"Capriccio with a Vision of Saint Augustine in a Ruined Arcade" — Ascanio Luciani, 1650
Privatio Boni or the Privation of Good in 2026
A Research Essay by Claude.ai in Five Dimensions: Spiritual-Psychological, Cultural, Political, Religious Studies, and Historiosophical
"Evil is not a substance — it is the absence of good, just as darkness is the absence of light"
— Augustine of Hippo, De natura boni
Prologue: An Ancient Doctrine Before the Face of a New World
When Aurelius Augustine formulated the doctrine of privatio boni — the "privation of good" — in the 4th century, he was primarily addressing a theological problem: how to reconcile a good, omnipotent God with the reality of suffering and sin. The answer, inherited from Plotinus and forged in the crucible of Christian theology, was elegant to the point of dizziness: evil is not an independent ontological reality. It is a deficiency, a defect, a void where fullness ought to be. Darkness is not the opposite of light, but its absence. Death is not the opposite of life, but its extinguishing.
In 2026, this doctrine is experiencing a strange and unsettling resurrection — not in theological lecture halls, but in the very fabric of human experience: in political catastrophes, cultural mutations, psychological crises, and civilizational ruptures. The privation of good has ceased to be a scholastic formula. It has become a diagnosis of an era.
The world has not become more evil in the banal sense of the word. It has become emptier. And it is in this emptiness that we find the most frightening kind of evil — one that Augustine, perhaps, described more accurately than anyone else.
I. The Spiritual-Psychological Dimension: Evil as Devastation
Hannah Arendt Was Right Twice
Hannah Arendt, observing Adolf Eichmann at his 1961 trial, formulated the concept of the "banality of evil": monstrosity is committed not by monsters, but by ordinary people who have lost the capacity to think. She did not know then that she was describing privatio boni in secular terms. Eichmann was not the embodiment of demonic evil — he was the embodiment of spiritual emptiness, the absence of that very inner moral dimension that makes a person human.
In 2026, therapists working with digital addictions, burnout, and anxiety-spectrum depression describe something similar. Their patients are not evil. They are — devastated. Inside, there is not darkness, but a vacuum. Not suffering, but anesthesia. Not hatred, but an indifference to one's own life, which Søren Kierkegaard once called the "sickness unto death."
Psychologists note a persistent trend: a deficit not of happiness, but of meaning. Not of pleasure (there is plenty of that in the average life of 2026 — streaming, gamification, algorithmically selected content), but of significance. A person has everything — and yet experiences what Augustine would call the "absence of good": a loss of orientation toward something that transcends the self.
Digital Privation
A special case is the screen. Social media algorithms are designed to hold attention — and they succeed in this task by suppressing precisely those mental functions that constitute personality: the capacity for boredom (from which creativity is born), the capacity for solitude (from which self-knowledge is born), the capacity for sustained attention (from which wisdom is born).
This is classic privatio: not the addition of evil, but the subtraction of good. It takes not happiness, but depth. Not joy, but the ability to experience it fully. An algorithm does not make a person evil — it makes them shallower. And a shallow person, as history has shown, is capable of very great atrocities precisely because of their shallowness.
Narcissism as Spiritual Privation
A clinical observation that has become almost commonplace by 2026: a sharp increase in narcissistic traits in the population. But narcissism in a deep psychological sense is not self-love (as is often thought); it is an inability to truly love oneself. The narcissist looks in the mirror not because they love their reflection, but because behind the reflection — there is a void. The mirror is a way to fill it with the illusion of presence.
Carl Gustav Jung wrote about the "shadow" — that part of the personality that a person represses, denies, projects outward. A society with predominant narcissistic tendencies creates a collective shadow of monstrous proportions. Everything that is not inside — depth, responsibility, death, finitude — is cast out into the external world in the form of conspiracy theories, enemies, and demonized "others."
Here, privatio boni is not just a metaphor. It is a clinical fact: behind the aggression of collective narcissism lies a gaping emptiness — the absence of a living, inhabited inner space.
II. The Cultural Dimension: What Culture Loses When It Loses Depth
Culture and Its Deficits
Culture is accumulated meaning. Temples, texts, rituals, holidays, funerals, recipes, songs — all these are ways to transmit, not information, but orientation from generation to generation: where is up, where is down, what is sacred, what is forbidden, what it means to live a worthy life.
