THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SATANIC CULT INVOLVEMENT: AN ...

3
makes the notion of evil possible. Evil cannot be equated with suffering, however, it is
necessary that this suffering be experienced as deliberately inflicted upon one by an
individual, or force, external to oneself. Evil, in other words, is typically personified.
Although evil, essentially defined as deliberate violence inflicted on a sentient being,
usually finds human expression, it is often attributed a supernatural origin (Russell,
1977). Not all suffering can be attributed to human action or inaction. All cultures,
therefore, to some extent interpret negative events as being inflicted upon them by some
or other malevolent supernatural spirit or force. Evil is personified because people
experience it as a malignant intrusion from outside (Cavendish, 1975; Russell, 1977).
Satan, the personification of the principle of evil, is a mythological figure, and this
dissertation thus begins with a review ofconceptual evolution ofevil in Western culture.
Every known people and culture produce myths, yet there is no commonly accepted
definition of myth, and of what distinguishes myth from religion and folklore (Harris and
Platzner, 1995). Myths may be defined in· many different ways according to one's
purposes and theoretical perspectives. Myth generally implies belief in supernatural
forces, that is, "in beings who are both different from and superior to living men in that
they exercise, either directly or through the intermediary of natural phenomena, a benign
or harmful influence" (Luquet, 1959, p. 1). Myths are thus often religious narratives
concerned with representing humankind's relationship with the supernatural world. As
this is a psychological dissertation, the approach that will be adopted is one that regards
myth to be a natural expression of the psyche, serving to "purge unacceptable desire,
provide creative energy, reconcile individuals to their environment, and attribute moral
order and meaning to the universe" (Harris and Platzner, 1995, p. 39). More specifically,
the interpretation of myth to be employed here is a deliberately narrow one that stresses
the unconscious significance of myth in terms of its intrapsychic origins and functions.
Freud (1901) stated that "a large part of the mythological view of the world, which
extends '" into the most modem religions, is nothing but psychology projected into the
external world" (p.258). In other words, mythological figures are considered to be