betragter man hverken mennesket som

betragter man hverken mennesket som oprindelig godt eller ondt, men derimod som et væsen kendetegnet ved evnen til at vælge mellem det gode og det onde. Derfor er problemet, at Alex ganske vist bliver helbredt i samfundets øjne, men da han ikke selv har valgt det, lurer samme dødsensfarlige rovdyr lige under den fredelige facade. På den måde bliver Alex et symbol på det evige problem, at man for at kunne vælge det gode, også må have mulighed for at vælge det onde.

Resultater (Engelsk) 1:

consider one neither man originally good or evil, but rather as a creature characterized by the ability to choose between good and evil. Therefore, the problem is that Alex admittedly will be healed in society's eyes, but when he does not even have chosen the same deadly predators, lurking just below the peaceful facade. On the way Alex becomes a symbol of the eternal problem, that in order to be able to choose the good, also must have the option to choose evil.

Resultater (Engelsk) 2:

considers neither man originally good or evil, but as a being characterized by the ability to choose between good and evil. Therefore, the problem is that Alex admittedly are cured in society's eyes, but he did not choose it, lurking same deadly predators just below the peaceful facade. This makes Alex a symbol of the eternal problem that in order to be able to choose the good, must also be able to choose evil.

Resultater (Engelsk) 3:

It is not that man originally good or evil, but rather as a creature characterized by the ability to choose between good and evil. That is why the problem is that, although Alex is treated in society's eyes, but, as he does not even have chosen the same deadly predators, lurking just below the peaceful facade. In this way, Alex a symbol of the eternal problem,In order to be able to select the good, must also have the opportunity to choose the evil.