Good vs Evil Rough Essay

In literature, both present and past, the battle between good and evil has always been the heart of the conflict, and the conclusion can be drawn that everyone has a dark side. Arthur Miller’s The Crucible uses character development to prove this, while Markus Zusak’s I Am The Messenger shows that sometimes good characters use this inner evil to promote a good cause.

The Crucible is about a small, very religious town in Salem, Massachusetts that is the site of a group of witchcraft accusations that tear through the community. All of this strife is caused by a young girl named Abigail. She wants a man named John Proctor all for herself, so she accuses Proctor’s wife of being a witch, in order to have her hanged. This one accusation leads to calamity sweeping through the town, as almost everyone is accused of being a witch near the end. Even Proctor, the protagonist, a hard working man with morals and values, has a secret that he told no one. He had an affair with Abigail once, which was what lead to the whole ordeal. He revealed this near the end of the novel in order to save his dear wife. He, at least, feels remorse for the deed he committed. Abigail influenced most if not all of the village’s girls to accuse others of witchcraft, despite their innocence. She feels no regret or remorse for it, though, and it leads to many innocent people being killed, including Proctor himself. The judges in the court also have evil sides. They have their mind set on the fact that witchcraft is among the villagers, and anyone who seems to possess it is immediately accused. They even force people to believe that they are witches through the sheer weight of questions and accusations. An example of this is when Marry Warren is being asked to faint and she can’t. She says that she “cannot sense it” at that moment, and a judge immediately says “Because there are no dark spirits present?”. A little while later, Mary cracks under the pressure and accuses Proctor of forcing them to lie, which contributes to him being hanged.

In I Am The Messenger, there are many evil deeds committed, but the vast majority of them are done in order to help further a good cause. The novel is about a 19 year old named Ed Kennedy who, out of no real heroism, helps to stop a bank robbery. This initiates a series of events, in which Ed has to figure out a way to help the person indicated on playing cards he receives anonymously in the mail. Sometimes it’s an easy job, and he doesn’t have to do much to help the person. An example of this is a young single mother who always puts about her kids first and never does anything for herself. For Ed, it was as easy as buying the lady an ice cream cone to show that she can still have luxuries in hard times. But sometimes Ed has a tougher time. For example, one of the first cases he had to deal with was a rape case, where every night a wife would be raped and abused by her drunken husband. Ed didn’t know how to deal with this, until he received a gun in the mail with one bullet. He then went and held the man at gunpoint, threatening to take his life unless he stayed away from the woman. Another example is the Gavin Rose. He was a young kid who constantly misbehaved and caused trouble, bullying people, stealing, etc. He also didn’t have a good relationship with his brother, and needed to grow up in Ed’s opinion. To achieve this, Ed beat the boy up badly. This worked to unite the two brothers and make them mature a bit. These would both be considered evil deeds, but they both worked to help enforce good.

Even though there is evil in both novels, they are not the same type or degree but they both aim for justice. In the Crucible, the evil acts that are committed by the characters are actually permitted by law, even though they usually result in someone dying. This is the most severe type of evil, because innocent people die because of the deed. However, in I Am The Messenger, the evil acts that are committed by Ed are not permitted by law, and yet are less severe in the punishment. No one dies in this novel, and yet the results are as satisfactory in justice as the hangings were in the eyes of the villagers in Salem. Therefore, the different evil acts done by the characters in both novels have varying effects and penalties, but essentially they both aim for justice, even though there are different means of achieving it.

In conclusion, everyone has a dark side. Even though some characters, like Ed, are protagonists, some of their acts are considered to be evil. Despite this, in some situations, these evil acts can be used in order to promote a good cause.

Can good characters engender judgement?

Yes, good characters can engender judgement, because even though they are good, noone is perfect. There is always that bad seed inside them. This is shown in many novels, films, and more.

