Good vs. Good?

The Lord of the Flies so far has been a story about innate evil and its contrast to good. Simon and Ralph represent the good of humanity, but in two different ways. As we go through the story, I get the sense that their good doings stem from different places. Ralph's goodness stems from a learned behavior rather than an innate instinct. Like the other boys, he is susceptible to the darkness of humanity. He too participates in the hunting dance that ended in Simon's death. At one point, he even had the urge to kill something by himself. Simon, though, seems to be good from the heart rather than by the rules that have been previously placed upon him. He lives by the "rules" because they are natural to his temperament. He thrives in nature and seems to be at peace with himself. Does a difference in the stem of goodness affect the quality of the goodness? Does the stem affect the way good intentions are carried out? Well, Ralph understands the evil side because he has acted upon it. I think his ability so see the world from another view point helps him to see how wrong the other side actually was. This makes him a good leader. Simon, however, has a different fate altogether. He was killed essentially because the goodness in his heart wanted the boys to realize the truth about the beast and to make them not fearful. This is another great parallel in the story to our society. Usually the people trying to do the most good are the ones getting burned in the end. The ones that have the less-good urges are the ones who get all the glory. Why is that? Is it because people don't want to see the truth in their mistakes? What kind of goodness is the good kind?

---Linzey Rice