Evil a Learned Behavior

What is evil? Is it characterized by a desire to cause hurt or harm, “an evil mood”? What causes people to do evil? The strong feelings of hatred and dislike that builds up in all of us or simply that all our emotions are constantly on the dark side for such a long period of time. What is right from wrong when the hate in our hearts makes us all make terrible mistakes and commit evil. The writings of Confucius say, “There is no light without darkness, no positive without negative, no good without evil. Throughout the history of humanity, humans have committed inconceivable and unthinkable acts of cruelty towards one another. From the brutal wars during the times of the ancient Greeks and Romans, to the modern area of ethnic cleansing and genocide one cannot help but wonder what is the root cause of this evil. Unthinkable numbers of human life has been lost in every corner of the world from the genocides in Armenia and Nazi Germany to the guerilla wars in Vietnam and Cambodia and presently to the devastating conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sudan.

Evil is a learned behavior which is illustrated in dictators, school violence, and classical novels such as Lord of the Flies by William Golding and Night by Elie Wiesel. Humans are fundamentally good, and then are corrupted by their environment. It’s because of evolutionary purposes. Every organism wants their species to continue (if they don’t, they die off and aren’t here any more). The same goes for us. If our species started off fundamentally evil, none of us would be here right now. People would’ve killed each other off instead of working together in communities to survive.

It’s the same as any other species that has made it this far. All characters, wherever they come from, may not be born evil, but they live up to this evil behavior eventually. According to Freudian theory, violence is a basic human instinct, described as a redirection of our self-destructive impulses onto others. The history of humanity and its primitive relations to violence may provide insight on whether or not violence is, in fact, human nature, or if it is a learned behavior. By exploring one’s childhood and family life, it’s possible to point out potential causes for excessively violent behavior.

As well, the society we live in may serve as a catalyst for violence among its habitants. By using anthropology, psychology and sociology it is possible to discover what causes humans to be violent creatures. “In the human brain, just under the cerebrum stem is the source of aggression and violent behaviors, called the limbic system. This part of the brain is not only responsible for aggressive behavior but for sleep and wakefulness as well as sexual behavior, which may explain the perceived correlation between sex and violence.

Males tend to be more aggressive than females, and in 2003, males committed 63. 7% of all murders, while females only committed 7% and 29. 3% remain unknown. ”(Williams, 45) Historically, causes of violence among males have been defense of territory and proving their dominances to other males as well as females. Every human has evil stored deep down, but when they shall or shall not use it is how they reach for it as a key goes to one type of door. If the emotions they have are dark then they will fight, be aggressive, and commit evil.

A good example of how humans are fundamentally good but corrupted by evil is Churchill’s decision concerning the small, ancient city of Coventry in WWII. The decoding mavens of Bletchley Park, the Cryptanalysts, had cracked the Nazi’s ‘Enigma’ code that they used for all their transmitted messages. All decisions concerning actions based on these intercepts went directly through Prime Minister Winston Churchill – now chief War Minister. One day, during the Battle of Britain, a message was decoded that made it very clear that the city of Coventry, with its churches going back to the time of Charlemagne, was targeted by the Germans for bombing.

Churchill knew that if they evacuated the city, under any pretense, the Germans would find out about it and figure out that the only way the Brits could have possibly known that was via their code, and they would have scrapped Enigma and replaced it with a newer version. Churchill could not allow that, so he squelched any possibility of the story of the bombing of Coventry. It happened. The Luftwaffe bombed the living daylights out of Coventry, and killed thousands. The entire city was destroyed.

After the attack, Churchill toured the damage,he had to come to terms with such a monstrous decision, in order to protect his sanity. And yet, his decision was the right one, the Enigma code held, the Germans never caught on, and the Allies were able to defeat them and win the war – as some have said, the Cryptanalysts won that war at Bletchley Park. What Churchill experienced was NOT evil. If he was evil, he would have simply made the decision and that would have been that. HITLER was evil.

