[b]<font color="blue">In The Lucifer Effect. How Good People Turn Evil by Dr Philip Zimbardo he relates for the first time the minutia regarding the SPE (Stanford Prison Experiment) he conducted during the times of the Vietnam War.

Since then he has continued to study the psychology of evil. Most recently he has spoken to the defense of an Abu Ghraib soldier explaining all the mitigating circumstances leading to the abusive behavior. The details of what led up to that incident are reported on. The book also addresses human rights around the world and the need for a torture "watch."

Dr. Zimbardo writes that a full understanding of these dynamics of such human behavior requires us to realize "the extent and limits of personal power, systemic power, and situational power."

For those needing a fuller explanation of the origin of evil, and Dr Zimbardo's book title reference, let me give some background. Lucifer was named so (the "light bearer") by God, as he was the shining example of the most powerful angels in heaven. It went awry though as Lucifer plotted with a third of the angels to overcome God Almighty and rule instead.

Of course, God being omniscient, and omnipotent, HE cast Lucifer and his angels out of heaven to earth. Lucifer became named Satan, the epitome of evil. From thence Satan and his following fallen angels plot to avenge themselves against God by corrupting God's creation: us here on earth. He began in the garden of evil, and I think most know the story from there.

So here we are, with the propensity to do evil, but with the capacity of doing good.

"Evil consists in intentionally behaving in ways that harm, abuse, demean, dehumanize or destroy others, or using one's authority and systemic power to encourage or permit others to do so on your behalf." (p 5) Dehumanizing. That is key. When someone deems another as nothing worthwhile (p 222) then they have de-humanized them.

How does this relate to anger and aggression? When someone dehumanizes another the gate is opened for aggressive actions where anger can be exhibited without guilt. Rationale of the concept that "it doesn't matter as the other is less than human" lays the foundation for such exhibition for aggressively acting out the anger by inflicting evil upon innocent people through acceptable means defined by the situation or the environment.

Ervin Staub, a psychologist who survived the Nazi occupation of Hungary writes, "Evil that arises out of ordinary thinking and is committed by ordinary people is the norm, not the exception..." (p286)

It is said that a large body of evidence in social psychology supports the concept that situational power triumphs over individual power in given contexts.

So how do we change or prevent undesirable behavior, change the result of the ruling power? How do we not become evil but perform different than the rest and be the hero? Dr Zimbardo says by our resistance of the situational influences. By changing environmental /situational surroundings directly influences the demeanor of the personnel and the outcomes of their relationship. Thus the statement that opposes that “one bad apple spoils the bunch” to “one bad barrel spoils the apple.”

Within the book Dr Zimbardo gives us a ten-step program to resist unwanted influences. (p 451) I’ll merely list the headings here: “I made a mistake,” “I am mindful,” “I am responsible,” “I am Me, the best I can be,” “I respect just authority but rebel against unjust authority,” “I want group acceptance, but value my independence,” “I will be more frame-vigilant,” “I will balance my time perspective,” “I will not sacrifice personal or civic freedoms for the illusion of security,” and “ I can oppose unjust systems.”

I now believe that it is only when a person creates a foundational concept that all peoples are human beings deserving of equal treatment can they rally that inner force to be altruistic and counter the evil that is sure to ensue otherwise. It is truly how we allow situational forces affect us that determines whether we will be the hero. Dr Zimbardo states that this perception implies that any of us could as easily become heroes as perpetrators of evil. (p 486)

He began by informing us that we are innately evil, and ends by giving us a method and hope to be heroes.

His parting message quotes the Russian poet Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The line between good and evil is in the center of every human heart.” (p 488)