Are humans inherently good or inherently evil?

[Tizzmarelda]

We as a species are inherently good when born. It is our environment and how we are raised that turns us into a perversion of this. There are some exceptions as there is with all things. Some people are just scum. Some people are born into terrible circumstance but have been blessed with the intellect and compassion to see past all the hate.Its our responsibility as people to strive for the better, For the sake of our own lives and our species.

 

[veloper]

Alright, so when people are born, are they good, evil, or are they a blank slate?

Neither. People are born with some qualities but they are neither good nor bad. It is society that labels this qualities as "good", "evil" and such.

Imagine simple experiment : does "good" and "evil" still applies when you're alone on completely uninhabited island ?

Possibly evil can exist, if you torture small animals on the island for no reason but your own enjoyment.

Modification : "Blue Lagoon" scenario. You were stranded at very young age. It's uniportant how you survived, you just did. You don't remember any people. You were never introduced into concepts of society, morality, ethics, good, evil etc. There's noone to judge your actions.

Does "good"/"evil" apply ?

That would basicly turn the kid into an animal. I'd say beneath good and evil.

 

[Dr Snakeman]

I wouldn't say we're born "evil". We're just born as assholes and raised not to be.

Pretty much. You're born selfish and obnoxious, but not evil. It's really up to the individual to decide what kind of person they are going to be.

 

[Bacontastic]

There is no Good or Evil there is only the choices we make and the consequences we must live with. Calling someone Good or evil in a way is just a method of removing responsibility for the actions one takes.

 

[Vault101]

I know for a fact animals are neither good nor evil

...humans, while we are animals, are slightly different, because we dont "need" to do horrible things to survive in our current society (in theory of coarse)

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

They are inherently human, for nothing in heaven or hell can be as bewildering and amazing as a human.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Alright, so when people are born, are they good, evil, or are they a blank slate?

Neither. People are born with some qualities but they are neither good nor bad. It is society that labels this qualities as "good", "evil" and such.

Imagine simple experiment : does "good" and "evil" still applies when you're alone on completely uninhabited island ?

Possibly evil can exist, if you torture small animals on the island for no reason but your own enjoyment.

Modification : "Blue Lagoon" scenario. You were stranded at very young age. It's uniportant how you survived, you just did. You don't remember any people. You were never introduced into concepts of society, morality, ethics, good, evil etc. There's noone to judge your actions.

Does "good"/"evil" apply ?

That would basicly turn the kid into an animal. I'd say beneath good and evil.

Why ? Such human is capable of thinking, reasoning. He (or she) lacks in education, wisdom, experience but he understands much more than any animal will ever do. He may be very smart and intelligent, he may create and use simple tools, he may erect some simple house. He is "raw", "pure" not stupid. No concepts of sin, no morality but that doesn't exclude intact brain.

How about now ?

 

[Denamic]

'Good' and 'evil' are social constructs used to better define certain kinds of behaviour relative to the current moral standards.
People are not inherently good nor evil.

 

[TheRookie8]

Well, I know dogs are basically good, but humans are worse than dogs. But humans are better than cats, and cats are evil.

So, basically all humans are dumb.

Socks are god.

 

[kuolonen]

We are what we are. Good and evil are cultural values made up, and agreed upon, by people in specific culture. What we see can as the evil incarnate can be praticality to some, and what we do everyday can be an act most horrid to some.

Personally I believe that we are simply what our genes make of us. We desire to survive and keep passing our genes, and these needs make us what we are. Anything else is merely flavoring made by the era we live in.

 

[SuperNova221]

I think this question is a false dichotomy.

Good an evil are purely imaginative concepts, so neither, I'd say.

 

[veloper]

Alright, so when people are born, are they good, evil, or are they a blank slate?

Neither. People are born with some qualities but they are neither good nor bad. It is society that labels this qualities as "good", "evil" and such.

Imagine simple experiment : does "good" and "evil" still applies when you're alone on completely uninhabited island ?

Possibly evil can exist, if you torture small animals on the island for no reason but your own enjoyment.

Modification : "Blue Lagoon" scenario. You were stranded at very young age. It's uniportant how you survived, you just did. You don't remember any people. You were never introduced into concepts of society, morality, ethics, good, evil etc. There's noone to judge your actions.

