Lars Avenden Four Categories Of Evil

Exploring the "dark side" I have raised many personal questions. These questions vary from the seriousness of an evil act or whether or not it should be considered evil. For example, during class we've discussed stupid evil. Personally I don't believe stupid evil is true evil at all. Lars Svendsen’s four categories of evil consist of demonic, instrumental, idealistic, and stupid evil. My belief is Svenden’s four categories of evil should be just three, in thus so removing stupid evil from the list. In removing stupid evil from the four categories of evil it needs to be defined as something new, which I believe should be a horrific accident. Svenden defines stupid evil as “evil that occurs based on human incompetence, despite the fact that
nobody wished it.” An example of stupid evil could be the captain of the Titanic. Is the captain of the ship evil because he hit an iceberg, unintentionally, and in doing so killing over one thousand innocent people? These unintentional harms can’t be prevented but the weight damage of the damage can be lessened by raising awareness and taking careful steps. The paring of these two texts, “The Chain” and “Genesis 1-4”, causes myself to revise and challenge my reading of another. Both the readings relate to each other in terms of stupid evil and why I believe stupid evil shouldn’t make or be considered one evil. However, the point is not to just connect the stories but how the reading of one text changes your perception of the other. Personally, “Genesis 1-4” induced me to think this way while reading “The Chain”. One and the other text include examples of stupid evil. I see the garden of Eden and the acts that occur in there as stupid evil in “Genesis 1-4”. God clearly stated to Adam and Eve they can eat from any tree in the garden barring the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Although God was clear with his orders, the serpent convinced the two, Adam and Eve, to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil saying “when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil (Genesis. 3. 5).” Adam and Eve were not being evil when they ate the forbidden fruit but instead foolish. The Garden of Eden is not home to were the horrific act of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
We witness Adam and Eve being ignorant in their quest to eat the forbidden fruit. However, the two did not eat the forbidden fruit without poor guidance from the serpent. When an individual with knowledge convinces you to do something, you usually will do it, assuming they know what is right and wrong. That’s were Adam and Eves mistake was. They trusted the serpent because he knew what the forbidden fruit would do to them. Instead of listening to the serpent’s remarks, Adam and Eve should have possessed the respect to God and listened to his orders. When God returned to the garden he noticed Adam and Eve knew they were naked. That’s where the mistake of eating the forbidden fruit was brought to
intention. My question about the “dark side” is, is stupid evil even evil at all? From text we’ve read in class thus far this question comes to my mind consistently, “The Chain” and “Genesis 1-4” in particular. In both these readings we see acts of stupid evil and how those acts could’ve been easily avoided. Right from the start in “The Chain” there’s an example of stupid evil, when the dog attacks Brian Gold’s daughter, Anna. The owner of the dog did not mean or intend for this horrific act to happen but nonetheless it did. You would think the owner of the dog would know whether or not their dog is vicious and if so to put it on a tighter chain. After the attack a chain of events happen and this, along with the dog’s literal chain, is where Tobias Wolff gets the title of the story. Using “Genesis 1-4” as a lens or point of view while reading “The Chain”, numerous occasions of not being stupid evil are brought about.
I was prepared going into the reading of “The Chain” to expect horrific acts to take place and whether or not I should see these acts as evil. Of course, there are many acts in both the readings, “The Chain” and “Genesis 1-4”, such as the killings. However, just because there are murders in each literally text does not mean every action taken place is evil. An example of the way “Genesis 1-4” shaped the way I read “The Chain” is Adam and Eves acts in the garden and the dog attack in “The Chain”. The particular acts make people quickly think they’re evil. Following the reading of “Genesis 1-4” I was qualified to expect similar deeds in “The
Chain”. The argument of seeing these texts, “Genesis 1-4” and “The Chain”, as evil and not an accident can also be considered. Although, as mentioned before, I think the eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the dog attack as mishaps, I’m not blind to people thinking these deeds are evil. One could argue that in “Genesis 1-4” Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating from the tree which in return they should be labeled as evil. In regards to “The Chain”, someone could disagree with my belief and in doing so believe the dog is to blame and is evil. However, this would most likely mean the father, Brian Gold, of the daughter, Anna, who was attacked by the dog means he was justified for the murder of the dog. This relates to the way God responded to Adam and Eve disobeying his commands. “Genesis 1-4” provided me with prior knowledge to reading “The Chain” and in doing so prepared me for what to expect. The mentioned readings, “Genesis 1-4” and “The Chain”, pave the way for perfect examples of stupid evil and why I believe a few acts should not have been mentioned with the world evil. Instead of these actions being viewed as evil, they should be perceived as horrific accidents. There’s no way to completely stop accidents from happening but there are steps that can be implemented to decrease the chances of something catastrophic from happening. Although I believe stupid evil should be labeled as an accident, others disagree. Just because these people disagree with me does not mean they’re wrong. For example, in class I have heard other students make very valid points to why the majority of the text we’ve read in class are only stupid evil.