Category: Good and Evil

As soon as these things stepped into the earth animals were killed and hunted they began to evolve into the mindset that they were the best, bullying, racism, hatred, discrimination, critics, gender inequality, murder, the need for power these things are humans. Hi, my name is Daniel and I will explore 3 out of the many themes and lessons in the book lore of the flies. Lord of the flies is a book centred around human lifestyle published 1954 September 17. The author of this novel Is William Golding Lord of the Flies was driven by ‘Golding’s consideration of human evil, through the book there is an in-depth examination of the cause and effects of evil.

In the book Seven kids Piggy, Jack, Ralph, Roger, Simon, Sam, Eric are stranded on an island with no adult supervision and no one in charge, Ralph and piggy find a conch after getting to know each other and then the blow Ralph becomes the leader and the quest to survive begins. In the book there are three things that can provoke evil in this situation and the first on is fear. Fear is a very big issue for the boys as they were all very little, in the book there are to versions of fear and the first most relatable one is from Piggy, Piggy is a shy boy he is more intelligent than the rest of the boys and is determined to leave the island as soon as possible but the others don’t see it this way they see him as a waste and an outlet of power because of his physical incapability’s such as asthma, poor eyesight, and obesity.

In chapter 2 during the assembly Jack is ragged because he is starting to lose control of the boys and the power he has, here he realises he cannot hit Ralph as he had been voted into the highest power so he punches Piggy. Later on in the book ralph realises that the boys seem to be more inclined to Jack so he tries to fit in by joining the other boys and bullying Piggy, but Ralph does this in a way that he still looks respectful he ignores and treats him merely as a pet. Another version of fear William Golding represents in the book is the one Jack displays, this fear provokes you to kill. Jacks evil is spoke about in the very start of the book when the choir boys walk across the beach “ADD QUOTE”. To be honest I’m a bit of Jack on a Monday. Through the book Jack displays a very ignorant and repulsive attitude towards the idea of being on the island. Most of us respond to fear in a tough, nonchalant way. This is important us readers because Golding uses the characters appearance, traits and surroundings to show how we humans can sometimes indirectly mistreat people solely on their looks.

Would you say the selfish acts done by these little kids is out of fear or because that just who they are? So, but how does this relate to us? But before I go into this, I wanted to talk about the two groups emerging on the island, the littleuns and the bigguns. The littleuns are truly obedient to Ralph and the others but this is purely because they are used to listening to someone from higher authority this is essentially feeding the bigger ones with power. So, let’s go from bottom to top of the power chain about how each character and scene in the book relates to the idea of power and how it affects us. Ralph he is the first character spoken about in the book; Ralph is an indecisive 12yr old boy who throughout the book tries to please the boys but ends up turning to their selfish ways. Most young children in schools more specifically 39% of kids change their lifestyle to please their friends. For example, in chapter 2 Ralph wanted to make Jack happy when he lost the vote of leadership “Ralph looked at him, eager to offer something. The choir belongs to you, of course.” Ralph constantly tries to make the other boys pleased with his leadership. Ralph was determined to leave the island as soon as possible at the start of the book this is mainly because after being voted as leader a lot of responsibility was given to him but as the book goes on, he slips an evil lifestyle.

Golding uses Jack and his thoughts and actions to make us as readers understand how we can sometimes let others influence us. Lord of the Flies was driven by ‘Golding’s consideration of human evil, a complex topic that involves an examination not only of human nature but also the causes, effects, and manifestations of evil.

Every choice becomes a consequence whether it is good or evil, and every consequence can serve a different light in a situation. As a society in an age of technology and social media, we hear everybody’s story, see everybody’s struggle, and feel everybody’s pain, based on events, actions, and words. Being an African-American female, I may be judged based on the color of my skin because sometimes people can have a tendency to hurt others in a way to give themselves power, so,“What truly defines a person’s nature or state if we do not go by what we already know or think we know? The answer lies in the ability to understand their intentions towards us and the world. Good, evil, or gray areas are a part of everybody’s lives as we question life itself. Writing about experiences that have been shown on television or in a movie, discussed on the radio or broadcast on social media, shows how a person can be truly good, truly evil, or fall in between the two in the gray area.

The term flight or fight is a response that represents the choices that our ancient ancestors had when faced with danger in their environment (Cherry par. 2). In my opinion, flight vs. fight is a response that is most likely to happen around the world. Everything, Everything is one prime example of how gray areas can be seen. The film is about how a teenage girl, Maddy, was curious about the world and imagined how it could be, but due to her illness, severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), her mother holds her in the house all day and all night in order to protect her. As the film continues, she meets a boy next door, Olly, and ends up falling in love with him. They soon realized with the connection they formed with each other that the love they have is worthy of risking her life to explore the world with him. Maddy doesn’t spend time being sorry for herself. She realizes she should not let that deter her from pursuing her goals and being optimistic even though her condition has some limitations. Maddy also has a great relationship with her mom because she is truly honest with her. Then things started to change over time due to the doctor’s discovery. Maddy finds out that she never had a disease, and her mother just lied to her after her brother and father died, so she wouldn’t be alone. Maddy’s love life tumbles out of control after she visits the hospital. Olly decides to move far away from Maddy to New York City. However, Maddy buys a plane ticket and flies to New York, and she meets him in an old book store and eventually forgave each other. We would think that Maddy is disregarding her mother’s wishes, but in the midst of the fog she truly finds out herself by experiencing the real world. Her mother isn’t an evil person for lying to her the whole time about having a disease. She did what any other mother would do to keep her family alive at any means. Everything, Everything demonstrates how gray areas apply in movies or televisions to portray different viewpoints that are not good or evil. In every situation, we either should fight or escape, the physiological and psychological reaction to stress enables the body to react to the danger in either situation (Cherry par. 2). What we see in a movie or television embarks on how we handle certain circumstances when under pressure.

