baylesattack.Theexperienceofmoralandnaturalevilis

thejustconsequenceoftheimperfectionofallcreated
things.Evilisthusametaphysicalnecessity.Thatthe
universeconformstogeneralnaturallaws,discoverableby
science,indicatesjusthowwellthecreationismade:it
doesnotrequirespecialdivineinterventiontokeepit
working.LeibnizjustifiesGodswaystomanbydeclaring
inessencethatGodcouldnothavedoneanybetterthan
Hedid.
TheLisbonearthquakeof1755exposedLeibniztoridicule
anddiscreditedtheefforttoexplainnaturalevilaspartofa
rationalscheme.Theearthquake,Neimansays,shocked
westerncivilizationmorethananyeventsincethefallof
Rome.Noonecouldjustifythearbitrarypunishmentofso
manythousandsofvictims.Inconsequence,Rousseau
arguedthatnaturalevilshouldbeunderstoodashavingno
inherentmeaning.Thepurposeofnatureistoprovidethe
conditionswithinwhichmanexercisesthefreedomto
becomehuman.Thisisanhistoricalandpsychological
processthatinvolvesconflictandsufferingandwhichis
thepropersubjectofphilosophyandtheodicy.Thathuman
natureisnotfixedbutsubjecttodevelopmentmeansthat
evilmight,atleastonoccasion,haveaconstructiveroleto
play.Inanycase,itisclearthatevil(thatis,moralevil)
comesnotfromthehandofGodbutisourowndoing.As
NeimansummarizesRousseau,wecandonomorethan
worryabouttheevilsforwhichweareresponsible.
KantfollowsRousseauinarguingthattheonlywayto

ordertheexperienceofevilinourlivesistoexamineour
responsibilityfortheevilswecommit.Butheremains
hauntedbytheawarenessthathumanityissubjecttotesting
byaninscrutablewill,oftenexperiencedasthevagariesof
chance.Thisisthetragedyofhumanexistencethatlives
onwrongidentifications,opportunitiesmissedandgrabbed
inthesplitofasecond...inshort,thepowerofthe
contingent.Wehavethedeepdesiretopenetrate
contingency,toknowhowGodandworldfittogether,but
thatdesireisneverfulfilled.Indeed,accordingtoKant,
providenceitselfrequiresthatwecannotknowit.Ifwe
did,thenouractionswouldinevitablybedeterminedbyour
efforttopleaseGodandobtainreward.Goodnessis
genuineonlyifdoneforgoodnesssake.Attemptstogive
extrinsicreasonsforvirtuedonotmerelyweakenvirtue,
theydestroyitsveryessence.Theonlyanswertothe
agonyofexistenceistheintegrityofourgoodintentions.
Wemustfollowwheretheyleadeveniftheybringno
happiness,andeveniftheyfail.
HegelrecoiledfromKantsstarkvision.Thesoleaimof
philosophy,hedeclaredinhisLecturesonthePhilosophy
ofHistory,istoeliminatethecontingent.ForHegelas
forLeibniz,observesNeiman,eliminatingcontingency
meansshowingthisworldtobenecessaryafterall.The
historicalprocessisaninevitabledialecticofhumanaction
inwhichevilaswellasgoodpusheshistoryforward.
Neimanalsoexaminestherebellioustraditionstemming

fromBaylethatdefiestheexplanationofevilandinstead
proteststheinjusticeofthehumancondition.Inthislineof
thoughtstandVoltaire,Hume,Sade,andSchopenhauer.
Thisisperhapstheleastinterestingchapterinthebook
becausethestoryofmodernskepticismisanofttoldtale
andtherearelimitstowhatcanbedonewiththeexpression
ofphilosophicaloutrage.(Ialsoremainpuzzledbythe
continuedfascinationofintellectualswiththerepellent
ravingsoftheMarquisdeSade.)Whatmarksthesewriters,
accordingtoNeiman,istheirinsistenceonfacingtheworld
raw:Experienceisjustwhatitseems.Thekeynoteis
hopelessness:Lifepresentsitself,saysSchopenhauer,as
continualdeception,insmallmattersasingreat.Ifithas
promised,itdoesnotkeepitsword....Ifithasgiven,it
doessoinordertotake.
MoreinterestingisNeimansaccountofNietzscheand
Freud,whofitneitheramongthosewhoseektoexplain
evilorthosewhodefyit.Thepreoccupationwiththe
problemofevil,assertsNietzsche,enervatesthehuman
spirit.Itsapsintellectualandemotionalenergyby
measuringtheworldinwhichwelivebyanidealworldof
purityandgoodnessthatdoesnotexist,willnotexist,and
neverdidexist.Theproblemofevilis...aproblem
humankindbroughtonitselfbycreatingidealsthatputlife
inthewrong.Freudsargumentproceedsalongsimilar
lines,althoughcouchedinhispsychologicalcategories.
Theattemptstomakesenseofhumanmiseryarefueledby
childhoodfantasiesandfeelingsoflove.Wewantasecure

