Today during an intense debate in English class concerning the statement "Human Nature is essentially evil" (me being against the statement) I discovered a weak spot in the opposing side's argument where they were talking about insticts and society and how society and religion are what keep our evil side inside of us. Then I thought, wait a minute....

EUREKA!!!!!!!

Society was created by our forefathers, by OUR instincts. It is a part of us, we have created the measures to control evil. If our instincts have created the cage for our inner evil than there must be some good inside of us. Human nature is not to create evil and dispair but to survive as a species and if we want to survive than we can't just start going mad and killing everybody since that would be a bad strategy. Our instincts are bent on self-preservation, not evil and if we are able to comprehend evil there must be a good side in us telling us what is evil and what is good.

I have just proved William Golding wron as well as "Lord of the FLies". Serves him right for making us study his book and being able to create his own words. Oh, look at me, I'm William Golding. I can create neologisms whenever I want."

Golding's view in Lord of the Flies is pessimistic, arguing that human nature is inherently corruptible and wicked, and so the 19th century ideals of progress and education are based on false premises. The real nature of the human being is not as innocent as we like to think, and Golding's ideas give a complete explanation to the atrocities of war. Symbolism plays an important role in the development of the story, with the narrative technique being used to give significance to certain people or objects, which in fact represent some other figure. The island stands as a microcosm representing the world, with the Beast being the dark side of human nature and the evil residing within everyone.

http://www.exclusivebooks.com/features/authors/wgolding.php?PHPSESSID==

Special thanks to anybody on my side since we won thanks to this and other smart statements. If anybody would like to destroy this argument I would like to see you try.