Since flight vs. fight is also discussed on radios in today’s world, biracial man, Colin Kaepernick was an NFL player who took a knee during the national anthem. He felt that the country’s treatment of racial minorities was unfair towards African Americans and other races. Kaepernick proclaims, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.” (ESPN. com News Services par. 2).There are always two sides to every argument because many people may agree with him and many people may disagree with him. So from people who support Kaepernick, he is doing the right thing because he is standing up for injustices such as police brutality and people of different races committing the same crimes but getting different sentences. Then from the other point of view, it is disrespectful to kneel because they should stand tall and respect their country, and even if they do disagree with the things going on in the country, they should just get out; the national anthem is not the place to make that kind of protest. Kapernick sacrificed his entire career and decided to be more active and engaged in more civil rights for people of color. Many players such as LeBron James, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, and WNBA players use their platforms to set a status by raising awareness across the world on issues that affect their way of living and even affect other people’s way of living. Kaepernick’s situation proves how a gray area itself is where something can be right or wrong depending on our point of view. His strong feelings about standing for what is right comes with commitment and determination which strives others to stand for what is right in their eyes.

Moreover, social media plays a big part in our society such as Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook. Celebrity, Kim Kardashian West made a major impact on Cyntoia Brown that changed her life forever. Brown is a thirty-two year old woman who looks back on how life has taken a turn for the worse over one decision. Looking back on her earlier years, she was a sixteen year old teenager who had been a victim of prostitution. Brown was a troublesome teen that was in and out of juvenile detention center due to her parents not being in her life as they should be. She was living out of a room at a motel in South Nashville at the age of sixteen and at the time was seeing a twenty four year old drug dealer known as “Cut Throat.” Cut Throat would often send Brown onto the streets of Nashville to make extra money to support their lives, offering sexual favours. She experienced numerous amounts of abuse and Brown states, “I was beaten down after being raped by several men and saw “Cut Throat” as the Clyde to her Bonnie.”(Iati par. 10). On the night of August 6, 2004, Brown met a man, Johnny Allen who was a real estate agent at Sonics in Nashville. He asked her for her pleasure and then she went to his place with him. As the night proceeds on, Allen and Brown engage in small talk which eventually leads up to the bedroom. While laying on the bed naked, Brown suffered many years of abuse and was a sex trafficker who eventually shoots Allen in the head killing him instantly; she robs him during the process as well. After her arrest, she told investigators during the altercation she feared for her life and claimed self-defense in the murder. Brown was found guilty after the trial and was sentenced to life in prison. Seeing her story broadcast all over social media drew many celebrities’ attention towards her case, especially Kim Kardashian West. With her position, she has the ability to help Brown in which she does. West hires a top-notch lawyer to defend Brown in her case. Governor Haslam granted clemency for Brown because he saw that the case was cruel. Cyntoia Brown is now a free woman with strong deeds trying to help out other women in the same situation. Brown states, “Writing down her experiences brought her back to difficult moments and reminded her that she had not fully healed from them.” (Iati par.13). She killed Allen in order to stop the abuse happening to her, but was she really a bad person for killing someone in order to defend herself? She was considered evil for murder back then. However, her situation seems to be a gray area because what she did was not necessarily evil, she did what she felt like she had to do in regards to protect herself.

In conclusion, flight vs. fight experiences are all around us even if it is on television or movies, discuss on radios, or even broadcast on social media. I think everything in the world is a gray area. There are never any specific laws or restrictions that can keep us from doing the right thing, or us from doing the wrong things. It almost always comes down to personal judgment. Looking at life through a black and white filter, our vision and point of view will be restricted from others effective forms of thinking or moral perceptions. Consider all possibilities, do not restrict the ability to do or see new things.

Evil is born not made In Sweden, scientists have discovered that there are genes in the human DNA that make them violent and become murders in the worst case. The result of this experiment supports the violent behavior of young survivors in the novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding. A group of children release the evil trait within them through their lack of cooperation, harming each other at the end. They must find a way to survive without adult supervision. However, tension occurs between Ralph and Jack as they have different morals.

Through the children’s discussion on the beast and through Jack’s ferocious acts, the novel exhibits a theme that men inherit evil because it argues that people can never escape the darkness inside their hearts no matter how hard they try to change their personalities since evil trait already exists in their hearts from the moment they are born. Children in Golding’s novel propose a possibility that they themselves can be the beast that they are afraid of and conclude that a beast is the real evil which they can see with their own eyes throughout this novel. However, evil begins at psychological level and develops into a visible physical action.

One of the survivors, Simon, speaks out for the group when he gets the conch: the object that is required to speak for the group and symbolizes order and civilization. Simon states,” Maybe there is a beast.. What I mean is,… maybe it’s only us”(Golding 89). As the boys on the island are afraid of the beast, Simon rejects the possibility of a beast and predicts that the true beast is the darkness inside their hearts and foreshadows the next tragic events that will occur through the novel. In the Theme of Evil, by William Golding, concludes that evil is an internal force that is within us all when he states ”Lord of the Flies was an exciting adventure into the nether region of the mind. Simon’s demise, the beast within the boys, and the way Ralph was feverly hunted were all examples of Golding’s philosophy, that society was inherently evil”(Golding 2).

