Science of Evil

“In a world beset by fundamentalists of both believing and secular varieties, it must be possible to balance a rejection of religious faith with a selective reverence for religious rituals and concepts.”I think that the above quote sets out what Alain tries to achieve in this book. He explains very clearly why humanity invented religion: our need to live together in mutual support despite our predilection towards the violence which is endemic to human nature, and also our need to cope with our personal vulnerabilities.I like his logical approach to providing secular solutions to our dilemmas through examination of the ways in which religions have tackled them, with a chapter allocated to different aspects of our lives: community, kindness, education, art and so on.In the chapter on loss of a sense of community, I feel that Alain sometimes takes some extreme negative examples to prove his point, which is a shame. For example, I feel that society has already gone some way to reducing isolation. I am told by a British friend that Agape restaurants do exist; there seems to be an explosion of places where people can meet each other in safe environments, places offering poetry, music, art, creative writing meetings, book clubs, yoga; our small French village of 40 people has associations which organise seven special meals a year where people are all mixed up at the tables, we have a weekly fitness class, our yoga sessions always start with a good gossip with neighbouring mats and friends we have made in class, a local café runs a Tuesday discussion get-together. I do not feel that we all “…naturally expect all strangers will be murderers, swindlers or paedophiles…”He makes the point that church attendance encourages an acceptance of strangers without worry, they give us a comfortable space in which to be open to others. They also expose us to a wide variety of different classes and types of people and, hopefully enable us to appreciate that there is value and goodness to be found in all. It also encourages us to value the person and not necessarily their worldly achievements. In religion, rules are also laid down for interacting with others, and, personally, I do feel sad that formal politeness has dropped out of a lot of British life (I do come back several times a year). It is one of the facets of life that I really appreciate in France, the way in which we greet total strangers in shops with a “bonjour” and shake hands with everyone, giving our names, at social gatherings. I found his suggestion that conversations should be guided at Agape restaurants a fascinating one, enough to get even the shyest person going, cheaper than a psychiatrist and possibly helpful to people in personal trouble.I loved the Jewish Day of Atonement, what a brilliant idea, what a way to get corrosive feelings out of one’s system. Maybe it could happen for each person on their birthday!Alain is very good at getting us to look at information which has been available over the ages in a new light, “…so opposed have many atheists been to the content of religious belief that they have omitted to appreciate that … it provides us with a well-structured advice on how to lead our lives” Education today gives us information, but does not teach us how to live and cope with what life throws at us. He has some really interesting ideas on how English Literature should be taught, for example, not looking at the whole oeuvre of an author but choosing a selection of authors to cover the concept of betrayed love. There should be “an emphasis on the connection between abstract ideas and our own lives..” There is also an interesting discussion on our inability (on the whole) to remember what we have read, and so the concept of repetition becomes important. Book clubs are a good help I think, making us mark up, think about, revisit and write about or discuss what we have read. He suggests that “…we should to train our minds just as we train our bodies..”In the chapter on tenderness, Alain shows us that female figures representing this virtue are to be found throughout all the ages and all over the world. They are a response to “a universal need”. He is not too clear on how we could cater to this need in our modern lives.On pessimism, Alain argues that, due to a misplaced belief that science can solve all the material problems of humanity, we have become too optimistic, particularly too unrealistic. In a sense, we have replaced religion with science as a belief. He further argues that this optimism has led us to think that perfection is easily possible, and thus we are less able to appreciate the need to cope with the inevitable problems that arise in, for example a marriage, or with relational problems in the