Core 101
Professor Holton September 26, 2007
Evil in an Examined Life
Wicked, bad, morally deprived, hurtful, vicious: the word Evil can be described in countless different ways. Hoja, from The White Castle by Orphan Pamuk, and Socrates describe evil with two similar yet still varying theories. Socrates and Hoja both see incuriosity as a form of evil, yet they disagree on the root of that evil. Socrates thinks that the body is the root of all evil, while for Hoja, the root of evil is sin. Because of this difference, Socrates attempts to free others from their evil while Hoja simply tries to distance himself from it.
questioning it. In both of these cases, it is the lack of questions, or incuriosity that Socrates and Hoja see as evil.
Although Socrates and Hoja both treat incuriosity as evil, they still disagree on the root of that evil. Socrates believes that the body is the root of evil because it distracts us from the
intellect. He uses words like impiety and injustice for evil because both of these are the opposite of the forms. All of our physical drives and desires are caused by our bodies and simply interfere with the quest for these forms. Unlike Socrates, Hoja views the root of evil as sin. He believes that a person’s actions dictate whether they are evil or not, but that fate pre-determines these actions. Hoja says he does not fear death because, “disease was God’s will, if a man was fated to die he would die” (Pamuk 72). Hoja was calm during the plague because “he had no doubt in his heart that he must be innocent.” (Pamuk 72) By suggesting that death comes to those who have sinned and at the same time that fate determines whether one dies or lives, Hoja implies that God has pre-determined who are the fools and who are the wise. There is no redemption in Hoja’s eyes because the root of evil is fate.
Because Hoja and Socrates’s view of the root of evil differ, so do their actions towards others. Socrates wants to free others of their evil while Hoja wants to distance himself from that evil in others. Socrates believes the root of evil is the body, therefore he must also believe that there is evil in everyone. Because of this, everyone has the chance to rid himself or herself of evil, or at least attempt to. Socrates makes a conscious effort to educate others in an attempt to free them of their evil. He tries to teach people about the forms, Truth, Beauty, Justice, through interrogation like we see in Euthyphro and speech like in the Apology. Since the body is what is evil, Socrates knows that a person’s soul is pure and simply hidden under the physical
attempting to educate others as well as himself. Hoja on the other hand focuses on the evil and how to define it. Hoja and Socrates are both looking for truth, but in two different places; Hoja in Evil, and Socrates in the Forms.
Contrary to Socrates’s attempt to educate others through the forms, Hoja makes no effort to help others rid themselves of their evil because he believes their evil is innate. There is
nothing anyone can do because fate in the end will determine whether or not a person is evil. Instead of educating others, Hoja simply searches to define the evil that these “fools” possess. He does so through interrogation, but a different, more brutal and selfish kind of interrogation than that of Socrates. Socrates tries to free the people he interrogates of the evil while Hoja tries to find the evil in the people he interrogates. Hoja wants nothing more than to separate himself from the fools. He interrogates villagers to persuade them to confess their sins because he believes their sins will reveal the innate evil in them. Hoja is desperately looking to define that evil in order to more clearly define the separation between himself and the fools. When Hoja interrogates the villagers for confessions, he is not satisfied with their trivial sins. “They must have committed sins much more profound, more real, that distinguished them from us.” (Pamuk 133) Hoja is certain that the villagers are not confessing everything because he believes that the difference between himself and the fools must be greater than a few petty crimes.
Hoja to argue that there is evil in everyone, even those who believe they are above it. Pamuk would agree with Socrates that people can free themselves from evil through questioning. Pamuk uses the Venetian to show a change from being curious to incurious and containing evil. At the beginning of the novel, the Venetian searches for knowledge and can teach and challenge Hoja, however over time he becomes complacent and unable to contribute anything meaningful to Hoja’s search for knowledge. “Hoja suddenly said I had changed much.” (Pamuk 124) Because he believes in this regression of the Venetian, Pamuk must also believe in the progression, that people can start out with evil, and free themselves from it.
Work Cited
Pamuk, Orphan. The White Castle. New York: Vintage Books, 1985.
Plato. “The Trial and Death of Socrattes.” Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2000.
