BIG QUESTION!

What defines good and evil?


Ghosts:
Manders believes it is wrong to insure the orphanage. He fears the town will lose trust in his connection to God and does not want to be viewed as "evil." Manders feels that others create the definition of good and evil. Mrs. Alving, on the other hand, formulates her own opinion on good and evil. She is not concerned about the opinions of others (illustrated by the books on her coffee table). She succumbs to Manders' desire to not insure the orphanage, which is a decision that eventually comes back to haunt them both. Therefore, is it better to trust one's own opinions on the definition of good and evil, rather than to worry about what others think?

Oedipus Rex:
Oedipus honestly desires to do what is best for Thebes. He saves the people from the sphinx, and at the end of the play, he exiles himself. He kept his word, because of his morality and integrity. In Oedipus Rex, the definition of good is this virtuous behavior.

King Henry IV, Part 1:
To a majority of Shakespeare's audience, Hotspur and the rebels are "evil," while Hal, Falstaff and King Henry are "good." Rebellion is generally viewed as an evil act, however, Hal rebels against his father's wishes, as he and Falstaff drink and steal. What makes these two rebellions different? The audience already has an opinion of who is "good," and who is "evil" in this play, before it begins. They know Hal eventually becomes an honorable king, and don't view his actions before he becomes king as evil. He might be mischievous, but he turns around in the end, making him eternally "good." Falstaff provides the comic relief for the play, and is a likable character. Hotspur is not likable, so the audience easily labels as an evil character.