A Unique Dichotomy: The Definition of Good and Evil

A prevailing truism is that nothing possesses the ability originate from its opposite or exist in the same entity as its opposite simultaneously. Life and death cannot survive together, ignorance cannot stem from knowledge. Yet good and evil, commonly assumed to be antitheses, harbor the capacity to subsist in the presence of one another. Moreover, the two ideas exist in all actions and humans themselves. Due to this coexistence, good and evil simply cannot occupy absolute definitions, but rather must be defined in comparison to one another. Thus, as elucidated by Gardner’s Grendel, Shakespeare’s Richard III, and Moore and Lloyd’s V for Vendetta, all people must experience a moral struggle because of the equivoque of good and evil notions. However not only this characteristic of the two ideas, but also the hubris of human beings is a factor that contributes to the struggle for morality as it is human nature to do that which is in one’s own self-interest.

In Genesis, Adam and Eve, the first parents, act in both good and evil manners. Biblically, good is defined as being pious and subservient to God and his sanctity, which Adam and Eve do eagerly. Yet, they eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, from which God forbids them to eat. Although Adam and Eve are supposedly ethical people, their actions opposed God’s ideals of good. Conveying the same interconnectedness of good and evil, the Shaper of Grendel tells apparently righteous stories of the feats of the Danes, yet at the same time he tells of tragic stories and death. As Gardner explains, “he built this hall by the power of his songs: created with casual words its grave mor(t)ality” (Gardner 47). He suggests that on the surface the Shaper’s word...

... middle of paper ...

...neous presence of the two. As a result, the moral struggle is not only concerned with the internal debate between right and wrong, but also relates to the endeavor to resist hubris.

As a result of this moral endeavor arising from both ambiguity about right and wrong and the tendency to act in favor of oneself, the concept indirectly projects the thoughts that the struggle is beneficial, and perhaps even imperative. As Williams explains, one who lives with a clear “budget of do’s and don’ts...wonders whether a life lived in subservience to this code could be seen as full, mature, and abundant” (Williams). Living such a categorical, unconditional life simply is not satisfying and inhibits one’s capacity to experience all that life offers. In order to lead a full and interesting life, uncertainty, as such existing in the ideas of good and evil, must prevail.