To quote another reviewer who said it well "I'm assuming that this book was published before the widespread acceptance of biological causes of mental illness, since Peck's "case studies" that appear to be primarily cases of obsessive-compulsive disorder, major depression, borderline personality disorder or some form of psychosis, all of which are now treatable with drugs" (Cade Foster). I completely agree. When I read this book quite a while ago, I found it pretty absorbing, but I was alarmed to see him call behaviors I recognized in myself evil. Later I found out they were aspects of OCD. I believe he also describes aspects of ADD/ADHD. These conditions are treatable medically and/or with diet and are not "evil". A very dangerous, irresponsible, and outdated conclusion.

Twenty-five years ago Dr. M. Scott Peck (author of "The Road Less Traveled" series of books) threw down the gauntlet, challenging the psychological and scientific communities to subject human evil to the same rigorous study as other human behaviors. Only within the last very few years has anyone had sufficient courage to take up that challenge.

Ever been relentlessly lied to - or about - by someone? Ever been stunned to realize that someone in your life somehow behaves as though he's the center of the universe and everything and everyone else is somehow LESS? Ever come face to face with virulent narcissism? This book will help you understand. But beware: such knowledge comes at a cost. Gone forever will be any vestage of naivete.

Psychiatrist, Dr. Scott Peck, defines human evil. After working with thousands of patients, Dr. Peck finds that there is a common thread between many of them; a life of lies along with complete & total self-absorption. To realize that there are people among us that are truly evil is unsettling, to say the least. However, the ability to recognize evil people is critical and crucial to human self-preservation. The reader must be careful, however, not to "diagnose" all liars and narcissistic people as evil. This is an eye-opening book, but "sheltered" readers may have trouble believing that their fellow humans can be capable of the evil that Dr. Peck identifies with such detail.

After reading, enjoying, and becoming inspired by The Road Less Travelled I had to take Dr. Peck's writing seriously. People of the Lie was a wrenching departure from his first book, a "nice book", as he says. Even tho I am no longer a Christian and in spite of the Christian overtones of POTL, I found it to be not just fascinating but helpful. It is a thought-provoking book, to say the least, and even "over the top" in parts. Still, to this day, perhaps 15 years after reading it, I think about evil in terms of Dr. Peck's principles. Whenever I encounter chronic confusion and pervasive lies I begin to think about the possibility of an evil personality. There are people I have known whose influences and actions struck me as evil, but their destructiveness was not evident at the time, when they seemed completely normal in every way. And that's one of his main points: we tend to think of evil as "back then and over there", not in the mother of three next door or the church deacon across the street, but that's exactly where it can be. And so often that destruction is visited upon children, so that the results are only apparent after years of awfulness, of crushed and crippled spirits, of destroyed souls. And he cautions us: it's all too easy to hate the evil person, but all of us are capable of evil. I believe he's right. This book is indeed an excellent beginning of a more scientific examination of the nature of evil.

M. Scott Peck is a psychiatrist who's definitely a renegade among his peers because of his thesis behind People of the Lie. Peck argues that Evil is not only palpable, but also even something that can be scientifically measured, analyzed and even classified as a bona fide, legitimate illness alongside cancer, TB, etc.. So certain is he of Evil being an indisputable reality and an actual term for actual illness in men--not merely a concept as the moral-relativist crowd professes--that I will in fact designate "Evil" as a proper noun for the length of my review.

Most of Peck's observations will resoundingly strike a chord with many a reader because of the easy understandability of his explanation of Evil as it manifests among everyday, seemingly average people including you and I. In People of the Lie, peck unmistakably identifies certain, idiosyncratic behavioral traits which define a person as Evil. His arguments for what defines a person as Evil are very persuasive since he lays them out in a severely meticulous and well-reasoned manner, which includes much logical foundation.

The focal point of Peck's thesis (Evil is a measurable quantity in people) is based on the fact that Evil people are people who never, ever, ever accept blame for their own misdoing and simultaneously reject personal responsibility, making them remorseless. Just by that definition alone, Peck clicks with so many readers because so many readers, in turn, do know all too many people who precisely fit this incriminating classification!!!! This only gets worse because, Peck reasons, Evil people don't just stop there; they also hurt others in a manner of lashing out instead of facing their own shortcomings. As the last, main piece of this trio, Evil people are also harshly narcissistic, for the purposes of Peck's definition, insisting that everyone else submits to their will and their will alone in an ideology of utter selfishness. Again, this behavioral trait is so very, very easy to identify in far too many people today that it's just a loathsome sign of how conscienceless society's become.

Peck then somehow hijacks his own line of thinking by making a sharp, left turn by insisting that the aforementioned, Evil people are just clinically sick and need professional help. While this book is praiseworthy due to its incorporation of morals to understand the "science" of Evil, if you will, this is one of Peck's many, unpalatable conclusions which actually take his well-founded thesis and misdirect from it. Peck gravely veers off into the proverbial deep end of making an impossibly difficult assertion when he actually writes--presumably with a straight face!--that the best way to fight Evil is by loving it!!!! WTF?!?! Yes, you read that right and in fact should proceed to pick your jaw up off the floor now. This argument is one of Peck's most seriously faulty ones because it guiltily reads exactly like an ultra-idealistic, emotional liberals' methods for tackling anything: just love it! Whether you're an Al-Q*eda terrorist, or merely a ped*phile who preys on kids, or how about just a regular, old serial killer who hunts for fun...Peck's radically liberal "solution" is to just "love" the Evil out of you, bad boy!!!!

