Human Nature

[Ikkin]

What do you think of human nature? Are people intrinsically bad, or just corrupted? Does all the evil in the world stem from human nature, or from something else?

I personally think that human nature is intrinsically evil. Everyone has done something bad in their lifetime, whether it be something as 'minor' as lying, cheating on a test, saying something mean to someone or even simply neglecting to do something to help someone or as major as genocide or terrorism. If one human person who has never done anything bad in their life could be found alive today, it would make a case for a neutral or even good nature possible, but that person cannot be found.

I'm interested in seeing what you all have to say.

[ghostision]

I dun believe in good or evil. Or at least, I don't like the terms. There are too many variables to say "He's evil" or "he's good."

[Deleted]

I don't believe in good or evil.

Why?

Because there are no common rules to what is which.

In some cultures, cannibalism is a common, non-evil way of life. In others, it is one of the largest forms of evil.

Everyone has their own morals and such. To me, white lies (lies which are meant to save oneself from trouble or to keep someone from getting hurt, without hurting anyone else) are okay, because their intentions are "good." To others, any sort of lie is evil simply because it's not the truth.

[Torey]

I voted for the second option. I think people are all born equal. It's what happens in their life that determines if they are a bad, good or neutral person. If they live in a rough area, have parents who smoke drink, swear and generally don't care, then of course, their children could get corrupted. Same thing goes if they live in a priveleged area with loving parents and a good income. The children are more likely to grow up being good. I'd say more on this if it wasn't so late. I have to go to bed.

[The Wanderer]

I opted for #3. Why? Because in a way, neutrality is how we are born. At birth, we have done neither good, or bad. Of course, that quickly changes as one's life begins.

I suppose that views of good and evil vary from culture to culture, but there is no doubt in my mind, that good and evil is real. And regardless of how we convey our beliefs, it is generally the same thing.

[Ginz ❤]

I voted for #2. I believe when we are born we are good, but as we grow up in contact with the world and depending on the experiences we have we get corrupted.

I agree with what Ginger said.

[TheEaterofWorlds]

Ikkin- said:

I personally think that human nature is intrinsically evil. Everyone has done something bad in their lifetime

If one human person who has never done anything bad in their life could be found alive today, it would make a case for a neutral or even good nature possible, but that person cannot be found.

I could, by reverse say "I think human nature is good. Everyone has done something good in their lifetime. If one person who had never done any good in their lifetime can be found, it would make a case for neutral or even evil nature possible."

Since the reverse is also true (Or at least as true as the original statement), It paints a pretty good picture of us as pretty middle of the road.

Herman Hesse wrote a book called Siddhartha which describes what he refers to as 'The inherit divinity of man'. In this book he puts forward that every human being on the planet has the capacity for the most divine good and the most unspeakble evils.

In short humans are both evil and good at the same time, this duality of spirit shapes and defines everything we do. I think to say that 'because we don't do all good we are evil' is as silly as saying 'because we don't do all evil we are good.'

In my life I have lied, I have stolen. I have also nursed the injuries of others, I have stood up for something I believed in. I am flawed, as every human is. A person being 'evil' or 'good' is mostly based on intent. I know a girl who found a bird that flew into a window. She picked it up to try and get it to help, and broke it's neck. She killed a living thing, but was she evil? Maybe foolish... but not evil. She tried to do a noble thing. Even if we fall along the way I think it's a longing to do good and to be a good person that keeps humanity afloat.

If there is one thing that I really believe, is that humans are capable of very wonderful things. We also do terrible things, but with such potential existing, how can it be said we are evil beings?

[theunorthodox]

Good and Evil are both just outlooks created by man (Or God, if you prefer). If man is born with no relations to his natural world (Say cities and the world that modern man lives in) then he/she would grow up not knowing either and having no qualms to either or trying to live his/her life by either. He/she would grow up as any animal would and they hardly have distinguishes between good and evil (though that doesn't mean they don't have feelings). And even most people would consider this fairly accurate (EI- Vegetarians don't like the idea of humans eating animals, but don't bother with the fact that other animals eat other animals.) Therefore, both become obscolete.

[Oily]

I don't believe there's a very clear definition of good and evil. Different societies and cultures have differing views.

I don't think we're intrisically "bad." Bad usually is regressive and destructive. Humanity is naturally driven to progress and creation, I believe (ie, always making new inventions, improving old ones, etc).

However, the problem of balance is hard. There's not really an equivalent "good" thing for murder - except maybe saving a life. For a lot of things we consider evil, it's harder to do good to balance it. But I believe most people kind of live in a slightly good-neutral state each day, because a slightly evil-neutral state is too disruptive. Or perhaps a state of apathetic good would be more accurate for our day-to-day lives.

And evil is particular to humans, for we have a conscience etc. Some animals do have codes of conduct, but it's not quite the same.