A fellow Brit, contemporary with Churchill, was Christian apologist CS Lewis, who was writing at about that time. “ In his book ‘The Screw tape Letters”, he lays out that real, true Evil is not the carnage on the battlefield, not the moral degradation of the Human spirit by way of the weakness of the flesh, not the compromise of morals, it’s not even the passion of fratricide – good old Cain and Abel – he said Evil is produced, manufactured, generated by men in three-piece suits meeting in oak-paneled board rooms, calmly, almost blithely, changing the fate of the teeming millions with a flick of a pen. (Leckie 67, 69) Elie Wiesel’s memoir Night is based on his experiences in the German concentration camps of Auschwitz and Buchenwald during the Second World War. Having grown up an Orthodox Jew in the Hungarian village of Sighet, Wiesel and his family was deported to Auschwitz in 1944 where his mother and youngest sister were immediately sent to the gas chambers. While both his older sisters survived, his father, with whom Wiesel had fought to survive the labor camps, died shortly before the war ended.

Night tells the horror stories of the Holocaust through the eyes of the fifteen-year old Wiesel who recounts the loss of his innocence, his faith in God, his sense of time and his sense of self. Night describes how the Nazis dehumanized the Jews at every stage through the war years. And in the process, they lost their own sense of humanity. Dehumanization usually involves members of one group asserting the inferiority of another group through acts or words.

But during the Holocaust, the Nazis did not stop at simply asserting their own superiority over the Jews; they stripped them of their sense of self and individuality and reduced them to the numbers they had tattooed on their arms. The theme of inhumanity is omnipresent in every story and every memory recounted in the memoir. Night makes you question the power of humanity. It makes you wonder how ordinary human beings could bring themselves to commit the kind of atrocities that we now deem unthinkable. But then again, people say that the most human thing of all is cruelty.

And every family destroyed every instance of torture and every life lost is testament to it. It all began with the identification process. Having to wear the yellow star immediately set the Jews apart from everybody else. By being made constantly aware of a distinction, the Jews were made to feel different. Despite this, many Jews remained optimistic like Wiesel’s father who said “The yellow star? Oh well, what of it? You don’t die of it…” (Wiesel 22). And then came the new laws and decrees that did not allow Jews into restaurants or cafes or to travel freely.

The ghettos were the most blatant form of segregation. What began with segregation and restrictions soon transformed into torture and mass murder. When the Jews from Sighet were expelled, they were “crammed into cattle trains by the Hungarian police” (17). They were not treated like human beings, but like chickens that are transported from place to place in tiny cages. Over time, their living conditions and the brutality they were continuously subject to actually altered their personalities.

Their circumstances evoked animalistic tendencies in most people. Especially in the concentration camps where life was so immediate- the only thing that mattered was survival. The only thing that mattered was getting through that day, preserving their tiny rations of bread and dreaming about a thicker soup than they had gotten for their previous meal. There is one particular incident that is a striking illustration of the behavior of men who were reduced to animals, acting out of character, with provincial motivations.

During one of their journeys in a crowded train carrier with no food or water, when they passed through villages, the locals would throw in loaves of bread to watch the hungry men fight over them. It made no difference, in that moment, that they were enduring severe physical pain; it made no difference with whom they were fighting. Wiesel watched on as a young man fought his own father for a small piece of bread. The only thing that mattered was survival.

And ironically, the very same Darwinist theories that the Nazis used to substantiate their pseudo-biological justifications for the Holocaust held great significance in the lives of these semi-men. Most people in the concentration camps entered fearful, fearing not only for their own lives, but also for the lives of the loved ones from whom they had been separated. They prayed to God, asking for the war to end soon. Many of them remained optimistic, at least initially. But as they became more conditioned to camp life, many people, like Wiesel were overcome with an “inhuman weariness” (45).

