Evil And Corruption
Understanding the definitions with clarity will make a huge difference
Let’s have another look at evil and corruption. John Boyd’s definitions of these two words are crystal clear and unambiguous. Understanding both helps us avoid their traps.
Evil
In the complex landscape of human interaction, the word "evil" is thrown around quite liberally. But what is evil in reality? Is there a working definition that can help us tune out the noise and focus on the signal of evil when it presents?
Let's take a look at John Boyd's briefing, "The Strategic Game of ? and ?." Here we find a clear definition of evil and profound insight about its nature. At its core is a paradox that exposes the complexities within human dynamics. The quote taken from Boyd's briefing captures this paradox:
"Evil: Occurs when individuals or groups embrace codes of conduct or standards of behavior for their own personal well-being and social approval, yet violate those very same codes or standards to undermine the personal well-being and social approval of others."1
This definition seems straightforward. It challenges us to dive deeper and think on the intricacies of human morality. It sheds light on the dual nature of the human moral and ethical compass. Principles adopted for personal gain can be manipulated to inflict harm upon others. By defining evil in this way, Boyd helps us recognize its presence all around us with greater clarity.
Boyd's insight transcends the literary and cinematic archetypes of villains. Instead we can look into the subtleties of human behavior. We can see the hypocrisy inherent in individuals or groups who profess virtuous ideals. These act as a cover for their engaging in actions that betray those very principles. This dichotomy between rhetoric and reality highlights the insidious nature of evil. It is often veiled beneath a facade of righteousness.
Think of a politician who champions integrity and transparency in public. Yet behind the scenes they succumb to corruption behind closed doors. Or maybe the corporate executive who espouses ethical business practices. But to employees, customers and shareholders they perpetrate systemic injustices. These examples epitomize Boyd's definition. They reveal the moral contradictions that are sadly often the norm and not the exception.
Boyd's insights extend beyond individual behavior to encompass the dynamics of groups. Entire societies or organizations can succumb to the allure of collective hypocrisy. They embrace lofty values while perpetuating systemic oppression or discrimination. In such cases, the pursuit of power or status eclipses any commitment to ethical conduct. This can result in a perversion of professed values.
The significance of Boyd's definition is rooted in its capacity to unveil the deception inherent in acts of evil. He exposes the contradiction between stated values and actual behavior. This provides a clear understanding of evil in its variety of forms. It challenges us to look beyond what we can see. We must be diligent and scrutinize the motivations that drive human decisions and actions. We must also be aware that the guise of virtue often hides a darker reality.
In a world chock full of moral ambiguity, Boyd's insights serve as a beacon. They compel us to be jealously protective of our own integrity. We are called to hold ourselves and others accountable to high standards of conduct. If we confront the paradox of evil head-on, we can aspire to promote a culture grounded in principles and virtue.
Boyd’s definition of evil can help us to navigate the complexities of human morality with resolve. It empowers us to confront the deceit and manipulation that undermine the cohesion of our groups and organizations. By understanding this definition of evil, we can stay focused on the journey toward a more enlightened and ethical future.
Corruption
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority.”
-Lord Acton2
Now let's look at how Boyd defined corruption. Corruption is another concept often misunderstood. The many complexities of corruption have a profound influence on society.
As with evil, our definition comes from the briefing, "The Strategic Game of ? and ?." Boyd gives us a definition of corruption that transcends traditional perspectives.
Let’s review Boyd’s definition of evil:
"Evil: Occurs when individuals or groups embrace codes of conduct or standards of behavior for their own personal well-being and social approval, yet violate those very same codes or standards to undermine the personal well-being and social approval of others."3
Where people commit evil seeks to undermine the well being of others, corruption is about personal gain. Boyd’s definition of corruption is:
“Corruption: occurs when individuals or groups, for their own benefit, violate codes of conduct or standards of behavior that they profess, or are expected, to uphold."4
This definition gives us clarity and depth. It serves as a guiding light in unraveling webs of corrupt practices.
Boyd's definition of corruption highlights the breach of trust inherent in unethical behavior. It emphasizes the discord between professed values and actual conduct. This reveals the hypocrisy that often lies at the core of corrupt actions.
Take for example the ongoing "Fat Leonard" scandal. High-ranking officials in the U.S. Navy were found to have accepted bribes and gifts from a defense contractor, Leonard Glenn Francis. These bribes were exchanged for classified information that helped Francis land lucrative contracts. Despite their oath to uphold the integrity of their positions, these officers succumbed to the allure of personal gain. They betrayed the trust placed in them and compromised national security in the process.
Boyd's definition emphasizes the role of self-interest in driving corrupt behavior. This theme has echoed throughout the Fat Leonard scandal. Greed, ambition, and the desire for personal enrichment often fuel corrupt actions. This lead individuals to prioritize their own interests over their duties as naval officers. In doing so, they perpetuated a cycle of deception and exploitation. This undermined national security and has eroded public trust in the Navy.
Is there any hope in this defintion? Yes. By shining light on the workings of corruption, we are empowered to identify it faster and confront it head on. With accountability, transparency, and a culture of integrity, we can attack and root out corruption. We can pave the way for a more just and fair dealings.
Boyd's definition of corruption is clear and concise. It helps us understand and address the complexities of unethical behavior. It reframes corruption as a betrayal of trust and a departure from professed values. This gives us with a lens through which we can see its underlying dynamics. We can then come up with ways to combat it effectively. In doing so, we can build cultures where integrity prevails and is upheld.
Evil and corruption are all around us. They are always present somewhere in the human experience. John Boyd’s definitions of these words are clear. They empower us to be more attuned to evil and corruption, its presence and its effects. Understanding both also helps us avoid them.
John Boyd, “The Strategic Game of ? and ?”
John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton, Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, April 5, 1887 Transcript of, published in Historical Essays and Studies, edited by J. N. Figgis and R. V. Laurence (London: Macmillan, 1907).
John Boyd, “The Strategic Game of ? and ?”
ibid.
Well done!