Is Human nature good or evil?

[masond123]

What is good? What is evil? Do you think the SS officers who were carrying out horrific orders from Hitler in concentration camps believed that what they were doing was evil? Or for the good of humanity?

 

[Braden]

The real question is how does jet fuel melt steel beams?

 

[StaticReach]

Alright, so I have been gazing at the comments and have been delighted to see the various ways that ideas have progressed. I will now give my hopefully logical statement on what I think of the questions that I and others have asked. Lastly, please bear in mind that this is just a general reply to all responses brought up in the discussion not me stating the correct answer, for I believe there is none.

Question: Are humans naturally good or evil?

Answer: I personally believe that humans are neither good or bad, evil nor kind at their birth. I persist in this thought for I believe at that tender age the human brain would have not fully developed to the point of distinguishing what evil or good is therefore meaning that it is almost impossible to put a baby on the spectrum of good or evil. Many people who disagree with this belief, state that if the baby has done nothing wrong it is automatically good however, we also have to take into consideration the entire aspect of being good is to be desired or approved of. Well, at that stage of the human cycle you have not proved yourself to become a good individual nor have you exactly made your own choices. Most choices at that age are defined by the decisions your parents make, for you have not reached or understood the stage of accountability. Therefore meaning a baby is neutral when born and what they do as the progress defines who they eventually are or become.

Question: Are humans good or evil as they progress?

Answer: This question completely dumbfounds me as there are endless amount of answers and possibilities. Now it comes to what I believe in. Many people say it’s the environment or what they are taught or even the endless amount of circumstances. But I believe this thinking is completely wrong. Your environment, rank, social status, strengths, weaknesses and even knowledge should not define you. I believe the defining figures of people are the choices you make and what you do with any given situation. You can be placed in the worst situations, have a lot in your life taken away and completely stripped from you privileges yet still maintain a good or evil life. In fact I believe many of the people in this community have gone through hardships that I cannot even fathom yet some still remain happy. I cannot say it is of simplicity but believe me where there is life, there is hope and I know without a doubt that you can make all things good if you put your mind to it. Lastly, choices also define you for many have long term consequences in your life. Just to be clear, I am not stating if you have made a bad choice you are hopeless but once again you can make the choice to admit to the wrongful actions you have made as well as make the necessary amendments.

Question: Response to the Giver

Answer: I read the Giver and loved it ages ago but have to disagree with the thought that it was a utopian society and that the society tried to take away evil. In fact I am here to say that the Book failed in making the utopian society it perceived and the author was tremendously biased when making the book. I do not what want to dive in deepness to the aspects of the Giver but how in anyway is taking away sound in society making it utopian. I doubt that people nowadays would take away sound in order to form a utopian society hence why I am saying the author was very narrow minded in the sense that he/she wanted to get their point across.

Question: Does an evil person think they are evil?

Answer: Definitely! I know of so many individuals who know they are doing evil which makes me ponder something. If someone thinks they are not evil why do they go out of their way to hide and disguise themselves from reviling their plans? This obviously means they are aware of their evil deeds yet persist in doing so for whatever sake they think is relevant. True, there are some who are mental and some who are not mental and think they are doing right but this mindset can be completely changed by either the guidance of people or the collaboration of isolating and curing the mental. Finally evil is something everyone is aware of and can never be hidden from the eyes of the public regardless of the ignorance some people will possess.

Finally I will comment on Tene’s comment but I need to rest my hands and need time to think of what to say for I know it can get quite complex when we stride to that type of thinking therefore, meaning I need to be careful with my words.

 

[OuchTheSchauzer]

I feel as if this line isn't as clear as we'd like it to be, but instead blurred by cultural and physical differences. Mostly it's someone's interpretation of nature, nurture, and place. For a topic like this good and evil are hard to define, as so many different view points are out there, so for I will discuss what i know then try to define them later.

Nature: Evolutionary speaking all life is selfish. It's not good or evil, it's survival of the fittest. Animals who are concerned with themselves, will likely survive longer than more altruistic ones. An animal that sacrifices itself will not breed. This causes the inheritance of more selfish genes in the gene pool and self sacrificing genes to be less influential. While natural selection is not anywhere near as present, as it was during the development of Homo sapiens, the genes that passed along then still survive today.

