It appears to be a story about how we existed in some kind of noble savage state, and then went on a quest for knowledge of some kind. However, the story seems to equate knowledge with morality, which is a bit strange. It's as if they thought that every bit of knowledge lead to morality. I suppose development of nuclear weapons made some kind of morality.
We still keep harking back to the noble savage state. The Paleolithic Diet is all about that. If only we ate more natural, we would be free from disease and live until 120. The basic premise is that: those who are in tune with their environment, live longer. The Jews thought that noble savages could be so in tune, that they would live until 900. Their faked observation that lifespans got shorter, indicates a form of degeneration in their mind.
Then there is the confusing problem of: if we do know good and evil, then why did God need to spell it out to us, in 617 Hammurabi-like laws? Clearly, we made the laws up, as we developed, and the laws are part of our own exploration of what constitutes good and evil. Then, the further change to the Golden Rule, put a different spin on those laws, and morality refined again. Once again, Christians think that we needed God to point that out to us, by sending Christ; even though the development was happening in Pharisaic Jewish culture and in Buddhism, without Christ.
Christian culture seems to want to attribute the exploration of morality to God, even though God didn't want us to know about it, and got pissed off when we started the exploration.