Abstract
In my response to Theo de Wit’s paper, I first set out what I consider to be his mostimportant claims about the relationship between evil and narrativity, before askingfour questions about some of the implications of these claims: (1) Are we to presumethat there is an absolute choice between reconciliation and a full recounting of evil,so that the latter would necessarily preclude the former? (2) Assuming that we areindeed faced with such a choice, what is proper response to it? (3) Is there any hopeof a trustworthy account of evil at all, given that deception seems to be endemic inevery such account? and (4) What status should we accord to victimhood in generaland victims’ narratives in particular?