Wiesel says that “We were incapable of thinking of anything at all. Our senses were blunted; everything was blurred as in a fog. It was no longer possible to grasp anything. The instincts of self-preservation, of self-defense, of pride, had all deserted us. In one ultimate moment of lucidity it seemed to me that we were damned souls wandering in the half-world, souls condemned to wander through space till the generations of man came to an end” (45). And it was this loss of self that broke many people’s spirits. Camps like Auschwitz stole away people’s identities.

They left no scope for any expressions of individualism. The SS took away all their belongings and left them with the pair of clothes on their backs and a bowl. In Wiesel’s words “There were no longer any questions of wealth, of social distinction, and importance, only people all condemned to the same fate” (32). People were not allowed the freedom of choice- they were all expected to follow orders without questioning them. Dehumanization was a tactic that was intentionally used by the Nazis. They broke people’s spirits in addition to inflicting physical pain.

They diminished them to machine-like existences that stopped knowing how to feel or react. The Jews stopped being afraid of death, or resisting it. In fact, they began to accept that death would be their eventual fate. And many prayed for it to come faster to escape their suffering. The novel Lord of the flies by William Golding presents and defends a theme that human nature is essential evil, and that a person removed from society will be allowed to let their evil instincts to manifest themselves as the person becomes increasingly savage.

In this novel, Golding presents a character (Jack) who takes on and exemplifies this transition to savagery through out the course of the book as the evil inside him is set free. We see Jack, who at first cannot even kill a pig caught in the creepers, fall deeper in deeper into his savage ways as his killing of one pig, and his focus on the hunt turns to bloodlust. Then as it progresses his bloodlust begins to drive more than just the hunt for food as he leaves the dead as sacrifice for the beast, and he begins to turn his violence out towards the other boys, not just his pray.

As a final decent into the evil that has consumed him the pray becomes one of the boys as Ralph is hunted with the intent to kill, sacrifice and possibly even eat in an act of cannibalism. Before the evil began to grow in strength within Jack, he was a boy much like the others and like the others he found the concept of killing another living thing was not something easy to digest, but Jack learned. How ever hard it was for Jack to first kill a pig, spilling its blood on his bare hands, once he had first killed another living thing his path towards evil and savagery was well one its way.

Early on in the novel we find Ralph, Simon and Jack walking through the forest when they come across a small pig tangled and caught in the creepers. Although Jack does have a knife with him his hesitation combined with the overwhelming reality of the situation keeps Jack stunned in his place and the pig escapes untouched. Jack swears to himself and the others that he will kill the next pig and this pressure to perform to prove himself a true and worthy hunter, leads him to obsession over the hunt. To Jack the hunt becomes more than just a game, or a source of food, it becomes his mission, duty and purpose on the island.

When Jack makes his first kill he is spellbound by the power of life and death he exerts on the pig and is fascinated by the warm blood that pours from the wound he cuts to slit the pigs throat. Now the hunt has become something more for Jack as lust for blood begins to stir in him and the hunger for that feeling of power over another beings mortality grows. The others on the island begin to take interest and excitement in the hunt as Jack has provided meat, and the draw of the hunt and its bloody gore begin to stir in the other boys.

This acts as a catalyst to the fall of the brittle society Ralph protects as the boys through Jack see the chaotic and savage game of the hunt and the prospect of more meat far more amusing and pleasing than even getting home. Jack denies the importance of the fire or shelters suggesting he is in complete obedience to the draw of the hunt, and the inherent evil that comes with. Cruel as slitting a pigs throat may at first seem to Jack, as the lust for blood that stirs in him begins to escalate, so does the power of evil deep within him, and for Jack the hunt becomes that much more lust full and primal.

As Jack’s grasp on the forgotten reality he left behind fades away, the new more savage ways of his tribe of hunters begins to shape a culture around the evil of the island. Jack’s kills, as time passes become more and more brutal and without mercy as he begins to loss any morel structure or compassion for other living beings. When hunting one day he manages to track a sow with young still suckling at her teat and he leads the boys in a perverse, and lust full slaughter of the mother pig. He does not consider what damage he is doing or the morality that would come into to play had he not been so far from modern civilization.

