CHAPTER REVIEW: MEANING EVIL (THE DARK SIDE OF MODERNITY)

Jeffery C Alexander’s The Dark Side of Modernity highlights the atrocities that inevitably come with modernity and the ill doings of rationalisation. Using various theories, philosophies and practical societal examples as references, the book insists that there is no evil without good and no good without evil; that the evils that have befallen humanity in the era of modernization is necessary for progress itself both in structural and cultural frameworks. (Gönenç Uysal, 2013)

Chapter 6 of the book, titled Meaning Evil focuses on the benefits of attaching some level of importance to what we simply refer to as social evil. It insists that good and evil not simply be regarded in binary terms; as contrary to how societies judge the two, good and evil are not always as black and white but there is a shade of grey that justifies the necessity to give evil more regard than is being done.

What is lacking is the appreciation of depth of search with the aim of identifying the genesis and intricacies of the relations that bring about these evils. What society does instead is make an effort to eliminate evil so that good reigns with its benefits. But to properly tackle the problem of evil, society must break from seeing it as a result of physical social practices and rather understand that it is inherent in the way people analyse and adjust to social systems, just as the case is with good. Therefore evil is inevitable. What society needs to do is learn to relate to it and not aim at eliminating it.

This structure of good and evil is inherent in all social systems- Kingship, globalisation, education and culture among others. In these societal elements, the prospects of good and evil are intricately interwoven.

Good produces evil in the same sense that evil produces good; therefore evil is inevitable. The sense of good will be lost when evil is non-existent. At the point of “emotional-cum-moral catharsis”, where a deeply emotional being may find justifications for negative behaviour, we may find evil as good. Yet when the veil is removed with the renewal of emotions and the mind, good moral is renewed. In this process evil has given birth to a new good.

Evil doesn’t come just to dominate or as a force of power, as good does not come as a fixture to tat dominance. Good and evil is a product of the demarcations of society; civil society has been idealized. However, reality is not always in sync with what is deal.

In a democracy as opposed to authoritarianism for instance, politicians’ motives are imperfect. However, by human nature, people align those motives with their image of the perfect society (because of the promise of good) This is one reason politicians are so powerful. Citizens themselves have the same imperfect nature so these three elements fit perfectly and a transcending conflict is created. The perfections of society are imperfections in themselves.

What we also find is how society keeps static impressions of people and institutions in mind and treats them in accordance with the pictures it has. These mental pictures are developed by society’s codes. Eg. Ghana governs, no matter what good they do is not appreciated by the citizenry because the picture that the citizenry has in mind is that Ghana government is not good enough. Society’s codes are woven intricately into the fabric of its people.

Every living being, both those who are classified as good and those classified as evil have both evil and good in them however, society tells stories to foreground who both listener and narrator wishes to be foregrounded.

For society, whether the shade of grey is identifiable or not, it is necessary to distinguish between good and evil and relate to them in binary terms in order to be seen/ accepted as rational and fit to partake in politics.

C. Alexander’s argument can be clearly placed side by side with the world today. All nations, big and small, rich and poor, religious and nonreligious have their own set of beliefs; and in these systems, every contradiction to these beliefs or norms are evil within that society. Meanwhile, these beliefs vary as much as the nations themselves. The United States for instance has its own set of internal and external rules it abides by; rules which by virtue of its superpower status, are mostly imposed on the international community. As it happens locations such as the Middle East and Asia are in the far left in relation to these norms. What results is a global sidetracking of the norms of most these communities, provided they do not provide acceptable remedies to this diversity. In the global combats system, for instance, what we constantly find is a terrific allegiance for each party’s stance.  In the midst of strong belief that one is standing for good, each side’s good is the other side’s evil and the result is a horrible clash in which innocent people suffer. This in itself is evil. So instead of aiming at totally eliminating evil or the other side’s good, humanity must be ready to operate as a double edged sword for there can be no such thing as perfection or the end of evil. And whatever results from these combats, humanity itself pays the price.

The causes of social evil will not seize at any point in humanity’s existence and neither will diversity. However, as the book argues and rightly so, societies must be fashioned to accept diversity and learn to unite these diversities into its fabric for the sake of peace. If this is achieved, evil and conflict will not be eliminated totally, but its extent will diminish.

SOURCES

·         Gönenç Uysal Cambridge: Polity Press. 2013. 187pp.

·         Samuel Burgum  University of York , UK E-mail:Published online: 12 Jun 2013.