So, Golding believes that the human society is living in a cycle of evil and that cycle can never be resolved no matter what. After a conflict is resolved there will always be an another evil that one has to deal with which makes it a cycle. This internal evil later realtes to Jack as he starts to release his darkness. Jack illustrates that evil exists inside every human by expressing great joy in hunting animals for leisure, whether the person realizes it or not. Throughout this novel, Jack becomes obsessed with hunting ever since he had killed a pig on the island with his group of hunters. Golding describes Jack’s hunting as the character’s proudest achievement ever done and states Jack’s thoughts on his first experience of killing a life as the following: “His mind was crowded with memories; memories of the knowledge that had come to them when they closed in on the struggling pig, knowledge that they had outwitted a living being, imposed their will upon it, taken away its life a long satisfying drink.”(Golding 70).

Jack has shown the darkness inside his heart by expressing his satisfaction after his barbarous bloodshed because he was satisfied choosing to hunt and killing it.Jack’s violent action fits into the result of a research on a gene that makes a person be homicidal. In Warrios’s gene, an organization known as the GWAS discovers genes that lead to violence and murder. These Genes are identified as murder Genes and the author Barbara Oakley states, “Those people who are wired to be unethical march to their own tune, no matter what they are taught” (Oakley 2). The quote could lead to a possibility that Jack could have these “warrior genes” and explains his psychopath, and his enjoyment of hunting animals. In other words, Jack was evil from the beginning and the research team believes everyone has these warrior genes. Lord of Flies illustrates a theme that evil is always inside a human’s heart and is shown throughout Jack’s obsession with hunting and Simon’s philosophy of evil.All mankind possesses evil characteristics and practices wicked deeds without any support from peers or parents When men face difficult situations, they are put into a condition where they have to choose between good and evil.

The children in Golding’s novel experience hardships as soon as they fall upon the island and have to choose one or the other as well. Ralph and Jack can be representations of both good and evil sides in human hearts, allowing the author to display two sides conflicting each other in a person’s mind.These children have access to education had peers, friends, and parents and most importantly are civilized. However, that does not make them live in peace because evil is always inside a human’s heart. Even without education, they will only focus on natural human instincts and possibly killing each other.Even though humans originally possess immorality in their minds, governments make laws to restrict people from releasing the evil side through their actions. Nonetheless, the children on the island get a chance to exercise their evil trait that they already have as soon as no government exists to prevent them from doing so. Good and evil are always two different principles that fight within human psychology, so there is no doubt that evil is a principle that can always take over an individual’s nature.

Man is capable of both good and evil, but which nature were we originally born with? Mencius released Man’s Nature Is Good, discussing his standpoint on this topic, but in a much different light than most. Mencius clearly believes that all men are born inherently good with desires to achieve principle respect by making moral decisions. Later, in Hsun Tzu’s written piece Man’s Nature is Evil, we clearly see that his philosophy is founded upon the idea that all men are born inherently evil with the desire to do wrong, and goodness is a result of one’s conscious activity. Despite the pessimistic tone of Tzu’s message, it is taken away that there are many factors that come into man achieving true satisfaction: ritual observance and relationship of man to the state; both necessities for upmost goodness.

Tzu repetitively points out that men cannot learn nature given by Heaven, but principles and rituals set by sages are able to be applied, worked on, and fully comprehended. His system neglects Heaven, which ultimately rewards or punishes a ruler according to his record by substituting a mechanical process that is independent of the doings of man. In his famous and controversial essay, Tzu exclaimed that by nature, men were evil and that they acquired goodness only through proper training. He believed that humans at birth are like uncarved blocks of wood and that as they get older, society molds and shapes them; moral teachings and prominent rulers are the key to human perfection. Tzu never says that humans cannot reach goodness eventually, he just makes it evident that those men who desire good only strive for good because of their original evil nature. For Hsun Tzu, instruction and teaching were the only road to salvation. All of the good of society is to be found in the sages’ teaching that man must exercise social restraint and develop the faculty of discrimination in order to train and direct his crude animal nature. Tzu argues that one cannot acquire clear sight and keen hearing by studying alone; perfection has to be taught.

Tzu also makes many valid points arguing that man is born with feelings of jealousy and hate; all things rooted in evil. If man yields to these, it will lead up to brutality and wrongdoings. An example of this is how man is ruthless; he fights and competes to do better than another. That mindset and these actions root to evil and sin. Tzu devoted much of his writing to attack the prevalent superstitions. He rejected the naturalistic view of man and the universe. He believed that if man follows his nature and indulges in his natural desires without transforming himself by conscious activity he is doomed to fall victim to his evil nature. Tzu does not agree that nature is good, because that would conclude that this would only result in man not truly understanding their nature and conscious activity. Tzu asserts that all tongues savor the same flavors, all eyes see the same beauty and all ears hear the same music. This means that goodness cannot differ from person to person; it has to be consistent through all of humanity.