The head of the sow is mounted on a stick as a sacrifice to the beast who to the savages that where once boys, has become a sort of symbolic vengeful and evil god who the boys commit wrong doings in the name of. The beast in the novel represents the evil that exists within Jack and the boys themselves and thus the sacrifice to the beast represents them giving in even further to their own evil. The boys are giving into their own savage, primal ways more and more as the innocence that they bore when they arrived on the islands begins to come crashing down even further.

Jack focuses his violent energies for the most part into the hunt, but as the hunt and the primal forces of evil he exerts on the hunt become more and more a part of him it begins to seep into the interactions he has between him and the other boys. As Jack, through his action, denies membership to any civilized society on the island he beings to show egocentric behavior toward any group but the hunters and his separate tribe and begins to see his survival as more important than that of the others.

Upon realizing that the other group had fire (which both groups needed) and his did not, he decides that his group as the strongest deserved the rite to the fire, and that they would take it by force weather necessary or not. This demonstrates the primal ways of nature in its laws of survival of the fittest, and Jack’s belief that he was the strongest and thus deserved to live the most, and have the fire over any other. In modern civilization we have morals we instill in our selves to help the weaker, and share what we have to shape a better future for those in need.

Ralph’s is very much willing to share the fire but Jack gives them no chance and simply sees them as the weaker link ready to be picked off, in his tribal island world. With Jack’s contempt for the weaker less primal, less savage boys of the island combined with Jack’s weak attachment to society and its morals, the evil in him becomes ever so powerful and enables him to ignore whatever social structure that once guided him and take his primal hunt to a whole to savage level. Jack’s final descent into the depth of his own darkness and savagery occurs when the target of the hunt, kill, and sacrifice, turns away from the pig and towards Ralph.

As Ralph’s small resistance to the evil and anarchy on the island takes its final blow with the destruction of Piggy and the conch, Jack chooses to end what little is left to remind him of the civilized behavior he once knew by killing Ralph. Not just murder him in cold blood, but hunt and slaughter him like an animal, and leave a meaningful and overwhelmingly real sacrifice for the beast, Ralph’s head on a stick. Ralph being sacrificed to the beast is meaningful in the context of the book as Ralph after the destruction of the conch represents all that is left on the island of society, and civilization and thus good.

Jack is so bent on seeing Ralph dead because he can sense that Ralph opposes the savagery going on. For Jack and the boys they have given up on the idea of home and forgotten the innocence they once had. Now with Piggy dead and the conch ruined Ralph exists as a painful reminder that, some one is still thinking about home, and the society they left so distantly behind. Jack goes as far as burning the forests of the island down to flush out Ralph without even considering that the forest is their only source of food.

He has lost his internal balance of good and evil and thus he can no longer reason and his actions and decisions have become like primal reflexes, everything for the kill. William Golding presents this novel to us as a thesis statement on human nature, suggesting that we are all inherently evil but it is society that keeps us civil and good. This concept although it might not apply to the real world is portrayed quite nicely through the character of Jack who finds himself doing things his society would look down on without the slightest bit of consideration.

He hunts armed with nothing but his instinct and a spear, lusts after the sight of blood. He even pursues a human pray, and bows to a sacrificial evil god. What about this book that actually has a basis in reality and applies even to the fictional character Jack is that their is a delicate balance between good and evil and that it takes so little to offset the balance that we as a society must protect and serve these values we hold so dear. In viewing the various aspects of the island society in Golding’s Lord of the Flies as a symbolic microcosm of society, a converse perspective must also be considered.

Golding’s island of marooned youngsters then becomes a macrocosm, wherein the island represents the individual human and the various characters and symbols the elements of the human psyche. As such, Golding’s world of children’s morals and actions then becomes a survey of the human condition, both individually and collectively. Almost textbook in their portrayal, the primary characters of Jack, Ralph and Piggy are then best interpreted as Freud’s very concepts of id, ego and superego, respectively.