workplace. I am not convinced that he offers much in the way of a solution, apart from noting that knowing that others also suffer from the same emotional problems as ourselves should make us feel better, that we are not alone. Does it? (possible discussion point?)In his chapter on pessimism, Alain argues interestingly that, with God dead, “human beings are at risk of taking psychological centre stage. .. they trample upon nature, forget the rhythms of the earth and shy away from valuing … until at last they must collide catastrophically with the sharp edges of reality.” He suggests that there will always be some things that we cannot understand, and that it would help us to be made to meditate on the stars, for example, that we should have easy access to images of things larger and beyond our daily comprehension.“Art… is a medium to remind us about what matters…. It is a mechanism whereby our memories are forcibly jogged about what we have to love and be grateful for, as well as what we should draw away from and be afraid of.” I loved this chapter, and the ideas that “we need art because we are so forgetful...” and that “good art is the sensuous presentation of those ideas which matter most to the proper functioning of our souls..” Art should also teach us to look at others through lenses which are not our everyday prejudices, to see other people as like us, fragile, uncertain, needing love, under their multiple different surfaces. He had a couple of what I thought were good ideas: the first being that it would be helpful if we were given help in what we should be contemplating when we look at abstract art, and the second that some exhibitions should be centred around a theme, he suggests the example of maternal nurture, rather than the work of a specific artist, or a particular time frame. It is true that when one goes to a large exhibition, one is jolted from one picture to the next, from a portrait to a landscape and so on. I have found in the past at exhibitions that I responded visually and not contemplatively.I found the quote from John Calvin in the chapter on architecture fascinating, that “For anyone to arrive at God the Creator, he needs only Scripture as his Guide and Teacher.” In other words, just words. And so, a huge amount of religious “teaching” art was destroyed. Plotinus argues that beauty reminds us about “virtues of love, trust, kindness and justice… it is a material version of goodness.” He goes on to argue that it was in Protestant countries that the first really ugly buildings were constructed, because “architecture and art have no role to play in the condition of our souls...”, that all we need are the words of a bible to lead a good life. I did take exception to his remark that we have to take on board our own “nullity and mediocrity” (p261) and feel strongly that, within every person, there are always some sparks of creativity, goodness, success. One just has to acknowledge that, although one might not value, or even see, another’s achievements, yet, if you look, they are there, they are valid. Nobody is totally nul or mediocre. I got quite cross!I liked his ideas about temples of reflection, maybe we need some, but can we not all find such places when out walking, in the countryside, in a city park, all we need, maybe, is to realise that we need to seek them out. I often wander into an old church and sit there, light a candle, think, without being attached to the owning-religion. But maybe, spaces dedicated to “promote important emotions and abstract themes,” would be good.The final chapter on institutions was mind-blowing… that if we look at the Catholic Church, for example, as a business, it has been amazingly successful. So, someone wanting to reorient humanity should study institutions; writing a book, Alain de Botton, will not be good enough!

I read Science of Evil: On Empathy and the origins of Cruelty by Simon Baron-Cohen at one sitting.  That's rare for me.  I usually like to dip in a little and then think it over for a day or so but the material was so gripping that I was on the edge of my seat.  I waited quite a few days before writing this review to process what I read.  Here is what I've concluded: if you want to truly understand evil, its source and a possible direction for a solution to evil this book is for you.  It gave me valuable new insights into evil as well as providing a solid, scientific basis for conclusions I've reached through study and experience.  And it lead me to pursue deeper research on the study of evil and empathy. What made this book so gripping was its relevancy.  Like all of us, I have had way too many exposures to evil in my life.  I submit that on a bell curve evaluating those who have personal knowledge of evil I would be on the downward slope toward the extreme range.  