You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
In Evil: Self and Culture I sketched out a definition that I have drawn on for nearly 15 years:
Evil…is the abuse of a sentient being, a being that can feel pain. It is the pain that matters. Evil is grasped by the mind immediately and felt by the emotions immediately; it is sensed as hurt deliberately inflicted. Evil is never abstract. It is an existential reality and has to be understood in the personal context of suffering. In most societies evil is frequently felt as an unusually malevolent force with a purpose, a malediction or malfeasance. Typically, these same groups conceive and/or perceive evil in some personified manner. (Moss, 1984, p. 182)
Speaking with the Devil is the best-crafted elaboration of this definition that I have read to date. As a priest, as well as a psychotherapist, I think Carl Goldberg has done a superlative job in approaching the nodal point of modern theology and contemporary psychoanalysis—the nature of evil.
For many years I was the book review editor of a theological quarterly. As a result, I developed a quick attraction to certain styles of craftsmanship that I now consider to be the warp and woof of a good book, regardless of the subject matter. Goldberg's “dialogue with evil” is a fine illustration of these qualities—appearance and content.
From its appearance, the book is obviously well crafted. The title, typeset, subtitles, references, and length combine to invite the reader to explore its sentences. Goldberg's use of language is the next attractive feature. The author of 11 books and scores of articles, as well as the editor of two psychological journals, he knows how to hold an audience.
The content of Speaking with the Devil also reflects fine craftsmanship. It is a sound theoretical discussion of a profound existential reality, malevolence. In fact, Goldberg's actual focus is the development of the malevolent personality. He clearly explains