Inarguably, Peck's credibility suffers irreparable harm with this totally imperfect assertion because in reality--something liberals have a terminal problem with--it's unworkable and impractical. No amount of idealistic "love" will cure the Islamofascist who's hellbent on killing infidels; the ped*phile who relishes in misusing kids for his own perversions; or the serial killer who has a predilection to kill. Owing to the fact that Peck himself knows how disgustingly idiotic his own conclusion is, he even admits that the only way to fight Evil is essentially by being just as, if not more so, evil as it. In other words, fighting fire with fire, which is 100% true! However, then, rottenly, Peck's liberal idealism seizes hold of his delusional mind again, and he argues that it's better not to take this "risk" as one supposedly becomes the Evil he's fighting if he adopts its tactics to fight it. Good God...here, Peck sounds just like every other Democrat out there who opposes America's right to self-defense through Bush's War on Terror. You know, the widely discredited argument that the US should just be "nice" and change its foreign policy and maybe, just M-A-Y-B-E, the misunderstood terrorists (I mean, "freedom fighters) will leave the US alone.

Peck's thesis also endures harm with the examples of patients of his through the years whom he's diagnosed as Evil. The examples are, quite frankly, asinine bordering on the ludicrous. Judge for yourself: in one case, a fifteen-year-old called "Bobby" had an older brother who committed suicide by shooting himself with his shotgun. His parents--apparently not in merely a sadistic and tasteless joke--then seriously went and saved the suicide weapon and "regifted" it to the younger, remaining son, "Bobby," as a Christmas present! While this can be more reasonably termed "unsympathetic" or "cruel," Peck crosses the line by branding the parents as "Evil." Now, the parents argued that "regifting" was merely practical, and in a sense it is!

Another case involves another teen boy, "Roger," and his parents. "Roger's" dilemma was that he was underperforming in school and getting into trouble. As Peck investigated, he suspected the parents were really the culprits behind the son's outbursts--as Peck apparently finds from time to time--and the "Evil" ones. Peck based this unwarrantable denunciation on the fact that the parents rejected his suggestion to encourage one of "Roger's" only interests--helping disabled or underprivileged kids, or something--because "Roger" hadn't cleaned his room properly. At most, this is an overreaction by the parents and quite vindictive and possibly selfish, too, but for Peck to brand the parents as "Evil" over this is stretching even asininity. If these are who qualify as "Evil" people for Peck's purposes, then what in the hell does he call Islamofascists, child rapists, murderers, etc.?

Another example involves a couple, "Hartley and Sarah." Their relationship to each other was so twisted that it--among all of Peck's' examples--was really the only one that plausibly could be termed a case of human Evil. Their relationship involved a corrosive co-dependence, a symbiotic relationship. The man, "Hartley," was basically such a whipped, liberal girlie-man that he was the submissive one in the relationship while "Sarah" was the overbearing boss. This involved "Sarah" berating "Hartley" constantly to the point where he basically needed to "grow a pair" in the worst way, and it manifested itself through repeated suicide attempts on "Hartley's" part. The absolutely sick part was that "Sarah" would continually get help for "Hartley" merely so she could continue her purpose in life: have him exist as her whipping boy!!!!

One of the final cases involves a completely out-of-control and promiscuous young woman, "Billie." This girl was such a case of damaged goods that her mother actually ENCOURAGED her to sleep around with older men!!!! Further, the mother completely deteriorated the girl's remaining morals by shamelessly discussing with her her own infidelity to her husband, "Billie's" dad!!!! "Billie" was in her early 20s and despite having her own apartment, had a hard time sleeping there for the night; in fact, she'd go back to her parents' home to sleep. In fact, every time the daughter would insist it was time for her to leave, the mother would make excuses to keep her daughter at her home longer. Through therapy, Peck concluded that the mother was "Evil" for this action and also for encouraging her daughter to have trysts, as the net effect of her promiscuity would be to feel cheated by men and come running home to her mother. Now, this is manipulation by the mother and selfishness, but, again...real Evil?

Peck's already badly injured believability takes a further downturn when he impudently strays into the territory of, I kid you not, exorcisms!!!! Reading People of the Lie, I perceptively suspected that Peck was the oxymoron called a liberal Christian, and this comical chapter on exorcism confirmed it!!!! I take as my all-purpose guide to exorcism Malachi Martin's seminal Hostage to the Devil; conversely, the kind of foul BS Peck writes regarding exorcism is so asinine that it's factually wrong. For instance, he claims to have encountered two patients of his whom he believed to be genuinely possessed, yet their behavior and the ritual of exorcism they underwent completely violate what Hostage to the Devil describes in bona fide possession cases. Moreover, what he asininely conjectures in a theological context about God and Satan is pure fantasy/wishful thinking. In example, Peck theorizes--in keeping with his overall liberal motif of loving the heck out of Evil to cure it/beat it--that one way Satan could be decisively beaten is by reaching out to it and trying to "love" it. Seriously. He goes on that Satan--being a creature of absolute impurity--would then reject the offer of love and simply retreat, or something completely ludicrous like that.