Mencius strongly presumed that goodness is polished through instruction and persistence or wasted through abandonment and pessimistic guidance, but it is never lost entirely. He refers to a song that proclaims that humankind is born from Heaven, and evil is not endowed on them immediately. Mencius does agree that man’s heart can be mired in different situations, but all men start with a clean slate. Mencius states that all men are capable of learning, because nature is good. He compared this propensity toward goodness to Ox Mountain, a hill that was once forested. The trees were cut down in order to make a place for cows to graze, but tree shoots continue to crop there. The cows chew them, which causes the trees to never reach maturity, but the potential for tree growth is always present. Simillary, humans have the potential and ability to pursue sagehood, but most become altered and end up unsuccessful. Mencius maintained that all were born good and became bad only when their goodness was abused or neglected. For Mencius, learning was a seeking of the lost heart of childhood innocence; becoming a good person is the result of developing our innate tendencies toward benevolence, righteousness, wisdom, and propriety. Mencius is generally considered to be the maintainer of an overly optimistic conception of man.

Both Mencius and Hsun Tzu agreed that men could attain perfect virtue through study and imitation of the sages. The significant difference was the logical and conceptual one of whether one starts from bad and moves toward the good, or whether one starts from good and inevitably suffers a combination of bad. Mencius believed evil comes from our condition in life, where scarcity of resources or a harsh climate vitalizes evil within us while Tzu believed that humans are born with an devil nature and wrong intentions, and goodness come from our condition in life and our obedience to set rules and honored rulers. Even with these two different views and beliefs, they both stress the same things: ritual observance, relationship of man to the state, and an ethical imperative in living life. No matter what standpoint man is at, all men can agree that goodness certainly survives while evil dies, but good also seems to build upon the foundation of evil.

Environmental influences can change people’s behavior and rationality when put into vulnerable situations where they have no assurance of survival on an uninhabitable island. Fear let’s darkness overcome people to do heinous acts for survival. In Lord of the Flies and Naked and Afraid Darkness manifests in both the boys and Matt; a common theme portrayed between both once civilized people turned savage through influences in the environment that triggers an inner evil within all of them. While there are some differences between Lord of the Flies by William Golding and Naked and Afraid, they share a similar theme of savagery, fear, and evil in human nature that intertwine through the use of fearing the unknown and inner darkness.

Fear is portrayed in both Lord of the Flies and Naked and Afraid, a common theme used to display turmoil within the boys and Matt. For example, in Lord of the Flies the beast arises fear within the littluns and causes disagreement between Ralph and Jack which in result splits in the group into two and allows savagery to run amuck once order and civility ceases to exist within Jack and his boys. Similarly to Matt; he fears being unable to hunt food because he is vegetarian and without meat he lacks stamina and protein to endure physical hardships in the wild and will eventually die of malnutrition, which triggers moral turmoil within himself. “Quiet! Shouted Jack, ‘you, listen, The beast is sitting up there, whatever it is… ‘Hunting,’ said Jack. He remembered his age old tremors in the forest. ‘Yes, the beast is a hunter’” (Golding 126). Jack utilizes fear as a tactic to win power and authority over the boys. He uses his “said” hunting ability to hunt down the beast and keep the boys safe. As the boys submit to savagery, Jack strengthens his power by showing himself as a barbaric hunter who can protect them. Which eventually shatters order and civility they once had on the island. Similarly to (Day 9 Episode 1) Matts moral turmoil within himself; his fear of killing animals comes to an end once he realizes he enjoys hunting because the fear of dying had overcome him more than the fact of him being against animal killings. It has been shown that in the novel Lord of the Flies and television show Naked and Afraid both displays fear in unique ways but still share a common theme throughout the story .

Another theme portrayed is savagery/ priminity. For example, throughout the book Jack rapidly transitions into savagery when he slaughters his first pig similarly to Matt when he kills his first rabbit. As time went on savagery became more evident within them, cruelty towards people and animals had no moral effect of them and became their everyday life. “Kill the pig, cut her throat, spill her blood” (Golding 69). This chant exemplifies how far gone their “civilization” has become creating chants about slaughtering the pigs in an inhumane way and turning death into pleasure. Comparably to (Day 26 episode 3) Matt begins to kill animals to feel superior and using mud to his face for camouflage like a barbarian shows how far from human development towards civilization has gone backwards for both Jack and Matt. It has been shown that both Lord of the Flies and Naked and Afraid portrays savagery in similar ways by showing how far gone both boys have severed from a civilized society.

The third and final theme explores evil in human nature. From both themes I talked about previously; fear and savagery intertwine with each other to convey the overall message of human nature. In the novel as soon as the boys and Matt are taken away from civilization they try to preserve society but however this doesn’t last long for. In both the novel and TV show it shows that humans are savage by heart and when put into an environment where life or death is on the line humans gear towards brutality, selfishness and dominance. “Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill!… You knew didn’t you? I’m part of you? Close, close, close! I’m the reason why it’s no go? Why things are what they are” (Golding 206). This quote from the Lord of the Flies severed head towards Simon during his hallucinations shows he is the only person who realized the beast wasn’t a physical monster who could hurt them, it is the beast within all of them that created the chaos on the island and also comparably identical to Matt who changed his attitude towards animals and people once his life felt threatened he turned to animal brutality and savagery. It has been shown that in both Lord of the Flies and Naked and Afraid each theme falls hand in hand with each other to create the overall theme of the evil in human nature which is shown in the majority of the story.