Nurture: Natural selection is no longer as prevalent because of the creation of society. This is where the ideas of good and evil are first brought up. Natural traits such as greed is now looked at as harmful to the species, and so is taught as evil. Sacrifice is taught as good and beneficial. We are nurtured from a young age to suppress primal desires that would've been beneficial in a different time. While this sounds depressing, it's crucial to keep a functioning society, which is in turn needed for advancement. However we are nurtured differently depending on our place in the world.

Place: I use this term very broadly, to cover a wide range of contributing factors. Such factors include, but aren't limited to, historical context, geographical location, surrounding cultural beliefs and ideals, religion, and rank or place in society. Beginning with historical context, (i.e. place in time) the ideas of good and evil are strongly connected with the current technological advancement with society, and religious context. An example would be murder, which is evil today, was a way of deciding dominance, settling arguments, and the means of solving various other problems in past time periods. Religious context is a strong contributing factor of ideas on good and evil throughout history. When Rome became a Christian Empire, old idols of pagan worship were deemed as satanic and evil. Christians used their religion to justify the crusades, an act today many would consider evil. Another example today is the ISIS radical movement in the middle east, tearing down ancient relics for what they deem good. I know I've used extreme examples here, but it shows the point of religion affecting good and evil beliefs. Geographic location connects strongly with the areas religion and cultural ideals. Finally rank in society ideals and interpretations, as what is required for survival varies. Someone not as well off might be taught what is evil is less encompassing then someone better off. Another outcome is the opposite, and a very well off child is taught to use people for their success.

In conclusion good and evil are a set of ideas decided by place, genetics, and influences. Our interpretations of what is good or evil is often relative to only ourselves, yet pattern shows across the world and history about what is right and wrong. Nature gave us the tools we need to survive in a competitive world, society nurtured often taught us to suppress these traits, commonly through dividing it between good and evil, and our place in the world dictates how society divided these traits. This all being said I'd have to define Good and Evil simply for what they are. Good: The way we interpret traits that are deemed beneficial. Evil: The way we interpret traits that are deemed harmful. So are humans inherently good or evil. The spectrum of what that is is far to wide, so I'd have to say we're somewhere in the gradient.

So I'd like your ideas on what good and evil are. What do you think is a good/evil trait and how do you believe your uprising has affected that?

If you made it this far thanks for reading! (and helping me procrastinate a lab write up)

 

[iTheManWithNoName]

Well, if you look at it from another angle, everyone has been evil, if lying is considered to be an evil thing.

I don't know who said it, but that person said that it has been proven that humanity will become extinct in 150 years.
I have an ANW book with a graph and a timeline, and lines with the amount of food, natural resources, population without collapse, etc is. It was published in 1999 and it basically states that there is not enough food in 2010 and the pollution is at an deadly rate, which it clearly isnt.

All I want to say, is that these are predictions that are made according to if we continue at this rate with doing bad things, so progressively, this proves that we are not continuing at this rate, but that we are actually decreasing and therefore do better. In the 60's and 70's, fabrics were dumping their deadly waste into rivers, that is not allowed anymore, and these rivers are actually being cleaned.

Humans will find a way, like we always have.

 

[Electrix]

Well, if you look at it from another angle, everyone has been evil, if lying is considered to be an evil thing.

I don't know who said it, but that person said that it has been proven that humanity will become extinct in 150 years.
I have an ANW book with a graph and a timeline, and lines with the amount of food, natural resources, population without collapse, etc is. It was published in 1999 and it basically states that there is not enough food in 2010 and the pollution is at an deadly rate, which it clearly isnt.

All I want to say, is that these are predictions that are made according to if we continue at this rate with doing bad things, so progressively, this proves that we are not continuing at this rate, but that we are actually decreasing and therefore do better. In the 60's and 70's, fabrics were dumping their deadly waste into rivers, that is not allowed anymore, and these rivers are actually being cleaned.

Humans will find a way, like we always have.

I hope they do. Pollution feels like a hopeless battle, since stopping it would require such a huge change to our lives.

 

[Ephizav2]

I'm super cynical.