Historically, demons played a significant place in
history. Millions have died because of
the assumption of demonic influence, by monotheists and polytheists and
spiritualists. Some see demons behind
every corner, even today. Demons are the
epitome of evil, the enemy of humankind and of all that is good. From a philosophic standpoint, how do we
consider the demonic, or that which is called demonic?
Many call demons just a myth, just stories to entertain and
to encourage certain moral practices.
Certainly the tales of Faust and Hellboy are but stories. But how does
one explain the many, many experiences of evil spirits that people claim are
true? The story of The Exorcist by
William Peter Blatty is supposed to be based on true events, and other
exorcisms are confirmed. What do these
real events mean? Are they all
mechanisms of the insane?
Eugene Thacker, in his philosophic work, In the Dust of this
Planet, suggests that the demonic is a method by which we culturally explore
the reality of nothingness. The absence of life, of meaning, of purpose
frightens us so that we personify it and label it as a being itself. This would make sense with demons being our
own temptations, and evil circumstances.
But what about the stories of spirits who attack? Of those who are innocent, but experiencing
judgment? Are demons just a way to speak
of evil coincidence? Of statistical probability that bad circumstances will
happen to us?
It is also true that in ages past
many items that we have labels and some understanding of were called demonic in
the ancient and medieval world. Schizophrenia, seizures, fits of rage and
fevers were often “caused” by evil spirits in the ancient world. So is that which we do not really understand
(like schizophrenia, which we can describe and label, but not really determine
the cause), or cure still a black box, even though we do not call it “demonic”? Are we really any better off than those who
called it demonic? Is a book collecting
a list and descriptions of mental disorders really any better than a witch hunter’s
manual which catalogs and describes demonic activity? What is really the
difference?
Associated with mental disorders are those who cannot fit
into society or belong to a different culture. In the past, some were called
demonic, even though they had a place in their original society, such as
spiritualist healers and astrologers.
The foreign or strange is often called demonic by those who do not
understand certain actions. Is the
demonic fundamentally a way of us describing our own discomfort of those who
act in a socially awkward or unacceptable manner? Are those who cannot understand or appreciate
societal nuances still make outcast in the same way, even if we do not use the
term “demonic”? Are the labels that
separate the unwanted any better or worse than the term “demonic”?