Without going into the grim details, I've seen, heard, and experienced evil from the inside out.  I live it as a victim of sexual abuse.  I studied it as a historian.  And I observed it working in a maximum security prison for two years.  I am a counselor on the GI Rights Hotline and have been trained in suicide intervention.  Today I take calls and work on cases of men and women who in many cases have experienced evil first hand.  I hear their stories as well of the stories of vets suffering from PTSD trying to get help for their suffering.  While working in the prison system, 1978 - 1980, and more recently in my career as a public school teacher I worked with the emotionally challenged.  Public school teachers, particularly if you taught in inner city schools, work daily with some children who are severely emotionally and sometimes physically damaged.  And finally, my wife and I spent years living and working unsuccessfully with a family member who is emotionally disturbed.  We know only too well how lonely, difficult, and relatively unsupported such work is.  Reading Science of Evil, I realized the sad soul why were trying to help was suffering from undiagnosed Asperger's.  That discovery was a huge relief.  We finally understand why he was so unempathetic and, yet, thankfully did not seriously harm others.  So I have more than a passing interest in the subject of evil and empathy, the two subjects of Baron-Cohen's important book.  Most of the books I've read about evil have been from the perspective of depth psychology.  Since 1980, I've read and reread pretty much everything Erich Fromm has written on human destructiveness and aggression.   These books delve deeply into evil and its causes.  Fromm has written fascinating case studies of Martin Luther, Hitler and Himmler.  But these studies,  while based on impeccable logic and the best available science of the time, are subjective.  Baron-Cohen's book is based on sound objective science.   Both men were serious men of science.  Fromm (1900- 1980), founder of Scientist Against Nuclear Energy (SANE) was a psychoanalyst and sociologist who had advanced degrees in both.  Simon Baron-Cohen is Professor of Developmental Psychopathology at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom. Both share the perspective of a Jew, in the case of Fromm a German Jew, who knows evil all too intimately.  This gave both a unique ethnic/racial perspective unavailable to most gentiles.   Both Fromm and Baron-Cohen also write that evil is closely related to the objectification of the other.  Viewing people as non-human or deeply "other" is necessary for a human to rape, beat, mutilate, enslave or murder.  Fromm explains the process of evil from a sociological/psychological perspective that while profound is not fully objective.  He, like Baron-Cohen, concludes that close to zero empathy occurs with those who commit evil actions.  Baron-Cohen, however, provides a modern, scientific basis for similar conclusions reached by Fromm working before modern neuroscience. The book Science of Evil is not all science.  Baron-Cohen shares his horrors reading as a child about Nazi's who ran concentration camps by day and went home at night to read  nursery stories to their children from a light with a shade made of human skin.  Such stories jolted me out of my white- male privileged comfort zone but imagine how much more affecting  if I had had relatives who were murdered in a such camps.   Baron-Cohen also shares lessons learned from years of cutting edge research with the autistic.  Serial rapists, murders and the autistic and those suffering from Asperger's Syndrome share being at or near zero on the empathy scale Baron-Cohen and his colleagues developed.  However, people with autistic and Asperger's seldom if ever hurt others.  The difference is they have developed a moral code that keeps them from harming others.  In Baron-Cohen's analysis it's the difference from zero-positive from the zero-negative of the narcissist, Machievellian, and psychopaths.   This is a powerful insight with enormous implications.  Even people with zero empathy - with autism and Asberger's can be trained or train themselves not to harm others which they see as essentially objects.  But what about psychopaths?  Are they even capable of empathy?  I've known a few psychopaths in my day and the question haunted me but the answer was not available in Baron-Cohen's Science of Evil. I looked online for answers to this question.  In the Netherlands  brain imaging research of psychopaths in prison for violent crimes revealed that "charming" (Machievellian?) psychopaths can turn on and off empathy.  