Dr. Jekyll starts off viewed as a good person in society, but his evil side took over after he let it out. People can decide which one is superior by either showing their good or evil sides. Even though everyone has evil thoughts, they cannot let them out because they will just keep coming back and will eventually take over. In the end no one wins because Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde both die because one cannot live without the other. This shows that there is no one that is purely good or purely evil, everyone has both in them but it is up to them to decide which one overpowers the
Mill would say that if God is omniscient then surely he is aware of our suffering and would therefore intervene in the evil as he loves us all. Yet God still allows our suffering to continue which suggests that God is not powerful (omnipotent) at all and cannot stop us or save us from this evil. Mill also believes that the natural disasters and natural problems within the human body such as curable or incurable cancers and diseases such as motor-neurone disease (causes of the body to shut down slowly) for example show faults in the design. These disaster show poor design but how can an all knowing
In his view, the end to political instability justifies the means no matter how shady they may be. He states, “Many have imagined republics and principalities that have never been seen or known to exist in reality. For there is such a difference between the way men live and the way they ought to live.... because anyone who determines to act in all circumstances the part of a good man must come to ruin among so many who are not good.” (Machiavelli p.186) Many of the virtues advocated for in The Prince are apparent in Claudius’ character from William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet. Hamlet tells of the various activities that take place during a questionable shift of royal power in Denmark. It is the acquisition and maintenance of this power that shows just how Machiavellian Claudius’ character is in the play.
Elizabeth sees his inner goodness shine when he refuses to lie about being involved in witchcraft, and she realizes how unfair she has been. John Proctor saves the lives of the others who are accused when he unselfishly declines to save his own. He acts as a martyr when he places others before himself. He would rather die an honorable death than live a dishonorable life, which is what precedes him to be the tragic hero of the play. John Proctor, being a very complex character stuck in a world full mischief, madness, and chaos shows a major change as the play unfolds.
Some may ask, "Is Caesar a hero, or just an ignorant tyrant?" others ask "Were Brutus' intentions as pure as we thought?" I think in The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare revealed the major character flaws of each individual in this play. As an example, Brutus loved Rome with a passion. But his love for Rome caused him to do something that not many other people would ever dream of doing.
However another one of the main themes in the novel is the idea that everyone has a choice to do good or bad. Whilst Cal believes that he has no choice but to do evil, he unknowingly does good. This may be a sign that Cal’s abilities may be far more extensive that he knows. So while Cal is rejected by Adam, Steinbeck manages to slip in the idea that Cal, as one of the main protagonists of the story may have the ability, and the duty to break this chain of rejection. He may not be the most virtuous of individuals, but he has more power and goodness than he could
It can also be as complex as involving the uninvolved or innocent people into your life affairs, which basically means that when someone is evil, they drag someone who had nothing involved with you into your own affairs. Evil can also be in forms of omission and commission. In the Puritan lifestyle, evil was extremely common. The Puritans believed that evil was a sign of disobedience towards God, and brought by the Devil. The play, “The Crucible”, written by Arthur Miller is an excellent example of evil being practiced in a Puritanism society.
All of the people in the brave New World believe they are the best they can be which means there is no desire to achieve anything or try harder. This also furthers the gap between real human nature because it is just basic instinct for people to make things better for themselves. When the world controller makes John stay as punishment it’s clear that the world is not a utopia because John hangs himself. By acknowledging the dystopia, Aldous Huxley demonstrates how one man's heaven is another man’s hell. Along with many other possible themes, “A perfect world is unachievable without imperfection” fits quite nicely.
Albert Einstein once said, “We cannot despair of humanity, since we ourselves are human beings.” Being human is making mistakes. We make mistakes because we are capable of being scared, overconfident, zealous, and joyous. This myriad array of emotions both coerces and condemns our every action, dooming us to a life of acting on impulse and striving for perfection. Emotions can push us to do great things, yet also tempt us towards evil. Our capacity to act beyond primal instinct is what makes us human.
Ambition is used with an extremely negative connotation in Shakespeare's writing, but today, ambition is seen as a good trait for a hardworking person. Everyone carries their own ambitious desires, whether they are good or bad. After Caesar's death, Antony uses Caesar's compassion as an example to “prove” that Caesar wasn't ambitious, saying, “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept; / Ambition should be made of sterner stuff” (JC 3.2.91-2). Antony argues that because of Caesar's compassion, he could not have been an ambitious ruler. He turns compassion into a foil for ambition, therefore making the reader go back to the question of, “What does ambition really mean?” It appears that the real question involves the meaning of ambition in Shakespeare's time.