Despite the overwhelmingly many trends-of-thought that make Peck guilty of some serious misjudgments, his absolute, most unpardonable chapter is the second-last one entitled: Mylai: an Examination of Group Evil. Shrewd readers will perceive that Peck's plot here is to arrogantly condemn the entire US military in Vietnam of massive, institutionalized Evil. This chapter is beyond the pale, anti-American, vicious and should earn Peck a complete boycott just for the audacity alone of dragging the institution of the US military through the mud as he does! This chapter was so difficult to get through because it's about 40 pages of Peck lobbying bitter broadsides at the US military and soldiers! Here's his censurable "reasoning": what occurred with the Mylai massacre wasn't merely the isolated incident sane Americans all know it to be, but, rather, was only one of many, other, undocumented massacres in Vietnam. Peck further exposes how liberal and anti-American he is by misusing the same old liberal accusations against the military: he alleges that the way the military is established with its specialized training among different soldiers means it's predisposed to breeding a culture of Evil. Peck alleges that soldiers are dehumanized in war zones to the point where the vast majority of them forget their training and/or conscience and are more likely to commit atrocities. Peck alleges that the US involvement in Vietnam was one of the WHOLE COUNTRY being in bed with the concept of Evil, and accuses the US of being the aggressor there! Doesn't this sound familiar to Democrat/lib thinking in this post-911 world, where libs charge the US with being the killer, the aggressor and the instigator of violence against the Arabs?!?! Of course it does! Predictably like the good, little, typical lib Peck is, he then insanely and idiotically offers retarded, liberal "solutions" to the "problem" of Evil caused by having a national military. Are you ready for what the hell he proposes? He proposes disbanding the whole US military and creating something like a Peace Corps which wouldn't fight wars, but just help out in trouble spots around the world. MY F***ING GOODNESS! When I read this, I basically blacked out from the understandable outrage. Again, also note how scarily close Peck's vile thinking is back when this was published (early 80s) to the Democrats/libs of current times.

The conclusion is that People of the Lie starts out with a very interesting and demonstrably true thesis: that Evil is real and exists and manifest in people. However, as I've incontrovertibly outlined by the use of nothing but hard facts and airtight examples from this book, Peck irreconcilably destroys his credibility with asinine examples, totally false, theological conjectures, and the worst of all: absolutely liberal, elitist scorn and hatred of the US military as an institution which breeds the very epitome of Evil itself. For that chapter alone, his book deserves a widespread boycott and nothing but condemnation because he's ruined any and all semblance of respectability.

Scott Peck repeatedly through the beginning of this book states how much of his opinions are from a christan point of view in this book.
He also points out that many anti religion people will dump the book right at this point. While I agree most will put it down it still should be read instead. There are many great points/examples in the book made about the self-rightous religous people and their failure to self analize. That right there is enough to not discount it as religious propaganda but a book of well thought out phychology and people. Overall I think this is a great book and worth the read.

Mobbing experts need an incredible amount of knowledge to understand group evil and its capability to destroy.

The People of the Lie explains the motivation behind group evil - and how it is justified in the minds of group. The book makes an important point: that the group is collectively immature and willing to do things that no one would do alone.

Mobber alone are cowards. But once the group solidifies - it is steelclad and deadly - no matter what it's moral agenda or cause may be.

As an ad hoc destructive ideology, mobbing must be understood for what it is: human evil.

This book condenses a 28 year pychiatric career into some great observations about people you know and meet in everyday life. It is interesting to anyone who has to deal with one of these "People of the Lie". I know that when I do, I have to work overtime to ensure that my sense of well being is maintained in spite of the machinations of a person of the lie. The book was very insightful and saved me from having to become a shrink in order to gain this practical knowledge.

This book sadly is the diametric opposite of Peck's first classic book, A Road Less Traveled. I believe that his first book stated it correctly, evil is not an outside force or external locus of control. Evil is not an outside force of an anthropomorphic "devil" as this book suggests. Instead, evil is symbolized by the metaphoric stories of devils which in reality were employed by Manifestations of God or Prophets to describe our own narcissism, ego, "satanic self" or animal side versus our angelic or spiritual side. Our "free will" makes the choice between our animal or spiritual sides. Evil is best described by the works of Gary L. Matthews. There can be collective evil egos or animalistic intents as well. Alas, People of the Lie is problably the worst book I have ever read, while his first book is among the best I have read, the sales differences between the two tell the story.

I have often thought that the word "evil" was a bit strong. Over time I have come to understand more about it as a concept and behavior.

I enjoy understanding the etemology of words- it helps me to understand what a word really means. Here is an interesting etymology of the word "evil."

The modern English word 'evil' (Old English Yell) and its cognates such as the German 'Übel' are widely considered to come from a Proto-Germanic reconstructed form *Ubilaz, comparable to the Hittite huwapp- ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European form *wap- and suffixed zero-grade form *up-elo-. Other later Germanic forms include Middle English evel, ifel, ufel Old Frisian evel (adjective & noun), Old Saxon ubil, Old High German ubil, and Gothic ubils. The root meaning is of obscure origin though shown to be akin to modern English 'over' and modern German 'über' (OE ofer) and 'up' (OE up, upp) with the basic idea of "transgressing". (from wikipedia)

The concept that Peck puts forth of Evil it is fundamentally the transgression over the will of others; interfering with freedom of other; imposing ones will over others - all by the mechanism of ego. This book is a wakeup call for the many millions of people in this world who simply feel they must exert their selves over others. It begins with our current Politicians, moves through our Religious institutions, and descends into our business and relational world. It means that we suffer from one- upmanship, power plays, power lunches, excessive competition, and the list goes on... All of this for the sake of the out of control ego.

I'm not into the exorcism thing - different strokes for different folks- but Peck did a good thing by writing this book.

This book is for all those wrestling with the pain of personal betrayals by people who should love and protect them. Those who are struggling to understand why others keep hurting them will find solace in this book. It offers an unflinching look at the ugly truth behind many people's motivations. It is simply not realistic to pretend that "normal everyday people" are incapable of monstrous, though subtle evil. Subtle indeed. This subtle, insidious kind of evil can occur continuously behind the thinnest facades of any family or organization without ever being acknowledged for what it is. The fact that it is often not overt enough to be openly identified as evil often leaves victims without a way to cope or understand. The covert cloak of obscurity and denial under which this kind of evil operates is perhaps one of its most damaging and confounding aspects.

This book was a page turner for me. Dr. Peck's style is direct, straight-forward, and to-the-point while still being entertaining and colorful. He confronts his patients the same way in the book. I found myself saying "yup," "exactly!" and "Uh-HUH!" often and at times burst out laughing. The book is also heartbreaking in describing some of the evils Dr. Peck illustrates.

