Wilkie Collins once questioned how “the best men are not consistent with good, so why should the worst men be consistent in evil.” Generally, people find the existence of intrinsic benevolence or malevolence within themselves and others, yet there remain those that challenge this concept. Gibran contends that good easily evolves into the traditional understanding of “evil,” and as such, we should instead view it as misfortune upon the good. Comparably, in Lord of the Flies, Golding portrays an evil within all erupting only when forced into a precarious situation; however, he argues that this innate vulnerability to evil within humans deems humans themselves to be evil. In Good and Evil, Gibran portrays true evil as virtually nonexistent, and perceived evil as only a byproduct of adversity. He rejects the traditional understanding of evil as being a simple opposition to good. First, Gibran introduces the situation as an elder asks the Prophet, “Speak to us of Good and Evil.” (Gibran 1) Immediately, it’s clear that the Prophet, or in essence, Gibran, rejects the traditional view of “Good and Evil” as he asserts that, “of the good in you I can speak, but not of the evil.” (Gibran 3) From here, Gibran provides juxtapositions of commonly understood positives against their antitheses. For example, the Prophet describes how “You are good when you strive to give of yourself. Yet you are not evil when you seek gain for yourself...You are good when you walk to your goal firmly and