As the id of the island, Jack’s actions are the most blatantly driven by animalistically rapacious gratification needs. In discovering the thrill of the hunt, his pleasure drive is emphasized, purported by Freud to be the basic human need to be gratified. In much the same way, Golding’s portrayal of a hunt as a rape, with the boys ravenously jumping atop the pig and brutalizing it, alludes to Freud’s basis of the pleasure drive in the libido, the term serving a double Lntendre in its psychodynamic and physically sensual sense.

Jack’s unwillingness to acknowledge the conch as the source of centrality on the island and Ralph as the seat of power is consistent with the portrayal of his particular self-importance. Freud also linked the id to what he called the destructive drive, the aggressiveness of self-ruin. Jack’s antithetical lack of compassion for nature, for others, and ultimately for himself is thoroughly evidenced in his needless hunting, his role in the brutal murders of Simon and Piggy, and finally in his burning of the entire island, even at the cost of his own life.

In much the same way, Piggy’s demeanor and very character links him to the superego, the conscience factor in Freud’s model of the psyche. Golding marks Piggy with the distinction of being more intellectually mature than the others, branding him with a connection to a higher authority: the outside world. It is because the superego is dependent on outside support that Piggy fares the worst out of the three major characters in the isolation of the island. Piggy is described as being more socially compatible with adults, and carries imself with a sense of rationale and purpose that often serves as Ralph’s moral compass in crisis; although Ralph initially uses the conch to call the others, it is Piggy who possesses the knowledge to blow it as a signal despite his inability to do so. Similarly, Piggy’s glasses are the only artifact of outside technology on the island, further indication of his correlation to greater moral forces. In an almost gothic vein, these same glasses are the only source of fire on the island, not only necessary for the boys’ rescue, but responsible for their ultimate destruction.

Thus does fire, and likewise Piggy’s glasses, become a source of power. Piggy’s ideals are those most in conflict with Jack’s overwhelming hunger for power and satiation. It is in between these representations of chaos and order that Ralph falls. Golding’s depiction of Ralph as leader is analogous to Freud’s placement of the ego at the center of the psyche. Ralph performs as the island’s ego as he must offset the raw desires of the id with the environment using the superego as a balancing tool.

This definition is consistent with Ralph’s actions, patronizing Jack’s wish to hunt with their collective need to be rescued, often turning to Piggy for advice. Initially, in the relative harmony of the island society’s early emergence, Ralph is able to balance the opposing id and superego influences in order to forge a purpose: rescue. It is only as the balance devolves that the fate of the island’s inhabitants is darkly determined. Among Ralph, Piggy and Jack exists a constant struggle to assert their particular visions over the island.

As the authority of leadership by default falls to Ralph, the conch then becomes symbolic of the consciousness. Its possession rotates between Ralph and Piggy in order to determine logical courses of action for the boys. Jack however, constantly eschews the authority of the conch, consistent with Freud’s model with the id by definition remaining subconscious, but fully able to exert influence over decision-making. Conversely, the masks and face-paints that Jack’s group of hunters come to wear are very suggestive of Freud’s image of the subconscious.

The hidden and secretive nature of the boys’ faces beneath their disguises gives them a camouflage blending them into the background of the island foliage, making them imperceptible to the awareness of the self. Their actions go generally unnoticed, but still have great impact on the island as they kill and destroy, eventually overhunting the pigs they so desperately covet. The general assembly of the island, torn between the conch and the hunters also becomes symbologically valid, becoming a menagerie of the other major human faculties, some more important than others.

In Samneric comes a sense of loyalty and fraternity in the lack of unique identity between the twins and their fidelity to Ralph, even when captured and brutalized by Jack’s hunters. In Roger’s single-minded devotion to the bloody, gory spirit of the hunt lies a ruthless viciousness that even Jack must rely on to achieve his dark agenda. Simon’s loss of emotional coherence and his revelation give him a fragility coupled with a wisdom that make him an almost neurotic flaw in the cohesiveness of island society; he is ironically the strongest and the weakest link of the chain in his unique understanding of their situation.