See - Coldhearted Psychopaths Feel Empathy Too by Tanya Lewis,   July 24, 2013 07:19pm ET posted in livescience.com  Researchers had psychopaths while being imaged see a film which consistently evoked empathetic brain response in "normal" humans.  There was no empathetic brain response in the psychopathic subjects.  Asked to watch the film again while "trying to be empathetic" their brains lit up like normals.    This is proof that zero-negatives could potentially become zero-positives.  However, as my own experience with criminals suggest caution is needed.  When I worked at Narconon at the maximum security prison in Minnesota (SRM) my partner and I concluded that what we were producing in our program were "happy criminals."   Leopards don't easily change their spots.  Most prisons are universities of lower learning where criminals become better, more successful criminals.  Not that they can't change nor that we shouldn't keep trying but it's a long hard slog with many setbacks and few successes. In the title to this review I suggested the book was too short.  Like any good read, Baron-Cohen left me wanting more.  But could more be less?  Not in this case.  Obviously,  Baron-Cohen couldn't include research that happened after publication.  However, I think the author might have shared some of the research of neuroscientist Dr. Richard J. Davidson, who leads the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds at the Waisman Center, University Wisconsin-Madison.  Davidson and his colleagues conduct rigorous scientific research on healthy qualities of mind such as kindness, compassion, altruism, forgiveness, mindfulness and well-being.  Their findings support Baron-Cohen's thesis.          For further theory read A General Theory of Love by Thomas Lewis, Fari Amini and Richard Lannon, three San Francisco Bay psychiatrists, who popularized limbic resonance which arise as we experience empathy and intuition.  For ways to deepen your own empathy I recommend A Path With Heart and A Wise Heart by Jack Kornfield a clinical psychologist, meditation teacher and former Buddhist Monk in the Theravadin tradition. Length aside, this is a wonderful, important book that deserves five stars, with a little more stuff.

Ever since functional MRI technology allowed us to begin looking into the brain, scientists have been able to discern what was simply unknowable before: the extent to which abnormalities in neural circuits within an individual brain lead to challenges that willpower and so-called freedom of choice have little influence over. "The Science of Evil" explores how brain circuits vital for empathy may be so physically impaired that it is impossible for individuals to step into the shoes of another and to feel remorse.Although it may be frightening for some of us social liberals to make the shift, we must face that science is now telling us that for empathy-impaired youth and adults, no amount of correctional intervention may be able to help the brain restructure itself into a more normal neural pathway. Coming to terms with the existence of this profound limitation in what "nurture" and re-education can actually achieve can nonetheless foster a vital blend of two values in those of us who do have empathy. The values are compassion and safe boundaries -- and the two are absolutely linked.Amazingly, the more I learn about what can go wrong with the empathy circuit in the human brain -- whether the cause is genetic, prenatal condition in the womb, or postnatal harmful nurturance -- the more compassion I have even for the most hardened criminals. Can any of us imagine any condition worse than having so faulty an empathy system that we intentionally and uncaringly harm others? Can any of us imagine a situation more appalling for a mother than to watch her adolescent son grow into a psychopath -- no matter what interventions she may seek out and provide?And yet it happens. And that is where this growing body of scientific knowledge can also help us see the vital importance of growing safe personal and collective (societal) boundaries in tandem with our compassion.Bottomline: FORGIVENESS must no longer be assumed to be the highest spiritual response in all situations. A neurally impaired person who commits a criminal act cannot be expected to offer victims and their families the solace of genuine remorse. They are incapable of it. In such circumstances, remorse and restitution are not even remote possibilities. And no amount of societal investment will change that.This means that our culture must stop elevating those rare individuals who display unconditional forgiveness. The expectation that forgiveness is a good thing in the absence of remorse heaps another level of abuse onto good-hearted victims and families