I'm glad I read this book. It has given me that "missing piece of the puzzle" that had prevented me for so long from letting go of some past abusive relationships. I could finally admit, yes, those relationships were just as bad as they seemed. People did treat me with malicious intent. They did wish to harm me. The past was exactly what it looked like and there definitely is such a thing as evil. Thank you Dr. Peck for giving the world a much needed light on this truth.

In this book, Dr. Peck begins the Herculean feat of charting a course for the recognition, analysis, and healing of evil. In essence, he clears away some of the brush and thistle along humanity's winding ingress to understanding why we commit and are affected by diabolical behaviors. Other than the exquisite writing style that unfolds throughout the book, I found the subject matter covered a brave foray by its author. Admittedly, the subject of evil (i.e., of what it is comprised, its prevalence and characteristics, etc.) is an uncomfortable one to dissect and analyze, much less discuss. When doing so, we essentially confront our own fallacious, entropic tendencies. Due to the fact that Dr. Peck walks the tightrope in attempting to fuse nosology (science) with theology (a lofty task, indeed), he defiantly places his own reputation on the line. This is nothing greater or less than sublime. As a scientist and writer, I can certainly appreciate such bravado. Indubitably, most great thinkers must question the status quo in order to disengage assumed barriers of knowledge and truth. Though a Christian, Dr. Peck demonstrates a patulous attitude to all belief systems that bespeak the virtues of clemency (e.g., he reveals details of exorcisms of which he partook, alongside "loving" atheists and agnostics). Often deferring to other experts (e.g., philosophers, writers, priests, saints, shamans, and all who have taken keen notice of "evil"), Dr. Peck does anything but place himself on a pedestal. Rather, he perceives himself as one of many, who is merely attempting to enable a paradigm shift in the field of psychiatry. Beyond this, however, his greater mission is to break some ground in the realm of human love.

As Dr. Peck defines it, "Evil is in opposition to life. It is that which opposes the life force." In other words, it is not just that which is linked to murder of the corporeal body, but destruction of the spirit, as well. "Evil is that force, residing either inside or outside of human beings, that seeks to kill life or liveliness. And goodness is its opposite."
Unlike some other reviewers, I do not believe the case studies he features are meant to influence readers to submit to a brazen concept of evil. If the latter was true, he could have chosen more dramatic examples of patients with whom he has worked. Additionally, he could have described high-profile cases (e.g., those regurgitated a million times over in the media). Rather, I feel that he painstakingly chose muted examples, to demonstrate the insidious, covert, deceptive, confounding, and prevalent nature of evil in seemingly "normal", "healthy" and "law-abiding" people. In most societies, many people who are (overwhelmingly) evil (or who are influenced by evil) are never caught in the midst of the atrocious acts they commit. Most parents who are devious and abusive to their children do not have criminal records; in fact, many of them are model citizens in their communities. Most child predators will live their chronological lives, without conviction (both literally and metaphorically). Amidst personal and professional stomping grounds, many maleficent manipulators and sadists are so adept at combining surreptitious with deceptive natures, they leave their abused victims scratching their own heads and asking themselves, "What just happened here?" In fact, as Peck notes, evil has freer reign (and is more difficult to pinpoint) when committed by groups. Although I found Peck's chapter on Mylai (as an example of group evil) a bit overwrought, I also perceived it as apropos, considering the war we are fighting in Iraq, 24+ years post publication of this book. NOTE: Although Dr. Peck did not mention it, one of the best novels (my favorite, in fact!) that describes the highly influential and powerful nature of evil on both individuals and groups is Bulgakov's work, Master and Margarita.

Most of the time when we are initially confronted with evil (in other people), we just "feel" that things are remiss. I agree with Peck, that in time, repulsion serves as a natural reaction to those who are evil. I also concur that the study of evil can be dangerous, as a certain faction of the population can employ measures of ostracism to justify their own concepts of what is repulsive. Perhaps, this is what Peck meant by "...the end does not justify the means. If we kill those who are evil, we will become evil ourselves. If we attempt to deal with evil by destroying it, we will also end up destroying ourselves, spiritually, if not physically." As Peck describes, the latter premise is a Strangelovian (Peck's favorite word, by the way), nihilistic vacuum, from which one, who not only wishes to recognize and understand, but also eradicate evil, can never escape. Beyond hope and faith, only love can truly serve to annihilate evil, and keep it at bay. At first bite, this tastes very Christian (1 Corinthians 13), which may seem offputting to non-Christian readers. Yet, most leaders of great religions have admonished the same. My personal conviction is that when enough people speak in cacophony, in order to hone in on that which is true, one should find where the harmonies occur. Therein, the divine will be found.

The one thing that I pride myself on are my keen perceptions. You know when you meet someone for the first time, but there is an aura that puts you ill at ease. You try to put your finger on it, yet you remain baffled. Well this book explains those "gut feelings", if you will. I was aware enough throughout my life to know it wrong to ignore my center senses. This book will teach beyond this primitive awareness. Pay attention to what this book teaches, choose wisely, and pass on your wisdom to those you value.
ELRoe

I had a hard time getting thru this book. Not that it was too hard, but one of those you have to read some and then go outside and look at your flowers to calm yourself. Some of it is very rough, but enlightening at the same time. I recommend every single person read this book at some point. I explains a lot of things to me. The mind of a sick person thru the eyes of a DR. Very interesting.

Peck is writing like Freud long after it is ok to practice "science" using anecdotal evidence. This methodology is highly suspect and cannot be used to prove any theory. The theory Peck sets out to prove -- that a Christian conception of evil exists -- is itself suspect because he approaches it from the biased perspective of a believer. As a work of science and medicine it is therefore not worth the paper it is written on. Nevertheless, I give it three stars because it is a good read, and it is interesting. The anecdotes tell you as much about Peck as they do about his subjects.