The older boys then are the dominant faculties of the psyche, variably giving fealty to each of the three major forces of the id, ego and superego. As the biggest, strongest and smartest on the island, they are the source of accomplishment and achievement, both constructive and destructive. The emotions and human qualities manifested in the “littleuns” seem almost repressed in comparison, congruous with their relative ineffectuality. Their nightmares and uneasiness impress a sense of fear, weakness and anxiety, while allayed, still spread to even the most mature of the island to some extent.

Among the masses of boys, Golding interpolates other images passingly suggestive of Freudian psychosexual theory. Ralph’s first call to come together by blowing the conch implies a reference to the neonatal oral state, during which Freud postulated was the first conflict between desire and self-control within a child. Other references to problems in getting the younger children to adhere to toilet etiquette for health concerns allude to the anal stage, which psychodynamic theory hypothesized to be a period of increased awareness of bowel movement during the toilet-training period in toddlers.

Golding notes that the younger boys call out for their mothers rather than their fathers, hinting at the Oedipus complex. If the abandoned boys are representative of the aspects of the human individual, then the lush, rich bounty of the island suggest the resources available to the individual. The initially luxuriant images of abundant fruit and the tropical halcyon idyll give a sense of splendor suggestive of the innate seemingly limitless charity of nature, not only on the island, but in the human soul.

The initial “scar” of the boys’ arrival on the island presents the first sign of damage to paradise, culminating in its ultimate incineration, almost suggestive of Gotterdamerhng, the burning of mythical Valhalla. As such, other analyses of the island as a whole must take into account the island in a greater context. Piggy’s relative intellectual maturity and Ralph’s eventual rescue at the hands of British naval officers are thusly indicative of the role the seemingly absent adult world plays on the island.

The preeminence of the adult world to the boys and its presumed virtuosity elevate it to a much higher level than the everyday world of the island. Despite a passing reference to nuclear war early on in the novel, the outside world is very much assumed to be superior in functioning by both the boys and the reader, making it an almost divine figure in the scale of the island as a macrocosm. The outside world then becomes the ultimate macrocosm, the cosmic knowledge and wisdom of God.

Ralph’s guilt at the British officer’s comment about the boys’ being British suggests a kind of tongue-in-cheek repentance, both solemn and at the same time satirizing alleged British moral superiority. Ralph and Piggy’s desire to be rescued then becomes a form of faith elevated to a connotation of spirituality. The signal fire then develops into a plea for divine salvation, communicating to the adult world a wish to be rescued spiritually. It is Jack and his hunters that care not at all for the maintenance for the fire, despite the fact that it is their only means off the island.

They contrast Piggy as the signal fire’s greatest proponent, who as superego maintains a more externalized sense of what must be done. In establishing the island as a macrocosm of the self, one must then examine the manner of Golding’s treatise on the human condition as related to the plot of the story. The origin of the boys on the island gives birth to the individual, the “long scar smashed into the jungle” suggestive of some kind of inherent human weakness, perhaps a kind of Original Sin.

Ralph’s call implies the first inkling of self-awareness as the boys come to understand their situation and the power structure of the island between Jack, Ralph and Piggy forms. The ensuing formative phase of the island society then indicates growth and development, not free from mistakes and flaws in the psychodynamic of the island, but progressing. The true downward turn in the island/person then comes as Ralph loses control of Jack’s hunters and Piggy’s subsequent death. Golding’s reasons for pursuing this course of action in the collective sociology of the island is debatable.

While it may be a mere exciting plot device, it is also very possible within the context of the macrocosm that Golding is in fact, portraying the island as a person in decay. Previous events including the crash and various untended wildfires indicate the island has suffered substantial trauma. Golding’s choice to generate conflict between the id and the ego may well be symptomatic of a greater crisis for the island/person, where it is reduced to an internalized battle between its two fundamental psychological processes.