[Jessica Coconut]

Neither. We just are. Some are worse than others, some more good. However, if stupidity is bad, then, most are worse than others.

This may be the one case in which Murphy's Law is wrong. Just because humans can go wrong, doesn't mean they will.

The only thing I believe about human nature is human stupidity. That's the only true natural thing about humans.

"The more we know, the more we know that we don't know".

Kind of like how, with each solution we find, we open up ten more problems.

[Rishiy]

I think humans are innatley sexual, selfish and confrontational, among other things. But these things are easy to overcome.

[Princess Ember Mononoke]

I don't really believe in one human nature. I think that humans have two inclinations - and I'm not talking "good" and "evil."

First of all, there's the Ego/Mind/Me/etc. It's not really evil, but it's certainly... selfish. It's goal is simply to keep from disappearing. There are two dangers it has to protect itself against - the first is physical danger involving the real world. All it wants on this level is to keep from being physically harmed and forcefully erased from the surface of the Earth, even if that requires causing physical pain to others or emotional pain to itself. It has got it's little story - a story of survival in the harsh, harsh world, and it doesn't like to be contradicted. The other danger to its survival is the other component of human nature, the Soul/Spirit/Inner Buddha/Seed of Christ/ etc. This is something much different and more mysterious than the Ego. It simply wants what God wants - whatever that happens to be. In general, it is more on the "good" side than the Ego, but it gets confusing because even though it comes from God and Love and is divinity itself, it doesn't necessarily follow any given HUMAN code of morality. Where the Ego is selfish, it is selfless, because it recognizes the inherent oneness of all things on Earth and knows that it is therefor foolish to favor one body-mind over any other. It's also more relaxed - the Ego sees it as an enemy, but the feeling is by no means mutual. Because the Ego is so quick to sacrifice emotionally well-being to ward off a percieved physical danger, living as the Soul makes for a happier existence. The Ego doesn't like this, because it effectually makes it obsolete, and reveals it for the fraud it is. So it plays lots of little mind games that all of us participate in every day of our lives to keep us from noticing our other half. I believe that all emotional pain comes as a direct result of following the inclinations of the ego, and that true, long-lasting happiness can only be achieved when you learn to ignore it as much as you can.

[Jessica Coconut]

Actually, I think I have a better way of summarizing human nature.

You know when you read a short story, or any fiction for that matter? It's easy to pick out the "good" character and "bad" character (especially in a short story, when there's not a lot of time to develop them). There's always the "perfect" character, and the "dispicable" character. In English classes, we call them "flat" and "static" characters, because they only show one side (being good or evil alone, per se), and they don't change at all through the story.

Humans aren't like that. We are "round" and "dynamic". Our thoughts and perceptions are always changing, hence being dynamic, and being that we all have some good sides, some bad sides, our views on this and our contradicting views on that, and our limits as to how far we'll go for something we believe in. This part makes us "round".

Every human (REAL human) has done good and bad, I'm sure. Even say, Mother Theresa has done bad. I don't know what, and I don't know when, but I'm sure she has. I'm sure even Hitler himself has done a good deed once in his life. I don't know what, and I don't know when, but I'm sure he has. You know, before the nazi's were charged in front of the UN, they thought they must be monsters, they could hardly be humane, or civil, they must be terrible everything. But they got up for trial, like ordinary people. Makes you think what some of the most normal, happy, sane people can do if they wanted to. Monsters didn't slay those Jews. Ordinary people did. Cruel, almost heartless folk, but people nonetheless.

[Deleted]

Hmm... Skimmed through all the stuff. Nah, I didn't vote for anything. Because I don't really think there is a human nature. Human nature is generalizing. Each human has his or her own doing. Well, the human nature could be described as filling the needs, but if it's good or bad, it's just moral issues.

It depends on instinct, enviroment and probably some genetical inheritance.

There is really no good or bad. It's like a weave of threads, where white and black run along each other. Sometimes it's bad, sometimes it's good... But good and bad came out of human society and wasn't natural in the beginning.

Is nature good or bad? I don't think so. So therefore, human nature is just what it is..

Well, that was my pretty weak argument. And I'm going to finish it with a quote.

"There is no good or bad. There is only power."
- Lord Voldemort

[mushroom]

*shrugs* I think most people are more likely to do what they believe is good than what they believe is bad. If a person strongly thinks homosexuals/blacks/women are the spawn of Satan, they're probably going to oppose freedom for (or the continued existence of) that group, no matter what. If a person strongly thinks eating meat is wrong, they'll probably be a vegetarian even in the face of Dad's fried turkey or that Chinese restaurant's Shrimp with Garlic Sauce.

So, I can't really judge other people as "bad" or "good," because what is good according to me is evil according to someone else. The only time any person has a reason to judge another person is if that other person is harming others with their actions, whether or not they see their actions as evil.