The Pros And Cons Of Good And Evil

885 Words4 Pages
Good and evil is a subject that has been debated countless times by people who are philosophers to movie critics. It’s easy to think about when talking about the extremes: a murderer is evil, a saint is good, but what is a normal person? In reality, good and evil is extremely hard to determine. People commit small acts of good and evil daily but there are no numerical values to help us determine how evil or good that makes them. Authors like William Golding and Kahlil Gibran allow us to grasp a better understanding of human nature through their works. Although William Golding’s Lord of the Flies and Khalil Gibran’s “The Prophet” are both centered around the concept of good and evil, Gibran understands that there is more to human nature than the black and white connotation of those terms and that humans cannot be defined as evil simply because they choose not to make a good decision. Golding, however,…show more content…
In his poem, Gibran makes the claim: “You are good in countless ways, and you are not evil when you are not good” (Gibran 22). The stanzas “You are good when you are one with yourself. Yet when you are not one with yourself you are not evil” (Gibran, 6-7), “You are good when you strive to give of yourself. Yet you are not evil when you seek gain for yourself” (Gibran 10-11), and “You are good when you walk to your goal firmly and with bold steps. Yet you are not evil when you go thither limping” (Gibran 18-19) validate his claim with the repetition of “Yet you are not evil…” indicating his belief that the absence of good is not the defining factor of evil. Another difference between Gibran and Golding are their interpretations of what lies between good and evil. Gibran describes this middle ground as instances in which people are hindered or slow, for example, “loitering and sluggard” (Gibran 23) and a “tongue [staggering] without purpose” (Gibran 16), but does not fault them for
Open Document