Heart Of Darkness Good Vs Evil Essay

Staring Into the Heart of the Heart of Darkness

1. Consider our discussion of good vs. evil, and fate vs. free will. What position does the pastor, Rev. Mark Long, take on these issues? (i.e., Does he believe people are destined to be evil, or that they make the choice to be so?) Cite the line(s) that support your response.

With regard to the case of Susan Smith, Rev. Mark Long claims that “she had a choice between good…and knew what she was doing when she made it” (2). From this, it can be assumed he believes that people are NOT destined to be evil or good, but instead make the decision to be evil.

2. Using Rev. Long’s terminology, what is Satan’s “beautiful presentation” to Macbeth in Act I of the play? What makes it so “beautiful” or attractive?

Macbeth, the “beautiful presentation” in Act I be the idea of killing the King coming into Macbeth’s head after the prediction of the witches. Though this act would be evil, it is attractive because killing the King would eventually lead to Macbeth becoming the king.
3. Rosenbaum discusses the differences between the perceived “evil” of various figures including the two boys described (p. 3), Adolf Hitler, the Menendez brothers (pp. 6-7), Charles Manson (p. 7), etc. What is his purpose in exploring these multiple “evil” characters? What is he trying to determine?
The different examples of “evil” were mentioned to explore how society decides what is evil and what is not. In some cases, the public is quick to declare someone as inherently evil based on his crimes, like in the case of the boys, but in other cases, like with Hitler, some people may think twice. In the case of the Menendez brothers, the judgment that the brothers were evil only comes after closely looking how they executed their murder of their parents. Rosenbaum was trying to explain where people draw the line that others are truly evil, as opposed to just people who have just committed a bad act.
4. How had Susan Smith justified her act of killing her two children? (i.e., what did she claim was her intent in killing them, and how was that intent, from her perspective, a “good” motivation?) Cite the line(s) that support your response.
Susan Smith justified the killing of her children by claiming it was better for them.

She was suicidal herself, but she viewed leaving her children motherless as “cruel;” in the hopes of being kind and giving her children the best, she killed them so they truly have what was best in her eyes, heaven. (4)

5. From the perspective of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, is there any way their plot to kill Duncan could be seen as reasonably “justified” or “good”? If so, what would justify this act? If not, explain. (i.e., if we consider that acts can be evil, but be based on good intentions, is that the case in this situation?)

From the perspective of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, the murder of Duncan cannot be justified. Macbeth’s sole intention is to kill the King just so he can get to a higher position. Macbeth even has a moral conflict about killing Duncan, and needs to be convinced to by his wife to proceed with their plan. If Macbeth is conflicted at the last moment, his actions cannot be morally justified.

6. Explain the metaphor that Rosenbaum uses on pp. 7-8 to explain the nature of the “categories of evil.” To what does he compare these categories? Do you find this comparison to be effective in illustrating his point? Why or why

not?
He compares the different types of evil to the areas within the city. There is not just one types of evil, just like there is not one neighborhood or area inside a city. Instead, the city has multiple divisions, just like evil does. Some types of evil are more wicked, just like some areas of city may be known to be more affluent than other areas.
7. Why, according to this article, does humanity seem eager to believe in the existence of an objective “evil”? Why would people want to accept that “evil” and “evil people” are real? Cite the line(s) that support your response.
Humanity seems eager to believe in the existence of an objective evil because people are “frustrated” with the idea that evilness may have a logical basis (9). People find it easier to just attribute immoral acts to “evilness” and “evil people” since the concept of evil has long been part of the culture that most people are accustomed to today.
8. How is the theological relationship the characters of Jules and Vincent in Pulp Fiction (pp. 10-11) perhaps comparable to the relationship between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as illustrated in Act I of the play? Explain.
While Jules insists that God had an influence on the survival of their victim and suddenly is opposed to the "tyranny of the evil man," Vincent continues to insist what happened was a “freak occurrence” (11). This is similar to how Macbeth changes his mind about killing King Duncan while his wife continues to insist they must kill him.
9. What paradox is explored in Rosenbaum’s discussion of the Oklahoma City bombing (pp. 15-16)? Explain.
The paradox revolves around how people claim that God is against wickedness and in control but still allows the Oklahoma bombing to occur. If God were actually in control and dislikes wicked acts, he would have prevented the bombing. So either God must not be in control, or instead he approves of wickedness.
10. Given Rosenbaum’s exploration of the concept of “evil” in this piece, evaluate Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, as they have been presented in Act I. Are they “evil”? Is one more “evil” than the other? Is neither? Explain your position.
Assuming the two actually carry out the murder, both of them would be committing an evil act. However, the wife does not seem to have any qualms about committing murder and instead calls on evil spirits to help her. She more easily buys into the “beautiful presentation,” while on the other hand, Macbeth seems to be conflicted and dislikes the idea of killing.