Moral Codes In Lord Of The Flies By William Golding

1542 Words4 Pages

“What would you do if you were ever stuck on an island?”
This is a question often discussed by many people. Writer William Golding helped us put into perspective the reality of this scenario. He argued that once we allowed ourselves to break our moral code once, it became much easier to slip into savagery as the shame that once came with breaking these moral codes diminishes. The breaking of one’s moral code can be attributed to a number of things ranging from fear of rejection within a group, the loss of faith in the effectiveness of the rules and even challenging times can tempt one to deviate from or abandon their morals and those established by society.
Firstly, Loss of faith in the effectiveness of the rules can lead to savage behavior …show more content…

Jack sensed the rising frustration of the group and appealed to the boys with the promise of exciting hunts, food, dances and the freedom to not have a care in the world. Also, unlike Ralph, Jack could hunt. This could have been viewed by the boys as a symbol of power as emphasized by Jack; “He’s not a hunter. He’d never have got us meat. He isn’t a prefect and we don’t know anything about him. He just gives orders and expects people to obey for nothing. All this talk—”. Also, as the boy’s priorities focused more on survival, Jack’s hunting ability started to appeal more to the boys rather than Ralph’s ability to lead and organize as it promised them immediate access to food, shelter, and celebrations, meanwhile Ralph’s campaign if you will, was simply based on keeping the fire up and the hope of finding a ship to rescue them, which tired the boys out fast. Later on, The shattering of the conch symbolized the fall of reason and Ralph’s rule; “the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist...This time the silence was complete. Ralph’s lips formed a word but no sound came.” After the boys killed Piggy and ultimately the conch, this could be seen as a clear defiance against Ralph and his rules. The boys no longer believed in the rules as they haven't seen any …show more content…

If the other boys left then Jack’s side can’t be that bad after all. Plus the original goal of having rules was to ensure the inclusion and safety of everyone. Yet they found themselves isolated from the majority of the boys and highly vulnerable. This tempted them to leave and enjoy the comforts of being part of a society even if that meant abandoning their original beliefs. This was because at this point survival was prioritized more than morals. Later Sam and Eric refused to leave castle rock with ralph as they knew the three boys would not stand a chance against Jack and his vast amount of hunters, especially Roger;“ 'Won’t you come with me? Three of us—we’d stand a chance.' After a moment’s silence, Sam spoke in a strangled voice. 'You don’t know Roger. He’s a terror.' ". Sam and Eric were no longer afraid of the lack of acceptance from the group, rather the punishment they would receive if they rebel against the group. They had to trade their morality for safety as they valued their safety more than holding on to their values. We can conclude that fear of isolation can be enough to tempt us to let go of our morals, eventually making the rules a distant memory of the

Open Document