In conclusion, the overall conveying message is without rules and order people will go back to primitive ways, Golding depicts that humans are naturally evil and without rules to tell people how to behave there will be chaos. While there were some differences between Lord of the Flies by William Golding and Naked and Afraid they both share similar themes of savagery, fear and evil in human nature. Although circumstances differ between them the similarities between the two undeniable.

Good and evil. These two words illustrates one of the most recurrent themes in writing and literature that gets people into saying, what describes the barriers between good and evil? This distinct question has continued to be profoundly embedded in the human individuality since the dawn of humankind. Countless and countless of narratives have been devoted into uncovering a well-defined explanation, an ultimate answer to the question. It has been one of the most conventional themes in our time that demonstrates a universal element of human nature. Since adolescent years, we are educated to think in a dualistic perspective, that is to create a somewhat black and white response to our complications. However, this may not be the case. David Fincher’s “House of Cards,” Denis Villeneuve’s “Sicario” and Colson Whitehead’s “The Underground Railroad,” explores this fundamental question, suggesting that the borderline between good and evil might be greyer than we ever imagined. These texts, ranging from a political thriller television series, a crime thriller film and an alternate history novel, explores morally ambiguous characters who challenges the binary notions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ through their questionable actions, displaying that the cost of victory comes at the expense of what’s morally redeemable.

David Fincher’s “House of Cards” elicits a political narrative that establishes pragmatic beliefs and principles of the American legislative procedure through merciless ambition and the aspiration for power. In a society that flourishes on morality plays and good over-over-evil, the creators behind the show presents a sensational narrative that is voiced from the point of view of amorality. Kevin Spacey’s ‘Frank Underwood’ gives audiences a brilliant archetype of American power that underpins Frank’s strength of character to stop at nothing to achieve his goals. Frank Underwood’s sole objective arises from the desire to acquire power, climbing up the political ladder, one rung at a time, after being turned down the position of Secretary of State. “Hunt or be hunted.” Frank’s motto can be seen in practice in the opening scene of the first episode. The audience watches Frank strangling the injured dog with his bare hands, delivering his very first monologue, “There are two kinds of pain. The sort of pain that makes you strong, or useless pain. The sort of pain that’s only suffering. I have no patience for useless things.” Within the first four minutes of the show, the audience encounters both Frank Underwood’s viciousness nature and his stylistic ‘Shakespearean’ manner of breaking of the fourth wall. This scene effectively reveals Underwood’s ‘Machiavellian-like philosophy’ while also attempting to generate an interconnection with the audience. In addition, Underwood gives the audience more insightful understanding of his moral philosophy in the second episode. “Money is the McMansion in Sarasota that starts falling apart after ten years. Power is the old stone building that stands for centuries.” From this scene, one can perceive the similarities between Frank Underwood and Machiavelli, as both observe the idiom that “the end justifies the means,” in that any practices can be used, even immoral ones to achieve a desired result. Although Frank Underwood’s means are seen as villainous, all of his actions are regarded as humanitarian and valid that gives a justification for Underwood’s behaviour. In other words, Underwood’s acts are done for the greater good, constructing him as an archetype of a morally ambiguous character. “I will win, and I will leave a legacy.” The anthesis of Underwood’s philosophy reveals the stepping-stone to his poetic dream, that is to leave a legacy. We can take a step further that Frank desires to be a memorial or a monument that lasts forever and remain in immortal dominance even after death. Therefore, “House of Cards” presents Frank Underwood who ideally fits the model of a morally flawed character that challenges audience the complicity nature of morality and power due to their interrelation between heroic and villainous features.

In Denis Villeneuve’s “Sicario,” colours play a fundamental role in not only conveying the epic magnitude of the ‘War on Drugs,’ but also expressing the moral ambiguity inherent in the human experience. “Sicario” speaks the story of a group of federal agents who takes on questionable tactics to throw down a Mexican drug cartel. Roger Deakins’ cinematography in “Sicario” is flawless as he and his lighting team successfully create a “grungy yellow world,” extensively using the yellow-beige spectrum to invoke a neutral environment where moral stances are endlessly growing and changeable. From deserts to walls to hallways and to cars, the film is saturated in beige tones which adverts to the enigmatic complexion of right and wrong. One particular aspect that Villeneuve shines into making this film is creating a sense of unpredictability, transferring momentum into pivotal scenes where the characters’ motives are ambiguous. Johann Johannsson, the composer behind the film, frames a terrifying, perplexing musical score that shapes a sentimental construction of the film as well as accompanying the narrative with heightened complicity. Furthermore, Taylor Sheridan, the film’s screenwriter, excellently introduces different characters with different perspectives in a setting where there are no clear-cut good and bad guys. These different perspectives support “Sicario” as a morally ambiguous movie. As a matter of fact, morality can be seen as an entity with the colours it evokes. Villeneuve and Deakins appoints different colours to exemplify specific concepts revolved morality. We see most of the film through the eyes of Emily Blunt’s ‘Kate Macer,’ an idealistic FBI agent who wants to make a difference by playing by the ‘book.’ However, different point of views is introduced that challenges Kate’s ideals when she finds out what it really takes to make a true difference. Benicio del Toro’s ‘Alejandro’ and Josh Brolin’s ‘Matt Graver’ represents as cryptic characters, both clothed with once again yellow-beige colours. “Nothing will make sense to your American ears, and you will doubt everything that we do, but in the end, you will understand.” Kate’s progressive degradation of her beliefs and her faithfulness in the social justice system can be visually seen through the desaturation of her blue shirt which changes to faded grey, showing Kate’s adjustments to her moral codes as she recognises the requirements needed in the end, just what Alejandro said. “Sicario” shows that the nature of good and evil loses semblance of meaning as power and morality cannot be obligated to the distinctions of black and white, but rather the colour of beige and grey. In the end, “Sicario” questions the audience to challenge our own code of ethics and moral values to conclusively decide what is right and wrong.