Author of the classical "The Road Less Travelled", Scott Peck is a most interesting writer. In his afore mentioned book, he focused on Love; in this one, he focuses on evil. Human "evil" is most often considered with no serious background or consideration, but Peck proposes in this work a very serious use of the term. In short, he proposes "evil" as a very strict psychopathological feature, alongside with the likes of schizophrenia and depression.

The book divides itself in 7 chapters. It covers a wide span of occasions where evil is at work; from Peck's own patients to the atrocities of the Vietnam War and cases of possessions and their exorcisms. While this may sound dramatic, it isn't so at all.

Anyone with an interest in the human mind and how it functions will find a lot in this amazing work. Moreover, if you had the opportunity to have suffered the company of an evil one, you may find some real solace in here, if only because something without a name is always more frightening than something named. This is what Peck does here; he gives something a name so that we can fight it more efficiently. Defining evil as a case of dysfunctional mental health is part of the goal in "The People of the Lie", and Peck does it well. It gives much thought about the issue, and it's a riveting read. I loved his previous book, and I love this one equally. I highly recommend it.

This is a brilliant work. Peck divides his book into two approaches. One is his thesis that evil is divided into two types: those who are sliding into evil and those who have attained it. I would venture to say that most peole who read this book will find themselves, at least sometime in their lives, in the first category. Those people who belong to the second group would of courese not be reading Peck.

The writing is concise, lucid and even entertaing.

Scott Peck's best, if not most famous, work.

If you find yourself baffled by the behavior of people around you, or dealing with the after math of some traumatic experience, this book may show you just what is going on. Once you read it you cannot ever go back and be ignorant of what Peck lays out.

I also recommend (for a more Jungian take) Sanfords "Jung and the Problem of Evil." .Jung and the Problem of Evil: The Strange Trial of Mr. Hyde Sanford references Peck and vice versa. but if you need to understand evil and how it operates in the world... this book is without a single competitor

The book is one of those more than worth reading. WHY? B/c it will indeed be a strong link used to transform you to the person you know and want to be - for yourself and the world around you. It is a must read if you are a person that wishes not to live a lie!

I purchased this book along with father malachi's exorsism tales. I wasn't looking for horror (and there was none). The topic is interesting and I don't doubt that evil exists (you can take a short trip to any public place to realize that!)... What I found very disturbing about this book is that Mr. Peck didn't seem to present a clear or fair judgement at all of the subjects he was studying. Peck gave several case studies of people he deemed as "Evil" by his own words but I just can't fathom how he saw evil as it was explained to me in his words. I know that the people were bad or wrong.. but evil? I can't get from what he wrote that they were evil. Maybe they were but that's not how HE explained it. It kind of seemed to me that Mr. Peck was on a sort of witch hunt and I think it's fair to say that if other people in his field were to hold his opinion high.. there might be some problems with the outcome. I'm not saying he's wrong or right but the way he explains things is not clearly defined for me to draw the conclusion of "evil" in those people. Evil does exist and I think if one were to write about it, it should be handled with a bit more clarification to the general public. Mr peck also seems to believe that all evil people are of course mentally challenged but he seems to take it one step furthur in attempting to commit to the fact that certain scientifically proven illness IS evil as well as illness (schitzophrenia), not JUST illness. Does neurology ever come into play? It was difficult to read because it droned on and on and wasn't really very interesting or detailed or informing. He does proclaim that his experience is limited.. and that was obvious to me as well. This book lost me at the first case study because I was waiting for it to impact and was left wondering.. WHAT? WAS THAT? And as I kept reading hoping it would but.. more of the same, WHAT? and then a long period of boredom. It just isn't informative or factual at all. I'm pretty sure you'll get the same vibe.

I read this book for two reasons: greater understanding of people who have narcissism personality disorder, which I have had to deal with, and to get an understanding of a psychologist's view of 'evil.' I found the book very profound in its insights, and although I didn't get more information about narcissism directly (there are other sources that specifically deal with it) it certainly validated my view of it as 'evil' in its consequences.

I appreciated the definition of evil as much broader than just 'sin', (which is part of my own theological construct.) He has a good working definition of evil which explains much of what is happening in the world today.

I did not find the strategies for dealing with narcissism that I was seeking, and the chapter on exorcism didn't really help my understanding. I finished the book still wondering how to "heal the evil", which is the promise on the front of the book.

oh my goodness, this book continues the age old ignorance of labeling the mentally ill as possessed...Perhaps it is easier to label patients as evil then to admit that analysis can't help someone with a biological problem...diabetics used to be labeled as 'possessed' before the discovery of insulin, manic-depressives are regulated by lithium, yet Peck would label such a soul, a person seeking help from a medical doctor as 'evil' since obviously Peck can not cure these diseases by 'talk therapy' - I'm shocked and outraged. Peck repent!

As we live in a society (America) where superficial is the norm, this book speaks to the very heart of so many we interact with on a daily basis. This is a book that will prick the ego of many who choose to live their lives in pretense....yet a book that will encourage all the souls that desire healthy relationships via truth and intimacy. It is very easy to believe that the desire for people to "be real" and loving is a fantasy..not to be found in this world.. and therefore our desire or expectation of that from people is wrong. This book encourages those seekers that their desire is not the problem....the problem lies with the "people of the lie" which unequivocally descibes a vast percentage of Americans. So, this book will either encourage you or upset you....depending upon which side of it's truth you find yourself sitting.

This books was recommended to me some time ago. I bought this one for the brother.

What this book did for me, in this world we live in, was to "define evil" in its less than apparent form(s). I'm a-religious. While I knew evil was alive & well, I couldn't with any certainty define it. Much evil is obvious, but the insidious kinds, as defined in the book, is what I was looking for. I could feel it, but could not define it.