As such, Golding’s climax plays much like a morality tale; out of control, the id destroys the individual due to its self-destructive nature, leaving only the ego to answer to a higher authority. As such, Golding’s judgment on humankind then takes on a very slantedly ambivalent tone; darkly pessimistic, only passingly redeeming in its sense of morality. In his decidedly Gothic ending in this interpretation of the book, reminiscent of Poe, Golding comments sourly even on ostensibly virtuous human faculties such as righteousness and practicality.

He portrays even the protagonists with a humanly flawed skew; Piggy is weak and whining, Ralph is ineffectual. In their flaws and Jack’s cursory attempts at virtue, Golding creates a balanced image of the person, where no faculty is fully good or fully evil, but capable of being used to commit acts of either or both. There are many lessons of human nature to be learned from the novel Lord of the Flies; the book explores many aspects of human nature and society as a whole. We know this is evident because the book stirs a variety of human emotions for the reader.

The implications of Lord of the Flies go far beyond these few small children being abandoned on a dessert island, it discovers the defects of the mind and our human nature in order to explain our actions in society. Human fear stems from the unknown, which leads to terror and often irrational behavior; just as the children on the island experienced fear, the island became an evil place as if ‘a beast ‘ had been unleashed. We later learn that the fear of the unknown causes humans to release their own devils from within.

In effect, their world isn’t so different from the one we live in now. I find it ironic that the very person who interrupted the children’s sick man-hunt of Ralph, will take the children to his ship, which will then hunt the enemy in the very same fashion. Society is no better than the children who are stuck on the island and showing their violent attributes. However, these children were saved, only to be exposed to the exact same situation on a greater level. The entire time the boys were stuck on that terrifying island they were wishing for an adult to come and release them from it.

Who then will rescue this individual and save him from the terrors of the world? There is also a political system on the island just as there is in our society. Ralph is the children’s elected representative. He appoints hunters (or an army in our case) and a leader to this group on the island. He also appoints people to look after the fire, people to get water, to get food and make shelters (political heads). They also have an age of importance on the island, they can distinguish a minor from their form of an adult just like us. In this way the island is run in an orderly fashion.

However, as in most political systems there are people who will oppose the decisions made by their representative. Jack is this leader of anarchy on the island. He drives this toward Ralph like people in society would protest or go on strike. This in turn throws off the democracy and leaves the island in chaos just as it would leave our world in chaos. Their fear of the beast, much like our fear of other countries or societies, has created an unstable form of government for the children. Their fear of the unknown allows Jack the opportunity to unleash his devil from within.

He leads in a revolt against Ralph’s society and begins his own barbaric civilization. He lures the others to his side by offering meat (the equivalent to money in our terms), the children accept this and Ralph is left to tend his fire alone with only the aid of Simon and Samneric (Allies in a war). Simon is forced to think deeply about this situation. ”Fancy thinking the beast was something you could hunt and kill! ‘ said the head. For a moment or two the forest and all the other dimly appreciated places echoed with the parody of laughter. ‘ 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? ‘ ‘;      Due to this important encounter we learn that it is in our human nature. Our society allows us to become so mentally unstable as to murder and kill. This is often the result of fear or an extremely unsettling situation. The beast is us, it is a result of our behavior. The behavior of one individual can have an effect on our entire society. We have seen this through individuals like Adolph Hitler and Sadam Husain in our own encounters. In conclusion, Lord of the Flies explores many aspects of human nature.

This book shows that society can be changed drastically by the way one individual acts and the complexities of the human mind. This book was banned for a period of time due to the message it sends to the reader, however, we should look to our own world before we look to literature. This novel has only shown a small portion of the evil that our world has to offer; it is up to us to change before the evil consumes us like it did the boys on the island. This book shows in great detail the attributes of our society and explains (at least partially) why we do the things we do.