“Every slave thinks about it. In the morning and in the afternoon and in the night. Dreaming of it. Every dream a dream of escape even when it didn’t look like it.” Freedom is both a dream and a nightmare for the slaves in one plantation in Georgia. “The Underground Railroad,” written by Colson Whitehead, takes on both of the slave narratives of the 19th century as well as the neo-slave narratives of the 20th century. The novel imitates these genres and classes of ambivalence towards the primary American faith in the pursuance of happiness, particularly freedom. Meet Cora, the heroine that Whitehead establishes as the heart and soul of the story, who was deserted as an infant when her mother, Mabel, ran away in exchange for freedom. “The Underground Railroad” leads readers into a quest taken by a fugitive slave in pursuit of her freedom. Whitehead effectively portrays the horrifying spectrum of cruelty and struggle that described the foundation of slavery. Violence and brutality have become an accustomed segment in the world of the novel that Cora and the other characters are not stunned by even the most ruthless and distressing episodes. However, Whitehead also indicates that Cora and other black characters are not completely detached to the inhumanity around them, even if they are compelled to hold back their emotions. This wretched act can be seen here, “Cora covered her mouth to keep in her scream. She failed.” This quote effectually highlights the dehumanization of enslavement and through Cora, the readers are reminded of the inevitable necessity of ambition, of uprising and of freedom. The paramount prejudice and discrimination of slavery also ushers’ certain ‘good’ black characters to perform acts of atrocity which demonstrates the complexity of the boundaries of good and evil. In pursuit of her freedom, Cora kills a 12-year-old white boy while escaping from Ridgeway, the slave catcher. When contemplating whether her actions were right or wrong, this turn of events leads Cora to come to the conclusion that her actions were necessary in order to survive and escape. “Cora rarely thought of the boy she had killed. She did not need to defend her actions in the woods that night; no one had the right to call her to account.” This signifies Cora as a ‘grey’ character who commits questionable, however, justifiable acts where readers are able to sympathize with the protagonist as we see Cora who has endured so much heartlessness that the conception of carrying out violence seems reasonable. Hence, “The Underground Railroad” is a story that allows readers to witness a contrary narrative of slavery that is not frequently told where morally ambiguous characters are forced to make moral choices in a system where there are limitations that makes moral codes and longevity conflicting forces.

Should characters be described as good or evil? Moral or immoral? Morally ambiguous characters in “House of Cards,” “Sicario” and “The Underground Railroad” deepens our understanding of the ambiguity of evil as good and evil shouldn’t be limited to the distinctions of black and white, but instead be represented as shadows of grey.

The hero rides triumphantly off into the sunset while the villain gets his just desserts. We all secretly enjoy the struggle between good and evil and in many ways, it is extremely satisfying to see the good guys defeat the bad guys in a blaze of glory. The concept of good and evil exists in every culture. They are necessary social forces influencing how humankind decides to interact with itself. Yet is appears paradoxical that human beings have such a disturbing capacity to be evil as well as good. What drives a person to be shockingly violent while another willingly risks their own life to help someone they do not know? Moreover, in a time when destructive technologies and artificial intelligence continue to develop and strengthen, it is critical we understand the human race’s capacity for good and evil.

It would be dangerous to suggest that some people are inherently ‘good’ while others are inherently ‘bad’ or ‘evil’. Human nature is significantly more complex than this. Every person has a combination of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ qualities and history provides countless examples of ‘good’ people doing ‘bad’ things. Advocates genuinely believe they are fighting for a just cause against an evil enemy and once the evil factions are overpowered or killed, peace and goodness will reign supreme. This would suggest then that there is an interdependence between good and evil.

Today, people live in a symbolic environment. Mass media such as broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet provide our main source of daily information, thereby bringing virtually everyone into a shared culture. Humans live in a world experienced, created, and maintained largely through many different forms of storytelling. According to Dr Walter Fisher, USC Professor of Communication, “narratives play an important role in the (informal) enculturation of humans in a society and can be viewed as one of the primary vehicles for the ritual maintenance of society’s morals and values over time.”

Before the advent of mass media, parents or community elders would tell stories to younger generations, like fairytales and myths, to explain how the world works. Nowadays, television, film, newspapers, radio and social media platforms act as our storytellers, integrating individuals into the established social order by offering specific demonstrations of values and behaviours. Consequently, what we see and hear via mass media is the product of society legitimising a certain identity and social order.

As such, we learn about life, people, places, power and family life through either real or simulated media representations. Stories represent what and who counts as good, important and valuable in our culture, through selecting and highlighting certain aspects or models more frequently than others.

Think of the plots of any action movie: James Bond, Star Wars, and Indiana Jones; the bad people are usually easily identifiable. Representations of evil, they are ruthless, maniacal, without remorse, going to any lengths to get what they desire. The audience is made to feel that it is okay, righteous and pleasurable even, to see the good guys inflict violence upon them. Because the villains like to hurt people, it’s okay to hurt them. Because they like to kill people, it’s okay to kill them. After all, they are evil and evil must be destroyed. But what is this kind of story really teaching us?