Peck sets out to do what could be considered to be the impossible--reconcile the ancient and persistent concept of an active evil in the world with a "cause and effect" worldview. He does so with sensitivity, respect and a willingness to look beyond the conventional wisdom. Without pandering to bogeymen, he nevertheless recognizes the limitations of current pscyhiatric understanding to explain and understand certain known behavior. By immersing himself into primary sources--the situations themselves--he has opened himself to a fuller understanding of the human character.

I have not read the entire book, but have read several pages throughout the book. It is not exactly what I was told by a friend that it would be, however, it is a very interesting, educational book.

This book is super acurate. I saw the evil of myself in these pages. I thought I was a good person, but I see the evil things I do on a regular basis. This book has brought recognition and healing to my life. When you name your issue, you can heal your issue. I am a recovering evil person.

Dr Peck does a good job of explaining what evil is in our world today and what we can do to help those who are afflicted, but only if they want help.

The basic premise of the book is an emotionally troubled patient named Charlene tried for years to seduce him as part of a power game and he calls that "evil" when she quit seeing him. It is painfully obvious he is in love with her and it seems very inappropriate for a doctor, trying to get in touch with a former psych patient, goes the the lengths of writing a book. I wonder if it worked and she got back in touch wih him--inquiring minds want to know.

We live in a time when people are "challenged" or "abused" or in need of "sensitivity training". All this psyco-babble is just so much smoke for the real problem, evil. Evil has been described (in paraphrase) as the abuse of power imposed to preserve one person's ego at the expense of another. The character disorders described in The Road Less Traveled can continue to mutate into full blown evil. And in our age of vanity evil has never come in more shapes and sizes. Sometimes we all must confront the question of why, why did this or that happen and/or how could someone do such a thing. The most baffling problem for a healthy, well-developed personality to understand is evil itself. Peck the psychiatrist with the penetrating insight of a spiritual pilgram explains this in a way that heals those of us who have experienced the brutalities of evil.

We live in a time when people are "challenged" or "abused" or in need of "sensitivity training". All this psyco-babble is just so much smoke for the real problem, evil. Evil has been described (in paraphrase) as the abuse of power imposed to preserve one person's ego at the expense of another. The character disorders described in The Road Less Traveled can continue to mutate into full blown evil. And in our age of vanity evil has never come in more shapes an sizes. Sometimes we all must confront the question of why, why did this or that happen and/or how could someone do such a thing. The most baffling problem for a healthy, well-developed personality to understand is evil itself. Peck the psychiatrist with the penetrating insight of a spiritual pilgram explains this in a way that heals those of us who have experienced the brutalities of evil. It can even be the beginning of healing.

Since this book deals with evil, some parts are difficult reading. This is a fair, balanced scientific exploration of evil from minor to maximum, i.e. demonic possession. Not based on sensationalism.

In The People of the Lie, Dr. Peck taps into human evil. He presents case studies of his own and shares with us in depth of their evil, depression, madness, and narcissism. In the case of Bobby, a depressed fifteen-year-old boy, he had a brother who committed suicide with a rifle. His parents gave him his brother's suicide weapon as a Christmas present: this was an act of evil. Bobby was a victim of his parent's evil.

According to Dr. Peck, people who attack others instead of facing their fears and failures are, in fact, evil. I believe this to be true. People who abuse others through the act of child abuse, rape, spousal abuse, emotional and verbal abuse, mental abuse, and physical abuse amongst other human abuse - the abusers are evil. They are emotionally weak and unable to face their own misery, weaknesses, and imperfections, and in turn, they make others suffer.

They are indulged in their own selfishness, self-deluding denial that causes harm to others. Their immoral and destructive behavior rots away at the core of every person who walks in their path.

As Peck reminds us, "Evil was defined as the use of power to destroy the spiritual growth of others for the purpose of defending and preserving the integrity of our own sick selves." As he states, "It is scapegoating."

Evil people are vicious because they are trying to destroy evil, but end up damaging others. Instead of destroying others they should be destroying the sickness that lies within themselves (paraphrased).

The title of this book is People of the Lie. Dr. Peck believes that lying is evil. At first, I was skeptical about this, but once I finished the book, I now understand his reasoning. Dr. Peck believes that wherever there is evil, there's a lie around. He states in his book, "The words 'image,' 'appearance,' and 'outwardly,' are crucial to understanding the morality of evil. While they seem to lack any motivation to be good, they intensely desire to appear good. Their 'goodness' is all on a level of pretense. It is, in effect, a lie. This is why they are the 'people of the lie.'"

One area in the book that I am debatable about is that Peck mentions that the healing of evil can be accomplished by the love of individuals. This may be true between a parent and a child, but the one thing that I learned in life is that we cannot change others. If we are in abusive relationships, the abuser drains us both spiritually and emotionally. I truly believe, in my opinion that it is not our job to change others, but it is their job to change themselves.

However, on the other hand, Peck contradicts himself by saying that we need to avoid people of such nature that drags others into their vicious games. How then can we heal evil through love if we are suppose to avoid them?

The one thing that Dr. Peck points out is that we have the freedom of choice. To choose how we want to be treated, how we want to live our lives, and how we want to treat others. We have the freedom to heal and we have the freedom to become a better person. We have the freedom to face our fears and get the help we need. With all the fears, insecurities, hate, misery, and failures one might endure, one thing stands clear, "The truth shall set you free."

This would be a mild diagnosis of Bush, Jr... With all the personality disorder traits Jr. exhibits, try looking up psychopathy!