Does "good"/"evil" apply ?

That would basicly turn the kid into an animal. I'd say beneath good and evil.

Why ? Such human is capable of thinking, reasoning. He (or she) lacks in education, wisdom, experience but he understands much more than any animal will ever do. He may be very smart and intelligent, he may create and use simple tools, he may erect some simple house. He is "raw", "pure" not stupid. No concepts of sin, no morality but that doesn't exclude intact brain.

How about now ?

I don't think much can come out of a brain without input first. Language limits how far thoughts may go and this person won't know any words.
People learn almost everything by copying. Only very few people invent a new thing or two. He'll grow up very stupid as that big language unit grown on top of his monkey brain won't get any workout.

 

[Jason Fayers]

I don't believe in good and evil. So I'ld say we arn't inherently either.

 

[Sum1else]

when it comes down to it, most of the time evil is just another word for 'having more power than intelligence/common sense' so no, no one is born with either, and you have to earn each.

 

[spartan231490]

I think people are inherently self-serving. Within that restriction, I would say that humans are inherently good.

so, people are inherently a little bit good I guess, say 5.5/10

 

[tzimize]

This thread socks.

:]

OT: We are blank slates to be filled with whatever are upbringers+society deems correct at the time.

I think people are inherently "good"; we evolved as a social animal, banding together to help one another, safety in numbers and all that. If we were born "evil" then I doubt that would ever have happened. There have even been studies done with showing that babies understand altruism [http://psychcentral.com/news/2011/10/11/young-brain-has-altruistic-characteristics/30233.html]. I think "evil" stems mostly from how a person is raised and exacerbated by certain genetic defects and as such people are, on the whole, good.

It's easier than you'd think to hold that view and still be misanthropic.

Safety in numbers have nothing to do with good. It has to do with selfishness. One bands together with others for one OWNS safety, not the safety of others.

People aren't inherently good or evil, they're inherently selfish and may do evil things to that end.

Well put.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

It really depends on which philosopher you're willing to quote. The Enlightenment had some people convinced that we're inherently good, others claimed we were all dicks in the making. I don't exactly remember who coined the phrase "State of Nature" to designate the initial, natural condition of Man and of how that supposedly involves innocence, but I do know that others later said that the State of Nature was a lot more ruthless, a lot more cruel.

To clarify, I'd say it's a question of whether or not civilization corrupts or civilizes us. Are we born as innocent widdle babies or are we actually apex predators kept in check by weird societal notions we developed and that the rest of the animal kingdom didn't bother to push quite as far?

*checks his old college notes* Right. So the State of Nature was penned by Thomas Aquinas, but most people know it from the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He says people are neither good nor bad. "Evil" behavior is a product of society, but our intrinsic nature forces us to look to ways to congregate, whether you're talking about hunting bands, villages or modern cities. So, basically, we can't avoid being dicks, not unless we turn into complete recluses.

And, well, it's kinda hard to be a dick to anything or anyone when you're all alone for miles on end.

 

[joshuaayt]

People are what they are based on the precise structure of their brain, which is dictated by their genetic code. All reactions are just hard coded into the person, altered by a number of modifiers (Which is where nurture can override nature)

So, in other words, people can be born either or neither, and be changed to either or neither. In other other words, parents roll a semi-random number for each of their kid's personality stats, and then pick traits and perks which alter the personality stats further. As the kid levels up, *They* pick even more perks, which do the same thing. A violently stretched parallel later, you have a person.

 

[GigaHz]

Both. The moment you think people are one or the other, some circumstance occurs that makes you believe otherwise.

You could say that decency is taught or acquired but then why is it that some people who live in toxic environments their entire lives turn out to be caring, considerate people?

Then of course, the opposite is true. I know people who have had it easy their entire lives with respectful parents, plenty of financial and emotional support, and yet they still turn out to be selfish, poorly mannered pricks.

Personality is a complicated variable, and it's the closest thing we have to theoretical evidence of a soul. So long as there exists free will, or the perception of free will, Humanity will never be clearly labeled as one absolute or another.