of heinous crimes by sending the message that unless they are eventually able to forgive, they are not spiritually advanced and compassionate people. Worse, unless they are able to voice forgiveness immediately (as in the Amish school-shooting example), then they are a less than liberal, progressive, and good people. Nonsense!So let us honor what science is now teaching us about the brain, and move beyond this naive pre-scientific and hurtful expectation.What an understanding of the physical underpinnings of empathy deficiency can offer, thus, is finally a chance for liberals to see that COMPASSION for brain-impaired psychopaths (and especially their families) is the goal -- NOT FORGIVENESS of a remorseless criminal. In so doing, we liberals will be establishing SAFE BOUNDARIES that honor the very real human emotions of anger and grief that victims and their families will naturally feel -- before acceptance of a crime and perhaps even compassion for the impaired criminal is even possible.In addition to SETTING SAFE BOUNDARIES AROUND FORGIVENESS, three other PRACTICAL GIFTS of this book are:(1) Finding a silver lining to the troubles of AUTISM by elevating the societal importance of "high-systematizing" individuals who contribute scientifically and technologically. Yes, autism as a whole is a very sad class of brain deficiency -- both for the victim and their families. But mild forms of autism, notably Asperger's Syndrome, can result in genius gifts of pattern-recognition that foster scientific discovery and technological inventions. Where would our civilization be without the autistic scientists and engineers of the past -- before any diagnosis of autism was possible?(2) The empathy deficiency in mildly autistic individuals can be FULLY COMPENSATED BY MORAL TRAINING. If an innate "systematizer" takes on the task (with guidance) of systematizing moral judgments and actions, they can become just as safe to be around as any high-empathizing individual. Thus parents can be encouraged to keep morally ambiguous or offensive films, television shows, and gaming away from their autistic children, while encouraging them to learn moral judgments by rote and to make a systematic game of doing so, from which they can obtain satisfaction for their mental achievements.(3) TEACH PARENTS THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSISTENT NURTURANCE OF INFANTS. Science cannot yet discern whether psychopathy may be induced by early infancy parental practices (as well as genetic and pre-natal impairments). But this book opened the possibility that empathy circuits are crucially developing in infancy. If a "caregiver" adult occasionally behaves toward an infant with ill intention or emotionally charged cruelty, the impact of recognizing ill intent may be so emotionally devastating for the infant that the child closes off trying to understand and mimic the primary caregiver. The opportunity to grow empathy in the normal way, at the normal time, thus closes down in the interest of self-safety.Overall, thus, I highly recommend this powerful, poignant, and perspective-shifting book -- especially for those on the socially liberal end of the spectrum.The ONE CRITICISM I have of this otherwise excellent book is that there was little evidence that the author had taken in the evolutionary reasons that in-group / out-group dynamics are also an instinctive part of normal human development and moral judgment. The chapter on the history of genocide cries out for someone to re-interpret heinous crimes by nonpsychopathic "normal" individuals from this perspective. Away goes the blame in such cases, and in rushes an imperative for all our cultures, all our societies, all our nations to encourage in both religious and secular contexts an expanding circle of who qualifies as one of "us."NOTE: This review was written by CONNIE BARLOW, wife of Michael Dowd (who has the Amazon account)

This is an interesting and easy read, I would suggest for anyone, either those totally unacquainted with psychology or those more widely read (or even students) on the topic.Personally, I would really recommend it to professionals such as teachers, social workers, social care, nursing, foster care or surrogates/kinship carers, as it has some of the best summations of attachment theory and the key thinkers and research into the same that I've had the pleasure to read in some time. I've read a lot on that topic, including many of the principle theorists that Baron-Cohen mentions and I wish that I had read his summary overview before I had. It certainly is very clear.There is a lot of information about neuroscience but I do not think this is obscurantist or difficult to read, consider and intellectually digest, for some readers (if