If you have ever experienced or been frustrated by people who seem to have a hidden agenda then you will enjoy and benefit from this book. The author states (some are paraphrased) and explains the following:
1. The evil hide their motives with lies.
2. Evil people want to appear to be good.
3. When confronted by evil, the wisest and most secure adult will usually experience confusion.
4. Evil seeks to discourage others to think for themselves (fosters dependency).
5. To oppose evil we must have an ongoing dedication to reality at all cost.

I agree that to be mentally healthy we must believe what is true and only what is true. After reading this book you will be better equipped to deal with people who cause strife and confusion. It will also help you identify thought patterns where you are lying to yourself.

I wonder how many people fell like Bush Jr. fits this general criteria as a person of the lie?

The book came in a timely manner and in great condition.

Peck discusses scientific study of evil in the book, yet this book is full of nothing more than Peck calling whatever he doesn't like "evil." The case studies used certainly are severely disturbed people, but I would hesitate to call them "evil." He talks about how his repulsion of certain people is an indication that they are evil. I was certainly repulsed by his opinions and treatment of people in desperate need of help. Does this mean Peck is evil? According to his definition, it does. Judging a person as "bad" is one thing, but so liberally applying the label to "evil" to whomever he chose is not only immoral but irresponsible as well. The book does get one thinking about what "evil" really is, but for all the wrong reasons.

I found this book to be very useful when it was released - i had a dysfunctional uncle and two other men in my family who could be mildly classified as narcissitic and were a lot more selfish and deliberately hurtful to those around them. This book helped me understand that people like that do exist and how one deals with them. As many other reviewers have said the chapter 15 on satanism did bother me as it seemed unsubstantiated, well, until the release of Peck's recent book on exorcism. That kind of evil is a deep subject undoubtedly and subjective - it does tell you that Peck's opinions are often from a purely christian perspective and that is what caused chapter 15 also in the older book (this one). In fact in the recent book he goes one step further to decry 'new age cults' and accept christian fundamentalism as something 'mild' or even cute. He calls himself a 'baby christian' with a lot of pride, almost like mature christians know the answer to evil and am not even sure where non christians are placed, in this classification.

While respecting his love of faith - Peck has a world audience of all faiths, to atleast study how same or similar problems are dealt with in non christian traditions would have made me respect him a whole lot more and perhaps gained him a better place in the hearts and minds of his many followers of Road less travelled.

This was a very thoughtful look at the problem of human evil. His ideas are unusual, but groove with what I was suspecting all along. For example, he thinks the best way to find evil people (should you want to) is to trace them back from their emotionally disturbed children and relatives. During the section on exorcisms (!) I was gripping the book in fear but unable to turn away.

Even if you have read books on psychopathy, etc. don't miss this one because it will give you a whole new perspective.

This book may not be for everyone. It has to do a very specific kind of person whose whole life is one continued effort to reverse moral and spiritual reality, and whose every word and deed is therefore a lie. If you've had to deal with such people the book is extremely helpful because it helps you put into perspective experiences that are likely to seem extraordinarily shocking and radically at odds with what you're used to in people. If you haven't had such experiences the book may just seem odd and pointless. It's not the type of situation it's easy to grasp or even credit unless you've been there. That of course makes the book all the more helpful for those who need it.

I was deeply moved when I read Dr. Peck's "The Road Less Traveled," and sought out this book for further enlightenment. I was sorely disappointed, and to this day I have trouble believing that these two books were penned by the same author.
People of the Lie is a collection of case studies of troubled people who need help. Many of them are seeking that help when they enlist the services of Dr. Peck, who seems to have lost his sense of compassion. Most of these patients are suffering, but the best Dr. Peck can offer is to label them as, among other things, evil. I fail to see how this can help any patient, and this book has nothing to offer those whose goal is personal growth. Instead, read The Road Less Traveled.

This book will be of comfort and use to people who have been forced to deal with extremely difficult, demanding, selfish and self-deluding people of a type often referred to loosely as "narcissists."

Peck starts with the viewpoint of a Christian, prone to forgiving people, offering them care, and in the worst case hoping that one's love will overcome any entrenched selfishness. What Peck came to realize, and why he wrote this book, is that sometimes people are so selfish, and so intent on wreaking havoc in other people's lives, and yet at the same time so completely in self-deluding denial that their selfishness is causing harm to others, that one needs to label them "evil" and deal with them in a different way.

Peck observes that it is advisable if possible simply to avoid such people, who have a knack for dragging others into their vicious games. He expresses optimism, thought, that such people can (in the rare cases in which they seek or tolerate treatment), be helped. The essential prerequisites of success in that effort, Peck asserts, are a loving spirit, knowledge of how and when to categorize them as "evil", and nearly limitless energy and ingenuity to confronting the lies told by such people to themselves and others. But he admits that his book is only a tentative start towards a way of categorizing and treating these people.

I found "People of the Lie" to be compelling reading. A psychotherapist myself, I found strong resonance with with many of Dr. Peck's insights and conclusions. His elaboration of group dynamics was fascinating, especially his insights into the regression and dependency that occur in groups, as well as into how specialization can lead to immoral and destructive behavior. His prediction, written in 1983, that in twenty years, our all volunteer armed forces will again become involved in foreign adventures was eerily prescient.

As a therapist, I appreciated Dr. Peck's insights into how difficult it is to treat patients who demand unconditional love while operating out of a paradigm of power and control.
However, the cases he chose to illustrate as evil were not particularly complelling in their destructiveness. Charlene was exasperating and annoying, difficult, to be sure, but evil?

His diagnostic criteria were also lacking-where is the aggressive, meglomaniacal evil personality of the Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Husseim? Where is the personality of the Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer? Can't evil be served straight up as well as under cover?
I recommend "People of the Lie" as a worthwhile, provocative read for the insights the reader will glean into human and group behavior.

