are humans inherently good?
- Thread starter galdre
- Start date
galdre
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,859
I vote for inherently good.
how do you explain crime then? If all people are good, why do some do things we consider bad/evil?
GhostWriter16
Deity
By an absolute definition, bad, we've all done sinful things.
By a relative definition, still bad, but not as much so. There are more criminals then there are people who make a large positive difference, and even non-criminals are often selfish and such.
There are always exceptions to the rule.
There are also many reasons people break the law, and I expect the minority of them are the result of "inherent evil".
GoodSarmatian
Jokerfied Western Male
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 9,408
Some are, some are not.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
No, at least not any more so than they are inherently bad. The bald ape is too complex and varied a species to be described in such glib terms.
nishant1911
*hugs*
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 453
GhostWriter16
Deity
What is a bald ape?
galdre
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,859
you are
Haseri
Emperor
It's true, I confess.... I've sinned. And it was way fun.
When sinning involves boobies, it's okay. God understands.
Amen to that, brother.
GhostWriter16
Deity
No I'm a person. I'm neither a bald ape nor even an animal.
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
everybody is inherently bad cuz we are all selfish and arrogant but you can become good, this life is a test,we are all bad but can we make ourselves good
Behind The Mask
King
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2010
- Messages
- 776
Lets see:
Nervous System
Digestive System
Circulatory System
Reproductive System
You seem like an animal to me; you're not a plant are you? Nothing worse then a zealous fern!
Here's one point of view...
"Are humans inherently good?" is a false question ridden with assumptions. "Good" is entirely a human construct and it changes depending on who you are and when you're living. What's good for one group of people is often not necessarily regarded as good for another group, or even for the same group in a different century. What's good for the swooping eagle may not be good for the running rabbit.
Replace the concept of "good" with the idea of "conducive to survival". Whatever humans variously define as good at various times is whatever allows that group of humans to survive and possibly prosper. What is not good - or evil in some societies or sinful in some cultures - is simply what would endanger the survival of that particular group of humans and its established culture and way of life.
So reword the question like this: "Do humans inherently act in a way beneficial to their group's survival?" And of course the answer is, by and large yes; otherwise that group would have died out long ago. And guess what: humans are not alone in this. All successful life-forms do this. You can call it group-selfishness if you like. It's just survival.
"Are humans inherently good?" is a false question ridden with assumptions. "Good" is entirely a human construct and it changes depending on who you are and when you're living. What's good for one group of people is often not necessarily regarded as good for another group, or even for the same group in a different century. What's good for the swooping eagle may not be good for the running rabbit.
Replace the concept of "good" with the idea of "conducive to survival". Whatever humans variously define as good at various times is whatever allows that group of humans to survive and possibly prosper. What is not good - or evil in some societies or sinful in some cultures - is simply what would endanger the survival of that particular group of humans and its established culture and way of life.
So reword the question like this: "Do humans inherently act in a way beneficial to their group's survival?" And of course the answer is, by and large yes; otherwise that group would have died out long ago. And guess what: humans are not alone in this. All successful life-forms do this. You can call it group-selfishness if you like. It's just survival.
galdre
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,859
I agree that selfishness is based in the survival instinct
I don't think all morals are relative though. Yes, something like dietary restrictions are completely relative, but I see certain acts as simply wrong/bad/evil (whatever label you want). I admit that's it's a bit subjective on my part, but if someone really wants to argue against, for example, rape being wrong then I consider them a lost cause anyway.
Perhaps it's the romantic in me who can't shake the "way things ought to be" view of life and the world, which is, admittedly, subjective
Smellincoffee
Trekkie At Large
Only religious persons and philosophers who take themselves too seriously try to cram human beings into their neat little systems. Humans aren't inherently good or evil any more than platonic 'Forms' exist, and to declare either/or is arrogant.
Similar threads