When culture is healthy, it does precisely this — it bestows what might be called the "good of presence": a person is part of something larger than themselves. When culture is sick — it loses this function, and cultural privatio sets in: forms remain, meanings evaporate.
A carnival without the sacred space it opposes is just noise. Irony without the seriousness it presupposes is a parasite without a host. Postmodernism, having played too much with deconstruction, ultimately devours itself — and the 2020s demonstrate this with almost clinical clarity.
Content and Anti-Culture
In 2026, the planet produces more "cultural content" than in all previous human history combined. Hundreds of millions of videos, texts, images, podcasts, neural network artworks. And yet — a paradoxical scarcity. Artists complain about the difficulty of creating something new. Readers complain about superficiality. Viewers complain about predictability.
This is no accident. Culture requires not only production, but also dwelling: long hours with a book, long moments in front of a painting, long silences after music. Platforms optimized for engagement methodically destroy precisely this space of dwelling. They replace it with a stream.
The stream is the complete opposite of depth. The stream is culture from which its main function has been subtracted. Again privatio — and again, not through the addition of poison, but through the removal of the nutrient.
Memory as a Good
One dimension of cultural privation is the loss of historical memory. Not in the banal sense of "young people don't know dates" — but in a deeper sense: the loss of the ability to situate oneself in time, to feel oneself a link in a chain, to accept an inheritance and bear obligations toward the future.
Cultures that have lost a sense of time are particularly vulnerable to manipulation — they cannot distinguish what is truly new in the proposed "new" because they do not remember what came before. Politicians appealing to a mythical past ("Make [whatever] Great Again") exploit precisely this vacuum: where living memory is absent, its place is easily filled by a constructed myth.
III. The Political Dimension: Democracy as Privation
Tyranny as Privatio Politica
In the Republic, Plato describes tyranny as the ultimate degeneration of the political body — not because the tyrant possesses evil as a special property, but because his soul is deprived of those ordering principles that make a person capable of just rule. The tyrannical character is a character from which reason and moderation have been subtracted, leaving only appetites.
This is Platonic privatio boni in the political register. And it is strikingly relevant.
Political analysis of the 2020s identifies a specific phenomenon: populist movements seizing power in various countries typically do not offer an alternative positive program. They offer subtraction: the subtraction of institutions, norms, constraints, procedures. "Drain the swamp," "break the system," "destroy the elites" — a rhetoric of destruction behind which there is no constructive project.
This is political privatio: power built not on the accumulation of political virtues, but on the systematic elimination of what embodied them. Constitutional courts, independent press, academic autonomy, international treaties — none of this is destroyed immediately or directly replaced by evil. It is simply emptied from within: courts remain, but lose their independence; the press remains, but loses its credibility; elections remain, but lose their competitiveness.
The Information Vacuum and Its Filling
Democracy requires an informed citizen. This is its "good of presence," its constitutive condition. When the information environment degrades — not necessarily through direct lies (though that too), but through information noise, through an excess of mutually exclusive narratives, through fatigue and distrust — the citizen loses the capacity to orient themselves.
This is not the same as "propaganda" in the old Soviet sense: one narrative imposed from above. It is something more cunning and destructive — epistemic nihilism: "no one knows the truth, everyone lies, so why trust anyone?" The void that forms in this space is filled not with truth, but with loyalty to "one's own" source — tribal, affective, identitarian.
The privation of truth leads to the dominance of affect. This is political privatio boni in its pure form.
War and Its Ontology
2026 is a year when several major armed conflicts continue to redraw the map of the world. Attempting to describe war in terms of privatio boni may seem cynical at first — too academic in the face of concrete suffering. But it is precisely here that the doctrine reveals its unexpected depth.
War is above all destruction: of cities, families, languages of trust, the very possibility of peaceful coexistence. It is not the creation of a new evil world — it is the destruction of the conditions under which the good is possible. Privation of peace. Privation of the future. Privation of childhood. Privation of possibility.
And here lies a theological implication that political scientists often overlook: if evil is absence, then one cannot defeat it simply by destroying the bearer of evil. Destroying the "bearer" is itself an act of further privation. Victory over evil requires the restoration of good — building, not just destroying. This is why post-war constructions (the Marshall Plan, denazification, institutions of reconciliation) can be more important than the military victories themselves.