Reading People of the Lie was like having your eyes opened to experiences that puzzled you in the past. I was so grateful to understand how some people operate, because I had been bamboozled (as my dad used to say) by their appearance, words and demeanor that said one thing but then the contradictions in those words and actions on the other hand. Peck's insights into this personality which he calls "evil" were superb. As a person involved with religious groups for many years, I have met this type of person. Now I am better able to pick out someone and realize that the red flags I had been noticing are, indeed, valid. I urge everyone who works with any type of religious or humanitarian group or with children to read this book. It's important for the folks you deal with daily.

I read about my mother in this book. It helped me understand why she is able to justify her hurtful actions. Also recommend books about Narcissism to try and understand the kind of person that can hurt others without a thought as to the damage they are causing. My mother has always been able to justify her wrongful actions with religious sentiments. I believe alot of evil in the world is simply caused by mental illness gone unchecked.

I am a fan of Scott Peck's work - however there is a problem with this book: he leans on the writings of Malachi Martin. Now at the time he wrote the book he was not to know any better, but since the publication of the memoir by Time magazine's Robert Blair Kaiser ("Clerical Error: A True Story", Continuum International Publishing Group, 2002) there are good reasons to doubt much of what was previously believed to be known about Malachi Martin, and certainly to be suspicious of his "factual" writings.

So as a result "People of the Lie" contains a flaw, perhaps a fatal flaw.

This book is dangerous. I agree. I can also understand how some people will loathe it and some will love it. It is a great read and love it or loathe it. It is worth reading for the tale about George, The Man who made a pact with the devil, alone. At least this book divides opinions and creates strong views and that can not be a bad thing. It is also very easy reading, so if you have not read it, I suggest you procrastinate no further. After all procrastination is the root of all evil. Sweet dreams.

If you want a book on evil that's both highly readable and shockingly intellectually lazy - this is the book for you. The biggest problem here is Peck's refusal to define evil in any kind of a useful way. Now a normal people would define "evil people" as people who do evil things. They'd say evil is evil because of the harm it causes - the injury, the serious violations of other people's trust and rights, etc.

But not Peck. He doesn't want to be hemmed in by such a sensible definition. Instead he redefines evil as that which kills the spirit. Nice for a theological debate, but once he's muddied up the definition nothing's stopping him from labelling anyone he wants as evil. Which is precisely what he goes on to do for 250 pages. The "People of the Lie" Peck describes are mainly the weak-willed or the narcissistic. One or two are manipulative or verbally abusive. They are unpleasant people, to be sure. But evil? Most of them don't even begin to fill that bill as the ordinary person understands it.

In fact, what ended up truly horrifying me was Peck's care of his patients. In the section that made me absolutely cringe - a *severely* depressed man just out of the hospital after a suicide attempt (and verbally abused by his wife to boot) is dismissed by Peck as "passive" and a hopeless case. And that's on the first session. Which actually ends up being the only session because Peck decides not to encourage further psychotherapy since the guy is too hopeless. Peck pronounces: "There was no hope for change. There was no possibility of help for Hartley. He was too far gone." On that first visit Peck actually berates the poor man: "You're just about the most passive man I've ever met."

His final analysis of his patient suffering under a crushing depression? "I could have used a number of words: 'dependent, infantile, lazy.' Hartley was monumentally lazy. His relationship with Sarah was that of an infant clinging to his mother. He would not even come into my office alone, much less take the risk or exert the energy to think independently for himself." It's hard to imagine where Peck gets his supreme confidence in the diagnosis considering he spent most of that single session talking to the abusive wife and not the patient. Holy malpractice batman.

What about Charlene, his "teaching case" in evil? Surely she actually *does* something evil. Well, she is obsessed with her therapist to the point of stalking him a few times. But other than that she's just an underachiever who can't follow rules at work and is dishonest in therapy. Her greatest crime appears to be interrupting Peck's martini-hour, but otherwise she apparently never harms a soul.

In a world full of abuse, hate, crime and destruction - how can Charlene be anyone's poster child for evil? But again, Peck's view of evil is large. And one day he decides to tell her she's evil and suggests an exorcism. Depressingly, he doesn't see this as evidence that he's lost his moorings, instead he views her passivity in response as evidence that she is in fact evil. He does admit that she has never actually done anything "evil" per se, but that doesn't deter him in his diagnosis. His response: "give her a nation and she would likely have been a Hitler or an Idi Amin."

It's a rather large leap from lying to your therapist to organizing death camps. But logic isn't really Peck's muse. And unfortunately this is just one of many many other examples of bad psychology, bad therapy and just plain bad thinking. And if you're a critical reader, you'll have the disorienting experience of watching a therapist label one troubled but mostly harmless patient after another evil while himself systematically damaging them.

He's a good writer though, so people with equally fuzzy thinking will be taken in. And it's an enjoyable read if you don't think too much.

I am responding to some of the other reviewers.

First of all, you do not need to read any of the author's previous books in order to appreciate this book.

Secondly, Chapter 5 on exorcisms isn't meant to "prove" or "convince" anyone of the reality of demonic/satanic possession, but rather to demonstrate why the author himself, as an M.D. psychiatrist, is personally convinced that such occurrences are rare but real. Dr. Peck has recently come out with another book that gives a more detailed account of the two exorcisms mentioned in chapter 5 of "People of the Lie". The title of this new book is "Glimpses of the Devil", ISBN# 0743254678.

Thirdly, one reviewer feels that Dr. Peck is "anti-Vietnam." I agree with this assessment, but feel the author's point about "group evil" is valid whether or not you accept the author's premises regarding Vietnam (I disagree with Dr. Peck on many of his premises here).

Overall I feel this book was extremely worthwhile reading. I would have given it five stars but for the fact that I disagree with some of Dr. Peck's theological and political views.