Good Intentions in the Crucible by Arthur Miller Essay Example

How do good intentions bring harm through actions? In The Crucible, Arthur Miller conveys this argument through witchcraft. He uses this play to show how even though people have good intentions, their actions can cause damage and distress. Miller means that trying to save people or going into a situation with a good mindset can hurt others even if that isn’t the goal. As seen in The Crucible and modern events, intentions are more significant than the actions that occur. 

John Proctor’s intentions far outweigh his actions. In Act I, Proctor says, “Wipe it out of mind. We never touched, Abby” (para 198). In this line, Proctor is telling Abigail Williams that their relationship is over. He does this to better his relationship with his wife. Through his good intentions, his actions cause trouble with Abigail. Abigail states, “How do you call me child” (para 197). Through this argument, pain occurs. Abigail is hurt by John even though John didn’t mean for that. He just wanted to help his family, but instead, caused issues. It puts a hole in his relationship with Abby and pushes her to become dark and resentful. John Proctor additionally shows good intentions without thinking about his actions or what happens because of them in other ways. 

Proctor also brings suffering through his actions in court. Proctor says, “It’s a sort of testament. The people signing it declare their good opinion of Rebecca, and my wife, and Marth Corey” (para 153). Proctor tries to save the ones accused but unintentionally puts the others in danger. He uses his good thought to help the town recollect itself, but instead he pulls the whole town down. He uses their word without even thinking of how it would be for them in court. Danforth replies, “Mr. Cheever, have warrants drawn for all of these-arrest for examination” (para 168). The people who gave Proctor their word to help save the accused, are at risk because of it. Proctor didn’t think about how his actions would cause this to happen especially with his good thoughts. Proctor’s good intentions also relate to the intentions through zoological gardens for animals. 

Good intentions are also dominant for animals as linked with other people. The author states, “When Dunda, an African elephant, was transferred from the San Diego Zoo to the San Diego Wild Animal Park, she was chained, pulled to the ground, and beaten with ax handles for two days” (para 3). Zoo’s claim to save animals and put them into a loving and caring environment, but actually that is not the case. Animals are hurt every day to do what the keepers want them to do. They are punished for just being there and it isn’t benefitting them at all. The article says, “Birds’ wings may be clipped so they cannot fly, aquatic animals often have little water, and the many animals who naturally live in large herds or family groups are often kept alone or, at most, in pairs” (para 4). Animals are also treated poorly in their exhibits. Animals aren’t given what they need and treated as they are not living animals. Animals act differently because of this treatment. They result in abnormal and self-destructive behavior. These animals are not being saved and instead are being hurt which is cruel and needs to be stopped. 

With good intentions, actions arent as important as they are thought out to be. Good intentions can lead to terrible positions for humans and animals. Your actions can cause you to do something you would never want to do. Having a positive mindset is much superior to the actions you take to show this mindset. Even if an individual feels they are doing good in the world, it can go downhill without even realizing it.