Today, the issue is not whether a story is an ennobling one, a good myth to live by, but will it sell? The more special effects, seemingly impossible stunts and plot twists and turns, makes for high ratings or a box office hit. Stories espousing good and evil sell because they are easy and simple to understand, yet from a religious viewpoint this can be dangerously deceptive. It keeps us from looking deeper, from trying to discover causes.

Until the last 150 years or so, the most important stories for most people were religious. Religion dates back some 5 500 years, designed as a form of social control to ensure the survival of groups or individuals. Religion also helped explain natural phenomena and became a convenient mechanism for social interaction. From an historical perspective, religion served a purpose; it gave people of limited knowledge a way to make sense of themselves and their surroundings on a sparsely populated planet.

However, not all religions view good and evil in the same way. Buddhism focuses on the three roots or ‘poisons’ of evil: greed, ill will and delusion. Instead of the struggle between good and evil, Buddhism teaches that the problem is our lack of self-knowledge; do we truly understand what motivates us? This viewpoint implies a very different way to address the issues of ignorance and desire.

In Islam, the problem of evil and human suffering is either the painful result of sin, or it is a test. The Islamic holy book or Quran states that when humankind chooses to act in ways that are not in accordance with the divine plan, he will experience suffering of some sort. Therefore, the objective of Islam to help humanity understand the purpose of suffering and offer guiding principles in how to overcome various forms of evil.

However, over the centuries, religion has continued to give ground to science. Religious psychologist, David Wulff, suggests that we need a new ethos for an Age of Science, a new morality that incorporates the findings of science and applies scientific thinking and the methods of science to tackling moral problems and resolving moral dilemmas. Wulff proposes that in the modern world, organised religion is simply inadequate to the task. Indeed, there would appear to be an undeniable connection between monotheism and violence. As many conflicts have been fought on these principles, it seems evident that monotheism has proved an ineffectual prescription for morality. Not only does religious affiliation not make one more moral, it can lead to greater intolerance, racism, and the erosion of other values cherished in a free and democratic society. The rise of numerous activist groups and strained international relations highlight that religion may not be the solution but actually part of the problem. As psychologist and science historian Michael Shermer proposes, “If a greater percentage of the world’s population believe in God than ever before in history and if the world is going to hell in an immoral handbasket as never before, then the argument that we cannot be good without God would seem to be refutable.”

All our lives we have been taught what is right and what is wrong, and what is good and what is bad. There is a difference and one knows when they are good or bad. “One does evil enough when one does nothing good”(Picture Quotes). This quote states that when you do not do any good you are considered evil. The differences between good and evil are numerous and how culture affects whether one is good or evil.

To begin with, Webster’s Dictionary describes well as of a favorable character or tendency. Good people have a lack of self-centeredness and are capable of empathizing with others, having empathy for them, and putting their needs before their own. This means sacrificing their well-being for the sake of others, if possible. This includes benevolence, altruism and selflessness, and self-sacrifice toward a greater cause; all qualities of empathy. Good people are also able to see beyond the superficial differences of ethnicity, sex, or nationality and appeal to an underlying common human nature. One should always try to be good by being empathetic, tolerant, and not being self-centered.

In addition, Webster’s Dictionary describes evil as arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct. Evil people are those who can’t sympathize. It gives them high importance to their own needs and desires. They are arrogant, greedy and self-absorbed. In reality, others are only beneficial to them in so far as they can fulfill and manipulate their desires. This is true of criminals such as Stalin, Hitler, serial killers, and rapists. Evil people’s main feature is the incapacity of others to empathize. They can not feel the pain and suffering of others, they can not see the world from the viewpoint of other people, therefore, they have no sense of rights. Certain people are just objects to them, which encourages their violence and cruelty. One should not try to be bad and should not be self-centered, arrogant, and should try to be empathetic.

Lastly, culture has a lot to do with what the community thinks is good and bad. Culture affects the community’s behavior in two ways political leadership and big events. In a nation, political landscape changes over time and people with diverse views and agendas can inspire and influence the opinions of the majority of the population in the country. People learn new habits, some odd behavior becomes the new normal and unusual changes are described. Such shifts in leadership transform societies over time, good leadership leads and motivates those around them to get good habits and to do their best with integrity. Vice versa, it’s true that a bad leadership that’s egotistically driven negatively affects culture and allows everybody to be greedy and egoist produces a bad culture and determines normal behavior and not social values in such a society. Huge events, such as war, change the culture and induce new people’s habits. We human beings adjust to it easily to survive when we are in a special situation. Like in a position of prolonged war, people are intense anxieties, children are abused and people are no longer aware of ethical values. If a country faces economic crises and people have little money to feed their children, they will become a little greedy to save and make more money, which will get ordinary once again. The worst thing is that these events happen and change the culture, but when this event ends, the change of culture will continue. The series of these occurrences shape society. Culture can affect the whole society for better or worse based on government and big events.

In conclusion, there are many variations between good and evil and the impact of society on whether one is good or bad. “Being a good person doesn’t depend on your religion, your race or your skin color or your culture. It depends on how good is your heart and how well you treat others.” (Anonymous). One should always strive to be good because it could affect society for the worse causing others to be evil people.

