Question
Prompt:
In 1983, the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to William Golding for his great contributions to the field, particularly literature that analyzed the human condition. The Nobel Prize was presented by Professor Lars Gyllensten, a member of the Swedish Academy. In Gyllensten's speech, he quotes Golding as saying, "Man produces evil as a bee produces honey." Gyllensten then elaborates on Golding's quote:
"Golding inveighs* against those who think that it is the political or other systems that create evil. Evil springs from the depths of man himself―it is the wickedness in human beings that creates the evil systems or that changes what from the beginning is, or could be, good into something iniquitous* and destructive.
Write an essay that argues your position on the extent to which Golding and Gyllensten claims about man being inherently evil, and thus responsible for evil systems, are valid.
*inveighs = speaks or writes about something with hostility
*iniquitous = grossly unfair or morally wrong
Directions:
In your response, you should do the following:
Respond to the prompt with a thesis that presents a defensible position.
Provide evidence to support your line of reasoning.
Explain how the evidence supports your line of reasoning.
Use appropriate grammar and punctuation in communicating your argument.
In 1983, the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to William Golding for his great contributions to the field, particularly literature that analyzed the human condition. The Nobel Prize was presented by Professor Lars Gyllensten, a member of the Swedish Academy. In Gyllensten's speech, he quotes Golding as saying, "Man produces evil as a bee produces honey." Gyllensten then elaborates on Golding's quote:
"Golding inveighs* against those who think that it is the political or other systems that create evil. Evil springs from the depths of man himself―it is the wickedness in human beings that creates the evil systems or that changes what from the beginning is, or could be, good into something iniquitous* and destructive.
Write an essay that argues your position on the extent to which Golding and Gyllensten claims about man being inherently evil, and thus responsible for evil systems, are valid.
*inveighs = speaks or writes about something with hostility
*iniquitous = grossly unfair or morally wrong
Directions:
In your response, you should do the following:
Respond to the prompt with a thesis that presents a defensible position.
Provide evidence to support your line of reasoning.
Explain how the evidence supports your line of reasoning.
Use appropriate grammar and punctuation in communicating your argument.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
In his Nobel Prize Speech, Lars Gyllensten encapsulates William Golding's notion that evil is an intrinsic aspect of humanity, suggesting that systems of oppression and injustice arise from the darker facets of human nature rather than environmental or political constructs. While Golding and Gyllensten present a compelling argument about the propensity for evil within man, I argue that their claims overlook the significant role that societal structures and external factors play in fostering malevolence. While human nature may bear the seeds of selfishness and cruelty, it is the interaction between these traits and the circumstances of life that often yield oppressive systems.
To support this position, one can look to historical examples where systems of power have exploited basic human instincts for domination or control. Take the rise of totalitarian regimes in the twentieth century, for instance. Leaders like Hitler and Stalin manipulated the fear, desperation, and aspirations of the masses, utilizing the darker tendencies of humanity—such as envy and greed—to perpetuate atrocities. Their regimes were not merely products of the inherent evil of individuals but also the result of conditions such as economic despair, social unrest, and the struggle for identity in a rapidly changing world. In this sense, the systems they created were, in part, responses to societal conditions—an amalgamation of human factors and systemic influences rather than solely reflections of innate wickedness.
Moreover, research in psychology illustrates that people often act differently in groups, suggesting that external environmental conditions significantly influence behavior. The Stanford prison experiment, conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, revealed that when placed in positions of authority or subjected to authoritarian environments, individuals may exhibit aggressive or abusive behaviors. This study indicates that while humans may possess capacities for both good and evil, it is the context that can evoke the latent hostility, rather than a fixed inability to choose otherwise.
Additionally, focusing solely on the inherent evil within man ignores the potential for goodness that exists in individuals and communities, especially when they are nurtured in environments that promote empathy, cooperation, and understanding. Many social movements throughout history, such as the Civil Rights Movement or the anti-apartheid struggle, demonstrate humanity's capacity for altruism and collective action against oppression. These movements arose not from an innate propensity for evil but from a moral awakening to injustice and a desire to pursue equity and compassion in society.
In summary, while Golding and Gyllensten aptly identify the existence of evil within human nature, their assertion that this evil is the primary driver of malevolent systems dismisses the critical influence of circumstances and societal structures. The interplay between inherent human traits and external conditions illustrates that while humanity has the capacity for great wickedness, it also harbors immense potential for goodness. Therefore, understanding the genesis of evil necessitates a broader perspective that includes both the nature of humanity and the impact of the societies we create.
To support this position, one can look to historical examples where systems of power have exploited basic human instincts for domination or control. Take the rise of totalitarian regimes in the twentieth century, for instance. Leaders like Hitler and Stalin manipulated the fear, desperation, and aspirations of the masses, utilizing the darker tendencies of humanity—such as envy and greed—to perpetuate atrocities. Their regimes were not merely products of the inherent evil of individuals but also the result of conditions such as economic despair, social unrest, and the struggle for identity in a rapidly changing world. In this sense, the systems they created were, in part, responses to societal conditions—an amalgamation of human factors and systemic influences rather than solely reflections of innate wickedness.
Moreover, research in psychology illustrates that people often act differently in groups, suggesting that external environmental conditions significantly influence behavior. The Stanford prison experiment, conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, revealed that when placed in positions of authority or subjected to authoritarian environments, individuals may exhibit aggressive or abusive behaviors. This study indicates that while humans may possess capacities for both good and evil, it is the context that can evoke the latent hostility, rather than a fixed inability to choose otherwise.
Additionally, focusing solely on the inherent evil within man ignores the potential for goodness that exists in individuals and communities, especially when they are nurtured in environments that promote empathy, cooperation, and understanding. Many social movements throughout history, such as the Civil Rights Movement or the anti-apartheid struggle, demonstrate humanity's capacity for altruism and collective action against oppression. These movements arose not from an innate propensity for evil but from a moral awakening to injustice and a desire to pursue equity and compassion in society.
In summary, while Golding and Gyllensten aptly identify the existence of evil within human nature, their assertion that this evil is the primary driver of malevolent systems dismisses the critical influence of circumstances and societal structures. The interplay between inherent human traits and external conditions illustrates that while humanity has the capacity for great wickedness, it also harbors immense potential for goodness. Therefore, understanding the genesis of evil necessitates a broader perspective that includes both the nature of humanity and the impact of the societies we create.