Good, however, is defined by the lines it cannot cross. There are deeds that cannot be committed without sacrificing the very qualities that make Good 'good'. Once those lines are blurred, little remains to differentiate the two. Thus, the arsenal of Evil is inherently richer.

'In the end, Good does not defeat Evil'. Yet, this does not mean Evil stands victorious. In the end, it is Evil that defeats Evil. This is a lesson I am learning through Professor's writings: it was foolish to think the Fellowship (and all that was good in Middle Earth) could have defeated Sauron through strength alone. As we saw, it wasn't Frodo or Sam who destroyed the Ring; it was the greed and malice the Ring breathed into its 'slaves' that brought its own demise. But this was only possible because of the very goodness of many. The mercy shown by Bilbo and Frodo toward Gollum stayed the hand of fate just long enough for Evil to trip over its own feet. Had Good acted 'resourcefully' and killed Gollum when they had the chance, they would have removed the very instrument of Evil’s self-destruction. This does not mean we wait idly; the Fellowship did everything 'humanly' (hah) possible to reach the Cracks of Doom, but it was the inherent rot within Evil that finally finished the task.