Have you ever known someone who seems incomprehensibly malicious? Someone who might possibly be crazy, or who makes you think you must be? If so, then Evil Genes is a must read for you. Or even if you are someone who is fascinated by the possible biological basis of evil behavior. In an attempt to understand her older sister – who was apparently charming, fascinating and toxic to know – Barbara Oakley has made a life long study of the ‘successfully sinister’, both what makes them sinister, and what makes them successful. She has put all that research, pulled together through the lens of a background in several disciplines and life experiences into Evil Genes. It is a fascinating read.
There were, I admit, moments in the beginning when I wasn’t entirely certain I wanted to continue reading, despite some fascination grounded in my own personal experience with toxic personalities (my own term). One such moment was in the preface by Jim Phelps, MD when he explains that despite the type of people discussed in the book, most people are ‘remarkably good’, and gives as an example the willingness of most to continue trusting those that they have been given reason to believe (for whatever reason) are ‘good’ – even after that trust has been violated. Sometimes repeatedly. This makes most people remarkably good for what? is my question. Given recent events (or even not-so-recent events) what, really, is the ‘good’ these people are expecting this person who has violated their trust to do? And what, precisely (I wondered at this point) is the ‘evil’ that will be contrasted with this kind of ‘good’?
Then there were points in a few of the early chapters, discussing the foundation of studies of the disorders discussed in the book – psychopathy, anti-social disorder, narcissism, etc. Much of my trouble with these chapters had to do with defining these disorders against the psychology of “normal” people. (This episode of radiolab does a wonderful job of outlining the trouble with this idea in practice.) And then there was the use of “Machiavellian” as an epithet, which I think does a horrible disservice to the man (though, to be fair to the author, she generally uses the term ‘successfully sinister’ instead). I bring up these problems that I had with the book in the beginning, not to point philosophical flaws, but to convey what an excellent job Barbara Oakley did in winning me over by the end of Evil Genes. She has managed to take an incredibly murky and complex subject and discuss it in a manner that fully conveys all the murk and complexity of the issues.
She gives an excellent overview of the emergent character of the various disorders discussed in the book, which require both biological and environmental factors in order to manifest, and covers the various shades of gray between the disorders themselves, as well as between the ‘subclinical’ and ‘clinical’ versions of them. (Subclinical being those who, due to having characteristics of any of these disorder are incredibly difficult, if not outright toxic, to deal with, but who either through comparative mildness of symptoms (or ability to fake it) are never actually diagnosed. Then there is the incredibly fine line between manifestations of aspects of the disorders which can actually be beneficial, and those which are toxic.
Through the story of her older sister Caroline, Barbara Oakley also conveys some of the tragedy of those suffering these disorders. To what extent can they be considered responsible for their behavior, given that their CNS, the apparatus we all use to evaluate and make decisions, is so flawed? The question is merely raised, not answered, since there are some who do manage to overcome these problems, and some who don’t, and the difference between the two isn’t fully understood. In fact, there is still a lot that isn’t known about all of these disorders and the author is quite clear about that also.
And all that is just a fraction of what Evil Genes manages to cover, through a combination of an overview of the neuroscience & psychology involves, plus review of some of the more infamous ‘successfully sinister’ political leaders, as well looking back on the life of her own sister. And she manages to do it all with remarkable clarity.
Can you tell yet that I liked it? So yes, if this is a subject that interests at all, I highly recommend that this is one book you definitely add to your library.
