Seized by Christ

They are experiencing Christianity as joy and hope, having thus become lovers of Christ.

Tag: responsibility

  • What Is Evil?

    Jordan Peterson’s Deep Definition

    Jordan Peterson doesn’t define evil with a single dictionary-style sentence. Instead, he builds a complex picture across his lectures and books—especially Maps of Meaning and 12 Rules for Life. His view of evil is psychological, moral, existential—and personal.

    At its core, Peterson sees evil as this:

    🔥 Peterson’s Core View of Evil

    Evil is the conscious, malevolent infliction of suffering—especially for its own sake.

    ✍️ Expanded Definition

    Evil is knowing that what you’re doing is wrong, knowing it will cause unnecessary suffering, and choosing to do it anyway—often because it causes suffering. It’s the willful use of your voice, choices, and actions to distort truth, destroy meaning, and harm others—especially the innocent.

    🔎 Four Key Ideas from Peterson’s Understanding of Evil

    1. Voluntary Infliction of Unnecessary Suffering

    “Evil is the production of suffering for its own sake.”

    This includes torture, cruelty, totalitarian violence, and abuse. Peterson often draws on real historical examples—like Auschwitz, the Soviet Gulags, or Columbine—to show how evil grows from resentment, envy, and self-deception.

    2. The Lie Is the Path to Evil

    Peterson believes evil is rooted in deception—especially self-deception.

    “When you betray yourself, when you say untrue things, when you act out a lie, you weaken your character. You move away from God.”

    When people lie about what they’re doing—and why—they become corrupted. The lie, repeated often enough, becomes a foundation for deeper harm.

    3. Resentment, Envy, and the Rejection of Responsibility

    Peterson often links evil to resentment toward being itself—a deep bitterness about life’s unfairness, combined with a desire to strike back.

    This is why he emphasizes personal responsibility. Choosing meaning over resentment is, for Peterson, a way to resist the seeds of evil within ourselves.

    4. Auschwitz as the Ultimate Symbol of Evil

    Peterson frequently returns to the Holocaust as the darkest manifestation of human evil. What happened there wasn’t accidental. It was planned, intentional, and often joyfully committed.

    “You have to understand the Holocaust if you want to understand yourself.”

    The worst atrocities were committed not by monsters, but by ordinary people—step by step, decision by decision.

    🧭 A Moral Compass: Evil Is in Us, Not Just “Out There”

    Peterson’s warning is not about abstract philosophy—it’s about confronting our own potential for evil.

    He often quotes Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who wrote:

    “The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”

    Evil isn’t just something others do. It’s something any of us could do, if we let resentment, deceit, and self-betrayal take root.

    👣 Final Thought

    Peterson doesn’t just ask us to “not be evil.”
    He asks us to take up the burden of truth, meaning, and responsibility—to resist evil by choosing to live honestly, act justly, and carry what is ours to carry.

    💬 What Do You Think?

    Have you seen this kind of evil—or its beginnings—in everyday life?
    Do you agree with Peterson’s take?
    Leave a comment below—I’d love to hear your thoughts.

    If you found this reflection helpful, consider subscribing to get future posts directly. And if you know someone who’s been wrestling with these questions, feel free to share.

    Developed with assistance of ChatGPT

  • A Hard Look at Modern Charity

    Should We Expect the Homeless to Help Before They’re Fed?

    We all want to help the poor. But what happens when help becomes a routine—something expected, no matter what? In this post, we look at a story from a soup kitchen and ask a hard question: Should charity expect effort in return?

    *Q: When I worked at a soup kitchen, there were about 100 homeless people outside. Trash was all over the street. I asked, “Why not have them clean up before they get their free lunch?” The answer? There were seven soup kitchens within half a mile, and they’d just go to the next one instead. Many of the people looked well-fed. It made me wonder—should charity require something in return?

    A: That’s a sharp and honest question—and a very important one. In today’s welfare society, unconditional aid has become the norm. Many institutions and charities give without asking for anything back. At first, this feels like kindness. But over time, it can cause real problems:

    • It removes effort. When people know they’ll get help no matter what, some stop trying. Not all—but many.
    • It removes dignity. Work—even small tasks—gives a person value and purpose. When we give without asking for anything, we may treat people as if they have nothing to offer.
    • It removes responsibility. A community stays strong when everyone takes part. When some people always give and others only take, the system wears down.

    Your suggestion—asking people to clean the street before lunch—is simple and fair. It offers food and a way to contribute. But as you saw, if other places ask for nothing, people will simply go where it’s easier. That’s human nature.

    This is why real change often happens best at the local level, where smaller organizations, churches, or mutual aid groups can build relationships, not just routines. When people feel known and needed, they are more likely to respond with respect and effort.

    So what’s the answer?

    We need a model of charity that combines:

    • Compassion (yes, help people in need)
    • Dignity (trust that they can contribute)
    • Accountability (expect something small in return)

    This doesn’t mean turning people away who can’t work. But it does mean offering a better path to those who can. A simple job like picking up trash or helping in the kitchen can make a big difference—not just for the community, but for the person doing it.

    Conclusion:

    Free meals are good. But earned meals are better—not because they cost less, but because they mean more. The goal of charity should never be just to fill a stomach. It should be to help a person rebuild their life, step by step.

    Written in collaboration with ChatGPT