Recently I read the novel Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad; it was ambiguous, appalling, abominable — I loved it. The novel implies that everyone has the capacity for evil and they are one false step from becoming it. It implies that all humans are inherently evil and we must fight to remain good — as relative of a term that is. Socrates, on the other hand, said that humans are inherently good, since we always act on the best intentions for ourselves in every situation. I believe they are both wrong. Sure, we have a propensity for evil, but with it comes an attraction to righteousness. Humans can vacillate between good and evil on a whim, and become truly good or evil. That’s one of the things that makes life so simple yet so complicated: you are the embodiment of your thoughts. It is as Lou Tsu once said, “Watch your thoughts; they become words. Watch your words; they become actions. Watch your actions; they become habit. Watch your habits; they become character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.” In this way, we are our own worst enemies.
I agree with youu and Lao Tzo; everyone has the choice and free will to determine how they behave. I do not believe anyone is inherently good or evil, but we have a choice to which side to live our lives.
You provide some interesting insights on Heart of Darkness that I’ve never thought about. I like how you apply it to your life and the lives around you.
Caleb–this is a very eloquent post. A great rhetorical question for the title, and I love the surprise of your opening sentence: most people don’t follow a claim about something being appalling and abominable with a declaration of affection!
The focus on choice is thought-provoking. And I like the invocations of thinkers like Socrates and Lao Tsu. What I have always struggled with in this book is Marlowe’s “loyalty” toward Kurtz and his affirmation that Kurtz is remarkable. Kurtz chose evil (“to exterminate the brutes”). And just because he has the ability, supposedly, at the end, to name “with candor” or with “magnificent eloquence” the evil he has done, we’re supposed to go along with Marlow’s affirmation of him as remarkable?
It was great to get the chance to meet you and your dad today. I hope you will send me the sonnet you wrote.
Keyes' Kingdom 
I agree with youu and Lao Tzo; everyone has the choice and free will to determine how they behave. I do not believe anyone is inherently good or evil, but we have a choice to which side to live our lives.
LikeLike
Interesting thoughts — That Lou Tsu quote is pretty inspiring.
LikeLike
You provide some interesting insights on Heart of Darkness that I’ve never thought about. I like how you apply it to your life and the lives around you.
LikeLike
Caleb–this is a very eloquent post. A great rhetorical question for the title, and I love the surprise of your opening sentence: most people don’t follow a claim about something being appalling and abominable with a declaration of affection!
The focus on choice is thought-provoking. And I like the invocations of thinkers like Socrates and Lao Tsu. What I have always struggled with in this book is Marlowe’s “loyalty” toward Kurtz and his affirmation that Kurtz is remarkable. Kurtz chose evil (“to exterminate the brutes”). And just because he has the ability, supposedly, at the end, to name “with candor” or with “magnificent eloquence” the evil he has done, we’re supposed to go along with Marlow’s affirmation of him as remarkable?
It was great to get the chance to meet you and your dad today. I hope you will send me the sonnet you wrote.
LikeLike