If you have seen the movie Big Daddy starring Adam Sandler, you have seen a good example of the judgement. In the film, Sonny (Sandler) plays a man who wants to show his girlfriend he is mature. He does so by adopting a child, which promptly causes his girlfriend to leave him. Once he finds out he can't return the kid, he trys to raise him in....controversial....ways (ex. teaching the kid to dent cans of food on the ground in the supermarket to get them half price). This would draw judgement on whether Sonny is responsible enough to have a child. But he never hurts the kid, makes him go to school, and has fun with him. At the end, when the courts try to take the kid away, he makes a heart wrenching appeal on why he should keep him. Even though he loses the case, he still shows that he loves the child, wants to keep him, and that he would do his best to raise the kid, even though he's not perfect.

So in conclusion, whether you're Supreman or an average joe, nobody is perfect, and everyone makes mistakes. There are flaws in everyone, but how well you let the good parts shine is what makes all the difference.

What is the nature of evil?

Much like the nature of good, evil can be many different things depending on the perspective of the person(s) whom are being the judge. There is no true definition of evil, but it is understood that evil is the opposite of good. It is generally related to mental and/or physical harm. For example, crimes are concidered evil, but depending on the crime some are a greater evil than others. Murder would be more serious than petty theft, and therefore would be the greater evil. These would be universal evils, though evil is widely concidered a subjective truth.

What is the nature of good?

A long debated question that has led to wars in the past and will undoubtedly lead to more in the future, the nature of good is a controversial topic. While some people believe something is good, another might believe a different thing is better. It all depends on the perspective and beliefs of the group. As a general rule, though, something that is "good" benifits people more than it harms them. This applies to everyone. Laws are a goos example of people trying to uphold and promote "good" deeds. They are meant to prevent "evil" or "bad" things like robbery and murder from happening, therefore being "good" for society. Religeous beliefs have a lot to do with the nature of good as well. Usually the beliefs of the church rub off on the people, so if the church believes something is "good", the people will as well.

Is it subjective or a universal truth about what constitutes “good” and “evil”?

Mostly it is subjuctive as to what constitutes "good" or "evil". Depending on a person's point of view, an act can be deemed either of the two. It would be a matter of perspective. For example, a person needs to survive so they kill an endangered species. On one hand, this could be concidered good (from the survivors point of view). On the other, it could be concidered evil (from the animal rihts activists point of view). So it is all a matter of how the situation is seen, and the feelings directed towards it.

Reflection

Writing a persuasive piece is difficult for a few reasons. One (obviously) is because you have to persuade the reader while keeping them interested and not boring them to death. This can be hard if you don't know what you are talking about, and if you are just trying to BS your way through it. Another reason why it's challenging is that you have to have a good number of points to support your side of the arguements, and facts (not opinions!) to back up those points. Sometimes it can be a little difficult to find the supporting facts and integrate them into your report.

This can be improved in a number of ways. Primarily, reading other pursuasive pieces would help to develop more of an understanding of how a well written one should look. Before writing, an outline should be created, either on paper or in your head, to help plan out how the piece should look. Following the SESICU (Statement Explain Support Illustrate Connect Unite) method when writing would create a more effective piece. When editing the paper, it should be read aloud, not just spell checked. This would help to catch those homophones and grammatical errors that escape the powers of spell check. Reading it aloud can also help to see if the piece flows smoothly, and determine if sentences/ideas should be added or cut out.

For support to help improve these skills, I think maybe another analysis of a well written arguement would do a world of good, while also not holding back the course. Spending a day or two on that would certainly help a lot.

Obama's Victory Speech in Chicago

Obama's Victory speech was shorter, but in my opinion, just as brilliant as his acceptance speech. Just as in his other speech, he spoke with clarity, calmness and emotion. Also, he thanked many people, including Joe Biden, his family, as well as the entire nation. He said "But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to - it belongs to you." Also like his acceptance speech, he used inclusion to great effect. He also uses repitition in both speeches, as well as alliterations. In both speeches, he also uses rhetorical climax to great effect, really getting the crowd into it. An excellent example is the following:

"Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope. "

He used these rhetorical devices to great effect and really got his ideas and messages accross, capturing the audience in his words. He is an amazing speaker.