you are like me) this content may prove a little bit more deserving of a rereading (I am less acquainted with it than some of other content) but it is not dull or diverting.Baron-Cohen begins the book describing how he was intrigued to explain the evil of the holocaust, the subtitle of the book is a perfect description of his narrative effort in this respect "On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty". In the place of the terminology evil, which he describes as problematic (persuasively describes as problematic it has to be said, whatever the benefits of having it as a shorthand, popularly understood phraseology), Cohen suggests "empathy erosion".Cohen has his own typology of "eroded empathy", these are boderline personality disorder, narcissist, psychopath, or zero-negative B type, zero-negative P type, zero-negative N type (negative as these are not desirable states, they can be debilitating to those experiencing them but they can also be dangerous to themselves and to others). I thought this similar to the "dark triad" I had read about elsewhere of "psychopath, narcissist, machavellian" but Cohen's presentation is superior, less sensational or dramatic maybe and seeks to root itself in psychological research and neuroscience. He presents a case study of each type in turn, two (the B Type and N Type) being individuals seeking help, another incarcerated for crime (the P Type). Accompanying the case study or profile is then information on the neuroscience of each type and the main theories about the genesis of the personality disorder (mainly neglect, emotional abuse, rejection, abuse and threat during younger formative years) and also more recent developments or reframing in psychology (for instance border line, which described a borderline state between neurotic and psychotic, to emotional disregulation or reactive disorder). This chapter contained some interesting writing about complex trauma and also some of the desensitized responses of psychopaths to emotional stimulus, what Cohen had to say about damaged empathy "circuits" and reward responses.I also thought that Cohen's critical points about some of the explanations he did not find persuasive (determinants of psychopathy) or that were over stated (maternal deprivation theories along the lines of the Schizo-genic mother, sometimes associated with attachment theories) were fair comment.The next chapter is Zero-positive, this describes states of being in which individuals do not experience empathy or have "zero degrees of empathy" but can construct moral systems, such as individuals with aspergers and autism. This chapter was, again, enlightening and interesting, it gave me pause for thought on my own knowledge, which I would not judge to be less sufficient than I had believed it to be previously. I think this can be a sign of a good author that they can enlighten and inform but also spark up interest for further reading (Baron-Cohen has included ample endnotes and references and there is a very good contents and index for quick reference, cross referencing or assisting those reading primarily in order to research, study or compose an essay).The following chapter, on the "empathy gene", is my favourite and seeks to answer the questions, which if you are anything like me have been prompted by the preceding chapters, why do individuals develop as either Zero-Negative or Zero-Positive. Baron-Cohen acknowledges that environmental neglect, causing the depletion of an internal "pot of gold", is one explanation but "neither necessary nor sufficient to cause zero degrees of empathy" or account for the existence of Zero-Negative types who have NOT suffered neglect, or those who have experienced neglect but who exhibit excellent empathy. This chapter contains some further theories of psychological development, including information on the study of twins in reaching conclusions about "nature versus nurture".The final chapter is a concluding chapter summarizing Baron-Cohen's perspective, including a pictorial/illustration of his Empathy Circuit idea. The final two chapters contain information on the Empathy Quotient assessment/questionnaire, which is included as an appendix along with a second appendix summarizing how to spot zero degrees of empathy (Negative). I would actually wager that some readers will want the book for that second appendix alone (you would be missing out on the rest of the content which is quality too though, so dont neglect the book as a whole).I've read a lot of psychology books, older material and more recent books, this is easily among the best. This is an easier, shorter read but I would recommend it and Richard Bentall's Madness Explained: Psychosis and Human Nature. Great book. Recommended.

