You're Evil. We All Are.

We are always told that only bad people are capable of doing bad things, and thousands of crimes are unexplained due to this notion. What if humans were instinctively capable of doing evil? Well, the answer is simply that we are; starting from the first people, Adam & Eve, who despite God’s direction and personal morality still partook of the forbidden fruit. As we’ve grown and evolved as a race, we have developed systems to keep us as far away as possible from those urges. Nevertheless, no matter how hard we try, there is no truly escaping the impulses that drive us to do what is wrong.

In Lord of the Flies, William Golding takes us on the journey of young boys being stranded on a desert island after a massive plane crash, leaving them without adult supervision or guidance. Using nothing but their wits and bare strength, they have to develop a system through which to survive the harsh conditions of the wild. When first introduced to each other and the environment they would share for the next few months, they came with their happy, fun loving, excited and juvenile selves. As the book explains, one of the boys, Ralph, was doing cartwheels and swimming in the lagoon (pg. 12), seeing that being stranded was more of a tropical getaway than a vacant wasteland of unknown horrors. So far, the reader is being shown how civilized and kind the boys are to each other; willing to play and get along, free of disputes. After having spent some time on the island, they began to lose their once childlike innocence and subconsciously created new patterns of life that were completely out of their character.  

The Stanford Prison Experiment was one of the most controversial psychological experiments of the twentieth century. Led by Dr. Philip Zimbardo, twenty-four participants were chosen at random to either play the role of prisoner or prison guard. At first, the men were simply acting, complying with the description given to them and none of their actions had any effect on their character or mindsets. Over the course of a week though, the men  had begun to physically embody the roles they had been given and ignored all sense of morality. This experiment displayed how instinctively, authority satisfies something within us and when given the chance to power or be powered over by someone. This is a representation of how the boys’ environment changed their ethical thinking dramatically since the plane crash.

In the book when the boys had become accustomed to life on the island, new fears and behaviors started to manifest among the small group. At night, some would complain of hearing sounds of  an unidentifiable “beast”, with many more reports of sighting its presence. When faced with this creature, or so they thought, they had acted in the most groundless of ways. The young boys began clawing at it, chanting “Kill the beast, cut his throat, spill his blood” (pg. 152), an impromptu warcry that they had manipulated into a ritualistic proverb. While taking turns maiming the monster, its cries were identified as being that of one of the boys, Simon. Ignoring his painful shrieks, they continued to partake of the murderous game until they had left no sign of life in the beast a.k.a Simon. The whole time, they knew that the creature was in fact Simon, saying: “It was an accident. That’s what it was. An accident. Coming in the dark--he hadn’t no business crawling like that out of the dark. He was batty.” (pg. 157). Now, of course they didn’t want to, when in their right minds of course, to kill anyone out of pure urge. However, when isolated from the polished luxuries of the society one is used to, the ethics that one has been instilled with start to dwindle considerably. This is a notable change from the children frolicking on the island and playing carelessly with each other at the beginning of the book.

During World War II, the Japanese bombed an American Military base, Pearl Harbor, in an attempt to weaken its forces. Having been devastated by this surprise ambush, the United States figured the only way to repel Japanese military powers was to fire back at them and show the extent of their true power and influence. The “Manhattan Project” had been in effect for a while before the actual attack, so they figured why not send an even more dangerous message. After the creation of the first atomic bomb in 1945, America decided that its purpose was best served claiming the lives of those behind enemy lines. On August 6, 1945, more than 100,000 lives were claimed due to the detonation of that bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Now, the U.S. only wanted to finish what Japan started, right? It was only fair for them to fire back...or so the idea was at the time. They only meant to “send a message” per say, but they knew the significant difference between blowing up a few ships and annihilating two entire cities. Similarly to the boys on the island, their hunting for the beast was a simple game until when actually confronted with it, their craving to kill and thirst for control had been triggered and began going absolutely riotous with the thought of tearing the innocent child to shreds.

Merriam-Webster defines civilized as:characterized by taste, refinement, or restraint.” Humans have tried to create the most civilized society possible. From childhood we are taught how to be functioning members of society; right from wrong, how to share, and being kind to everyone. Today’s social systems, functions, and processes have all been formulated to accommodate the ever-changing state of humanity and how we as humans want to live collectively. However, we are naturally wired with the need for power, influence, control, along with many other undeniable impulses. These traits thrive within all of us, no matter how “civilized” humans have been conditioned to behave.


Works Cited

  1. Golding, William, Lord of the Flies. New York: Penguin Group, 2003

  2. History.com Staff. "Pearl Harbor." History.com. A&E Television Networks, 01 Jan. 2009. Web. 05 Apr. 2016.

  3. "The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." About.com Education. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Apr. 2016.

4. "The Real Lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment - The New Yorker." The New Yorker. N.p., 12 June 2015. Web. 06 Apr. 2016.

Comments (2)

Jessica Guarino (Student 2018)
Jessica Guarino

I agree with your comparison between the Stanford Prison experiment and the book because the examples you used and talked about go hand in hand. "Over the course of a week though, the men had begun to physically embody the roles they had been given and ignored all sense of morality. " I like this because it is a really strong argument for your essay and it really makes your essay stand out.

Gabriel Copeland (Student 2018)
Gabriel Copeland

I do not agree with the comparison as the way Arielle writes distorts some meaning of the Manhattan Project. Yes the Project had been in production but the Atomic bombs were not dropped to retaliate 5 years later. The bombs were dropped for military purposes to prevent an invasion of Japan by Allied Forces ( Operation Downfall). Therefore, that would undermine the argument of retaliation as the bombs were not dropped as a game of Eye for an Eye.

"However, when isolated from the polished luxuries of the society one is used to, the ethics that one has been instilled with start to dwindle considerably."

Although I do not entirely agree with the statement, it is written in a such a storylike and poetic manner it makes it hard not to agree.