There are many things scientists and philosophers can’t answer one being whether humans are born into the world good or evil; a concept that has been around since the wonders of human origin. In the novel The Lord of the Flies, written by William Golding the theme of human struggle between good and evil is highlighted throughout, as well as how we change within the environmental factors we are each given. Humans are not born good nor evil but rather into a clean slate because the nurture they receive growing up as well as the environment they are set in heavily affects who they become in the future.

How a child is nurtured and taken care of growing up as well as the social factors in one’s life plays a major role in creating ones day to day thoughts as well as personality. Steven Pinker a known speaker on the subject of good vs evil origin supports “The Blank Slate” concept as he states ,”The human mind is a blank slate and that of its structure comes from socialization, culture, parenting, and experience.”(Pinker, 1) Thus no one is born with a set mind of how they are supposed to act and what they are supposed to believe in but rather how you are raised and your socialization experiences give you your own opinions and outlooks on life.

The biggest factor that creates one’s morals and outlooks on life comes from one’s environment. Weather one is born into a struggling family or a wealthy one makes each life different. With different life experiences come different shapings of opinions and morals. If one does not have experiences and needs they lack ability to be considered good or evil.

Nigel an author who writes about the functions of good and evil gives a counter argument supporting the idea of “the Blank Slate’’ concept stating,”It is quite implausable that people would be born with a fully functional genetically-determined brain..”(Nigel Barber, 1). Implying we aren’t born with the understanding of what makes good and evil but we develop it through interaction.

In a scene of The Lord of the Flies where Jack, one of the main characters has fully been exposed to the isolated environment Golding describes, ”Jack himself shrank at this cry with a hiss of indrawn breath, and for a minute became less of a hunter than a furtive thing, ape-like among the tangle of trees.”(Golding, 49) Thus implying Jack’s savagery and animalistic evil side as he has no remorse for the animals’ killings. Once Jack was put into a chaotic environment without rules to influence morals he later becomes savage as he loses touch with the importance of civilization.

In all, at a young age people are easily influenced. Through experiences, opinions and morals are formed creating what society conceives as good or evil. No one is born to be good nor evil but both are incorporated through one’s understanding of life.

In our world good and evil coexist in a harmony of chaos. Evil, in a terribly broad sense is simply the absence of good. Often in legends or religions, evil is denoted as something of the supernatural or magical force. It can sometimes be seen as an evil that doesn’t exist, a figment of our imagination. I’ve been listening to a podcast my Aaron Mahnke, in it he speaks of and legends of the world, old and new, and discusses topics with the idea of good versus evil. I enjoy it because it speaks of not only what we see and believe, but also what we don’t. Even though some see the stories as purely entertainment, in everyday life we are aware of both good and evil because urban legends, religion, and human behavior.

In certain religious contexts, evil has been described as a supernatural force. Questions concerning the nature of good and evil, applied ethics concerning particular moral issues. Evil according to a Christian worldview is any action, thought or attitude that is contrary to the character or will of God. This is shown through the law given in both the Old and New Testament. This evil shows itself through deviation from the character or will of God. Similarly, good according to a Christian worldview is any action, thought or attitude that is consistent with the character or the will of God, for God is good, the ultimate goodness. Mahnke speaks of classic religions’ absolute distest of concepts of what is considered evil to them. And how religion can create stories over time to explain the unexplained and provide reason.

Not only does Mahnke discuss the concepts of religion but he also delves into the topic of how human behavior itself explains how these stories come to light. Often in the 1600-1700s people would use stories of supernatural creatures to explain why a person acts a certain way or even explain sickness and the spreading of sickness. In the 1800s when tuberculosis, or consumption as they called it then, was the leading cause of death. In that era they didn’t know what TB was or how it spread, this lead to the first American vampire stories. When it spread to the family, they believed a vampire had spread it and was using them to feed on. They also believed it moved through families, and the vampire would reside in a body of one of the families’ past relatives, inhabiting the body similar to a demon or a possession. Signs that a body was being used by a vampire included: undecayed flesh, longer nails and hair, fresh blood for in liver, heart, or mouth. To kill the vampire they would burn the heart and liver and make a tonic for the sick to drink and they would drive a steak into the head of the body, some reports say the witnesses heard an audible sigh come from the body when they had “killed” the vampire. These people believed in these stories with their entire being, and used them to explain why members of the family would die one by one. It is natural human behavior to need something explained especially when it has such severe consequences.

As people modernize and society moves into the future with people, some of the stories from when people were trying to explain phenomena still carry on through generations. Urban legends are passed down in the form of stories. Some families have their own unique stories and some are nearly universal. A story in my family specifically was Hilda. Hilda was a witch who would take bad children to her cave in the mountains to eat them. I guess she was pretty similar to the Boogeyman, a very universal story. From La Llorona in Latin-American society to Baba Yaga in Russia, Tokoloshe in South Africa, The Jersey Devil in the U.S., and CuCuy in South America. Everywhere around the world there are these stories of a creature one shape or another, that either wreaks havoc on the community or punishes bad children. Mahnke proposes that these stories must have started somewhere and he believes it goes back to explaining strange phenomena.

Often people would use stories of supernatural creatures to explain why a person acts a certain way or even explain sickness and the spreading of sickness. These people believed in these stories with their entire being, and used them to explain why members of the family would die one by one. Similarly, good according to a Christian worldview is any action, thought or attitude that is consistent with the character or the will of God, for God is good, the ultimate goodness. As people modernize and society moves into the future with people, some of the stories move along with us.