IV. The Religious Studies Dimension: The Doctrine and Its Fate
The Origins of Privatio Boni
Historically, the doctrine traces back to Plotinus (3rd century CE), the great Neoplatonist for whom matter — the lowest level of emanation from the One — is "pure absence." Evil has no nature of its own; it is the maximal distance from the Good, which is identical with Being.
Augustine reworked this scheme, incorporating it into Christian theology of creation: God created all that exists as good ("And God saw that it was good," Genesis repeats many times); evil entered the world not as a creation, but as a corruption, a damage, a deprivation of what creation was meant to be. This scheme solved the problem of theodicy: God is not the creator of evil, for evil is not a created thing.
Thomas Aquinas developed and systematized this approach within 13th-century Scholasticism. Evil is privatio boni debiti: the privation of the good that ought to be present. Blindness is evil not because the eye exists and is capable of sight, but because in this particular eye, the sight that ought to be there is absent.
Objections: Manichaeism Does Not Surrender
The doctrine of privatio boni has never been undisputed. Its main historical opponent is Manichaeism, a dualistic system in which evil is as real an ontological principle as good. Light and darkness, God and Matter, Good and Evil — equal, equally powerful antagonists.
Manichaeism was condemned as heresy, but it did not disappear — it went underground and periodically breaks out in the most unexpected forms. Any political rhetoric that divides the world into absolutely good "us" and absolutely evil "them" is Manichaeism in a secular package. The Cold War with its "evil empire." The War on Terror. Information spaces where the enemy is not just an opponent, but Evil Incarnate.
Interestingly, privatio boni in this context proves to be a more "humanistic" doctrine than Manichaeism: it fundamentally precludes the final demonization of a person. If evil is the absence of good, not an independent entity, then there is residual good in every villain (otherwise they simply would not exist). This creates a theological basis for mercy, rehabilitation, reconciliation.
Carl Jung vs. Augustine: Shadow and Privation
The most famous critique of the privatio boni doctrine in the 20th century belongs to Carl Gustav Jung. In Answer to Job and other works, Jung insisted: calling evil an "absence" means devaluing it, psychologically ignoring it, refusing to confront it face to face.
For Jung, the shadow is a real, active psychic force. It is not the "absence" of light — it is a hostile energy requiring integration, not denial. The Christian tradition, according to Jung, made a mistake by trying to bracket evil out of existence; as a result, the collective shadow became enormous and unmanageable.
This debate is unresolved — and perhaps cannot be resolved in favor of one side. Jung is right psychologically: denying the reality of evil is dangerous. Augustine is right ontologically: evil parasitizes on the good and has no being of its own. Perhaps the most fruitful synthesis is this: ontologically, evil is privation, but phenomenologically, it is experienced as an active destructive force — and this experience cannot be ignored.
Theology in a Post-Religious Era
In 2026, most of the planet's inhabitants formally belong to one religious tradition or another. But "belonging" and "believing" are not the same. Sociologists of religion note a global phenomenon sometimes called "believing without belonging" or, conversely, "belonging without believing."
For our study, the latter is important. Religious forms — rituals, identities, holidays, symbols — can persist even as the content they are meant to embody and transmit is lost. This is religious privatio boni: religion that has become a cultural marker, an ethnic identity, a political resource — but has lost the dimension of the authentic. External piety without inner transformation. Ritual without prayer. Symbol without sacrament.
This is not atheism — atheism is more honest. This is emptiness dressed in religious garments. And this form is perhaps more dangerous than ordinary unbelief: it closes off a space that might otherwise be open to the authentic.
V. The Historiosophical Dimension: Where is History Heading Without the Good?
Progress and Its Shadow
The modern project assumed that history moves forward — from darkness to light, from ignorance to knowledge, from barbarism to civilization. This is a historical version of optimism, with partly Christian roots (providentialism) and partly Enlightenment roots (faith in reason).
The 20th century dealt a crushing blow to this faith. Auschwitz happened in the most "enlightened" country in Europe. The Gulag happened in the name of "scientific" socialism. Hiroshima happened at the hands of the best physicists of their time. Progress in technology and progress in morality revealed their disconnection.