worldliketheenchantedworldofnostalgicyouth.Thus
weprojectchildhoodstructuresontheuniverseatlarge.
Tofindasatisfactorysolutiontotheproblemofevilin
oneslifeisimpossible.
Iftheproblemofevilmadeforphilosophicaldifficultiesin
theeighteenthandnineteenthcenturies,especiallyafterthe
Lisbonearthquakedelegitimatedthetraditional
Augustinianparadigm,whatistobesaidtodayinlightof
theeventweknowbythenameAuschwitz?Eventothe
readersuspiciousoftheexceptionalismaccordedtheNazi
Holocaustafterall,thetwentiethcenturyisfilledwith
horrendousexamplesofintentional,systematicslaughter
Neimanstreatmentofthetopicisundeniablypowerful.
LikeLisbon,Auschwitzisaneventthatgrewinthe
intellectualimaginationovertime.Itacquiredsignificance
inrelationtothewebofbeliefsinwhichitoccurred.
Traditionalreligiousexplanations,suchasthoseofpious
JewswhoseetheHolocaustasajudgmentonanunfaithful
people,areputforwardinoppositiontothemodern
world.Liketheargumentsofpriestsintheeighteenth
centurywhosaidthesamethingaboutLisbon,this
argumentaboutthejudgmentofGodhasgenerallysunk
withoutatraceinseriousintellectualcommentary.
Neimangoesontoconsidertheworkofanumberof
respondentstoAuschwitz,butgivesthemostcareful
considerationtoHannahArendtsfamous(andinfamous)
argumentaboutthebanalityofevilinEichmannin

Jerusalem.SheinterpretsArendtaspartofaconversation
anddilemmathatgoesbacktoLeibnizbutparticularly
involvesKantandHegel:namely,thedifficultyofdealing
withthechallengeposedtoourtrustintheworldbythe
tragicandsenselessforceofcontingency.Thereisnothing
morefrightening,morethreateningtoourplaceinthe
world,thanthehammerstrokeofcontingency.
ContingencyseemstoenvelopAuschwitz.Deportationand
murderwerecarriedoutbygraybureaucratswho,like
Eichmann,didtheirdutyforpettyandmundanereasons,
neitherlookingatnorcaringforthelargerpictureofwhat
wasgoingon.AttemptstogroundAuschwitzinmalice
aforethoughtsuchasantiSemitismdonotfinallysatisfy.
Forexample,NeimanjudgesDanielGoldhagenseffortin
HitlersWillingExecutionerswantingbecausehis
condemnationofGermansocietyderiveslessfrom
historicalaccuracythanphilosophicalnaivet.Thefactis
thatateverylevel,theNazisproducedmoreevil,withless
malice,thancivilizationhadpreviouslyknown.To
illustrateherpoint,Neimanmakesatellingcontrast
betweentheHolocaustandWorldWarI:
WorldWarInowseemsbothintelligibleandcontingent,
thelethalfruitofoldfashionedimperialismandearly
moderntechnology.Fromwherewearestanding,it
remainswithintheouterlimitsofthenormal....Wecan
mournthosewhodiedatFlanderswhilewonderinghow
theirofficerscouldhavethoughtahorseandagood
educationequipmentenoughwithwhichtofaceartillery.

Bycontrast,thereisnothingatrainloadofdeportees
arrivingataPolishcampmighthaveknown.Auschwitz
beggaredexpectation.Tothinkaboutthisistoenterinto
theheartofdarkness.
ThesubtitleofNeimansbookisAnAlternativeHistoryof
Philosophy.Thebookisaneducationinmodern
philosophicalthought,attractivetothenonspecialist,
becausethechallengetounderstandevilisanissuethat
facesanythinkingperson.Theexistentialrelevanceofthe
problemofevilhasenergizedNeimantotellthestoryof
philosophyasthatofadisciplinethatseekswisdomabout
themostpressinghumanproblems.Inthis,shestands
apart.Likemanyothers,sheconfesses,Icameto
philosophytostudymattersoflifeanddeath,andwas
taughtthatprofessionalizationrequiredforgettingthem.
ThemoreIlearned,themoreIgrewconvincedofthe
opposite:thehistoryofphilosophywasindeedanimatedby
questionsthatdrewusthere.
SincetheSecondWorldWar,philosophyinGreatBritain
andAmerica,withfewnotableexceptions,hasbeen
beholdentoaninbredacademiccultureobsessedeitherby
anarrowconstrualofepistemologyandmethodologyorthe
groupspeakofleftwingideology.Thishasmadethe
ancientvocationofphilosophythedomainofthelogician
orthepoliticallyengaged.Neimanrejectsbothofthese
alternatives.Theresultisabookthattakesupthe
traditionalcanonofgreatmodernthinkers,interpreting
themintermsthattheythemselvesconsideredcrucial.The

questionofevililluminatesthethoughtofthesefiguresin
anoriginalway,somuchsothatNeimansclaimtohave
writtenanalternativehistoryisnotanemptyboast.Hers
isabookformaturepeoplewhodonotexpectpatanswers,
whoarewillingtobedisturbedbyargumentsinsteadof
havingtheirprejudicessatisfied.