Evil origins: A Darwinian genealogy of the popcultural villain.

Abstract

This article argues that the sciences of mind can inform analyses of narrative characters, including their motives, appearances, and other traits. In particular, it explores the popcultural villain through the lenses of evolutionary and social psychology. Evolutionary psychology supplies a basic blueprint for impactful villains: they are selfish, exploitative, and sadistic. They contravene the prosocial ethos of society. Social psychology embeds this blueprint in the interactions of characters by offering mechanisms through which cruel behavior may be realized. The main mechanisms behind moral disengagement are empathic deficits, pseudospeciation, and Baumeister's notion of a 'myth of pure evil': an attributive stance whereby humans consider injurious actions the products of evil essences in others. Finally, disgust may contribute to a character's perceived evil nature through dehumanization, likely compounded by a cognitive conflation of disgust toward potential contaminants and moral disgust toward social transgressions. Following the theoretical discussion, the article offers 5 predictions as to the universal makeup of popcultural villains. All predictions are complemented with illustrative vignettes on popcultural villains that embody the principles proposed.

(Why) Do You Like Scary Movies? A Review of the Empirical Research on Psychological Responses to Horror Films

“…Horror invariably includes an element of evil, channeled via a human, a creature, or a supernatural force, which has the power to change events causing disruption and instability and which must be challenged and defeated (Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, 2016). If this force is not human or supernatural (ghostly, spectral), it is natural – plants, monkeys, ants, leeches, sharks, birds, dogs, bats, rats, bees, fish, earthworms, alligators, spiders, snakes, cockroaches, and dinosaurs have all been employed to create chaos and instability in horror films.…”

Did our ancestors fear the unknown? The role of predation in the survival advantage.

“…Nairne (2014) has argued otherwise, suggesting that self-preservation should motivate stronger encoding across a variety of scenarios, including those that are less likely to have been encountered by our ancestors (e.g., in space, as used by Kostic, McFarlan, & Cleary, 2012). Truly, considering a zombie’s methods encourages thoughts of fear and disgust, which are known to be quite salient in memory (e.g., Bell & Buchner, 2010; Chapman, Johannes, Poppenk, Moscovitch, & Anderson, 2013) and can induce feelings of dehumanization and immorality (Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, 2016). The fear of contamination via parasites and diseases also has a powerful effect on mate selection and how we behave in social situations (Prokop, Fančovičová, & Fedor, 2010; Schaller, 2006).…”

“We are legion”: Possession myth as a lens for understanding cultural and psychological evolution.

“…This choice of motif is no accident and no arbitrary cinematic convention. As researchers in moral psychology have demonstrated, people tend to run together concepts of physical and moral beauty and ugliness (Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, 2016; Tsukiura & Cabeza, 2011). Regan’s turning nasty in a moral as well as a physical sense—with her physical transformation being symptomatic of her inner state—is intuitively compelling.…”