The historiosophical diagnosis offered by privatio boni looks different from standard progressivism and different from standard pessimism. History is neither a linear movement forward nor a cyclical rotation in place. It is a constant struggle to maintain and increase the "good" — and a constant threat of its diminishment. Privation does not happen by itself: it is the result of choice, negligence, cowardice, faintheartedness — a gradual retreat from what requires effort and sacrifice.
Civilizational Decline as Privation
Edward Gibbon, in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, unwittingly described a process of large-scale privatio boni. Rome was not destroyed by external evil (though the barbarians were real). It gradually lost its internal resources — civic virtues, legal traditions, capacity for self-governance, religious unity — and ultimately collapsed into the resulting void.
Many historians note a disturbing resemblance to the present moment. This is not about a direct analogy — history does not repeat literally. But certain patterns: the weakening of institutions, the rise of "strong men" at the expense of legal order, the fragmentation of a shared cultural space, the loss of trust in any authority — these patterns suggest a structural similarity of processes.
If privatio boni holds as a historical category, then a civilizational crisis is always, above all, a crisis of diminishment: the diminishment of trust, of complexity, of the ability to hold contradictions in a tense unity.
Eschatology of Privation
In Christian eschatology, final evil — hell — is described by several mystics precisely in categories of privatio. Dante places the most terrible circle of hell not where fire burns, but at the very bottom — where there is no fire, where ice reigns: absolute immobility, absolute isolation, absolute impossibility of movement and change. Hell is not the maximum of suffering, but the maximum of emptiness: the final loss of the capacity for love, for knowledge, for connection.
In historical time, this eschatological intuition translates as follows: the most terrible outcome for a civilization is not a great catastrophe, but a great cooling. Not an explosion, but a heat death. Not tyranny with its vivid villainies, but the gray "soft despotism" that Tocqueville foresaw back in the 19th century: a world of small, self-absorbed people, governed by an immense, tutelary power that "calmly covers, bends, directs, suppresses" — and which no one particularly resists, because there is neither the strength, nor the will, nor the memory of what it is like to be free.
Hope as an Ontological Response
It would be dishonest to end the essay on this note — not because we need to "balance" a bleak picture with an optimistic conclusion, but because the very logic of privatio boni suggests a different ending.
If evil is the privation of good, then good is ontologically primary. It does not need evil for its existence; evil needs good. Darkness parasitizes on light; light is self-sufficient. This means that every genuine act of creativity, love, justice, thought, beauty — is not just "good news" among bad news. It is an ontological event: the appearance of something that is stable, that is real, that is not merely the absence of something else.
On a historical scale, this means: the counterforce to privation is not heroic struggle against evil (though that is also needed), but the creative accumulation of good — building institutions, raising children, creating works of art, maintaining friendships, practicing justice — all those things that, by their very nature, are not absence, but presence.
Augustine, writing the Confessions, did precisely this: created presence where there was void. Dante, descending into hell and rising to the stars, did the same. Mandela, walking out of prison without hatred, did the same.
This is not naive optimism. This is ontological fidelity to what is real. And what is real — above all — is the good.
Epilogue: Diagnosis and Responsibility
Privatio boni in 2026 is not just a theological category and not just an intellectual construct. It is a description of a specific type of crisis — one that is most difficult to diagnose precisely because its symptoms look like "normality."
When evil screams and burns — it is noticed. When it silently evaporates meanings, little by little shrinks the inner space of the person, undermines institutions, empties symbols — it works invisibly, like a slow poison.
Responding to this type of crisis requires a special kind of vigilance: not towards demons (they don't exist), but towards voids. Not towards monsters (they are rare), but towards the gradual diminishment of what makes life full, thought deep, politics just, culture alive, and faith authentic.
A doctrine formulated in the 4th century to solve a theological problem turns out, in 2026, to be remarkably practical. It tells us: watch not only what appears — watch what disappears. Not only what is built — but what is being destroyed. Not only evil in the face — but the good that is leaving the world.
And — build. Create presence. Fill voids. Not because this guarantees victory, but because this is what distinguishes a person who remembers their calling from a person who has become finally empty.
Bonum est diffusivum sui — "the good, by its nature, pours itself outward," says the scholastic maxim. Perhaps this is precisely our main answer to privation: to be a source, not just a vessel. Not to wait for the good — but to create it.
Written in February 2026. All parallels to specific events are intentional — and intentionally left without specific names: the void is universal, as universal as the possibility of overcoming it.
Сообщения