The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty by Simon Baron-Cohen“The Science of Evil” is a very interesting book that examines human cruelty. British researcher Simon Baron-Cohen takes the reader on a fascinating ride that focuses on the social and genetic factors that impact empathy. This stimulating 272-page book includes the following six chapters: 1. Explaining “Evil” and Human Cruelty, 2. Empathy Mechanism: The Bell Curve, 3. When Zero Degrees of Empathy Is Negative, 4.When Zero Degrees of Empathy Is Positive, 5. The Empathy Gene Twins, and 6. Reflections on Human Cruelty.Positives:1. A well-written, well-researched book.2. A fascinating topic, the science of evil, in the capable hands of Simon Baron-Cohen. He treats this controversial topic with care and respect.3. The book flows nicely from one chapter to the next.4. Limited but good use of charts and figures.5. Does a great job of establishing the expectations of the book. “In this book I explore how people can treat each other cruelly not with reference to the concept of evil, but with reference to the concept of empathy. Unlike the concept of evil, empathy has explanatory power. In the coming chapters I put empathy under the microscope.”6. Provides four examples of empathy erosion. Memorable accounts.7. Defines the key term of the book to satisfaction, “Empathy is our ability to identify what someone else is thinking or feeling and to respond to their thoughts and feelings with an appropriate emotion.” “This suggests there are at least two stages in empathy: recognition and response.”8. The seven likely settings of the Empathizing Mechanism. From level 0 where the individual has no empathy at all to level 6 where individuals show remarkable empathy.9. Great use of current science to make compelling arguments. “There is a consensus in neuroscience that at least ten interconnected brain regions are involved in empathy (and more may await discovery).” Explains in an accessible manner these brain regions and their relationship with empathy.10. The three forms of Zero-Negative: Zero-Negative Borderline (Type B), Zero-Negative Psychopath (Type P), and Zero-Negative Narcissist (Type N). Provides case studies for each one. “The hallmark of borderlines is a constant fear of abandonment, emotional pain and loneliness, hatred (of others and of themselves), impulsivity, and self-destructive, highly inconsistent behavior.”11. Explores the causes of the Zero-Negative degrees of empathy. “Common within families of children who later grow up to become borderline are incest, child abuse, violence, and alcoholism. Obviously, the link between child abuse and borderline is not total: Not all who are abused go on to become borderline, and not all those who are borderline were abused.”12. The difference between the psychopath and borderline behavior. “When we meet the psychopath, we see a person who shares that same total preoccupation with oneself as we saw in Type B. But in this case there is a willingness to do whatever it takes to satisfy their desires.”13. Interesting facts. “About 15 percent of prison samples are psychopaths and just less than 1 percent of males in the general population.”14. A look at Zero-Positive degrees of empathy. “Zero-Positive means that alongside difficulties with empathy, these individuals have remarkably precise, exact minds. They have Asperger Syndrome, a condition on the autistic spectrum.”15. A look at the autistic brain, a sensitive topic treated with respect. “In addition to difficulty in understanding others, people who are Zero-Positive have difficulty understanding their own minds, a difficulty called “alexithymia,” which translates as “without words for emotion.””16. The two ways to systemize. “The first is by observation alone. We observe the changing data and then look for a pattern in the data. The second way we systemize is by observation plus operation. We observe the data and then perform some operation (manipulating one variable) and observe the effect of that operation.”17. A look at the new evidence that environmental factors interact with “genes for empathy.” “In the “right” environment someone with the genetic predisposition to psychopathy could show this behavior.” “Some scientists have focused their search for empathy genes on those that affect the neurotransmitter serotonin. Too much serotonin in the synapse has been linked to aggression.”18. Presents ten new ideas that focus on empathy erosion versus “evil”.19. A look at superempathy.20. Provides supplementary material on the empathy quotient and how to spot zero degrees of empathy (negative).Negatives:1. Neuroscience is in its infancy and as a result the book may not have the feel of a hard science but I thought the author didn’t oversell what we currently know.2. There are some topics that were barely touched, as an example, aggression in males versus females. Aggression and how it varies by culture.3. I would like to see an update to the book so that the author can address some of the criticism.4. An appendix explaining the author’s methodology would have been helpful.In summary, I enjoyed this book. This is a very interesting topic and Baron-Cohen treats the topic fairly without overselling what we currently know. Though the author left many fruits on the tree what’s in the book is very good. I recommend it.Further suggestions: “ The Anatomy of Violence” by Adrian Raine, “The Age of Empathy” by Frans de Waal, “Obedience to Authority” by Stanley Milgram, “The Psychopath Test” by Jon Ronson, “The Sociopath Next Door” by Martha Stout Ph.D., “Just babies: The Origins of Good and Evil” by Paul Bloom, "Psychopath Free” by Peace, “The Psychopath Exposed” by Jonas Warstad, “Sociopath: Enter The Mind of a Sociopath!” by Clarence T. Rivers “The Psychopath Inside” by James Fallon, and “Snakes in Suits” by Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare.