First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Human Nature-Good, Evil, or Neutral
4408 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Cavite, Philippines
Offline
Posted 6/13/09
Human nature is neither neutral, good, or evil, society just labels it as such. In the end, humans is just how nature designed it to be, a creature capable of using tools for survival and self satisfaction.
Posted 6/19/09
If kids are brought up with nice people, the chances are they'll most likely be nice themselves. And yes, there is evil in everyone. Evil can grow. But if they're like me, they can just mask it. I have evil deep within in me. I mask it up with an innocent smile. I tell people I'm evil, as a joke. To protect my innocents... I feel like I'm being dragged off. Leaving my innocents behind me. Evil grows. I blame the media for evil anyway haha. If the parents were nice, media will posien them:)
Posted 6/19/09
eh, human nature is peculiar as a sudoku puzzle...but man doesn't enter this world evil. personally, i think it's what he/she is exposed to when they're young or how they were raised. but for other individuals who have been raised in a typical loving home, went to a great school, etc. & does wrong anyway i can't fathom that. the human mind & behavior is strange, but i do know that no child comes into the world saying i'm going to kill people for no apparent reason.
311298 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09 , edited 6/20/09
iono but i agree in Hobbe's philosophy.


" the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbe's said that men are naturally selfish. We live for our own sake. We live for our own interest. He called the state of nature as war against every man. Men are basically living for their own selves, for self-preservation.

And i, as a person, realized that what he said is true. Though, many others say they arent selfish, i believe that they are actually are. Many give to charity or donate to foundations expecting nothing in return. However, the truth is they actually did that for themselves and not for the sake of others. They donated money bec. they want to go in heaven (for Christians) or want to accept a good karma or many other "unconscious" purposes they have.
3066 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09 , edited 6/20/09

leilockheart wrote:

iono but i agree in Hobbe's philosophy.


" the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbe's said that men are naturally selfish. We live for our own sake. We live for our own interest. He called the state of nature as war against every man. Men are basically living for their own selves, for self-preservation.


Pretty much. I personally believe humans aren't "evil" or "good" of any sort, but rather selfish and does things that meet their needs and desires. The extent of selfishness differs from person to person, but even without any laws, certain boundaries will be naturally made. There will be individuals who aren't afraid to steal or kill other person for the benefit of himself or his loved ones/family. There will be individuals who only care about themselves.

In other words:
the man who steals to help his family - perceived as "good"
the man who steals for himself - perceived as "bad" or "sinful"
It's all based on interpretation and angle of perception.

Secondly, any form of law, whether found in religion or secular societies, exist for a reason. There has been no anarchy society that lasted too long for obvious reasons.
311298 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09

makix wrote:


leilockheart wrote:

iono but i agree in Hobbe's philosophy.


" the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbe's said that men are naturally selfish. We live for our own sake. We live for our own interest. He called the state of nature as war against every man. Men are basically living for their own selves, for self-preservation.


Pretty much. I personally believe humans aren't "evil" or "good" of any sort, but rather selfish and does things that meet their needs and desires. The extent of selfishness differs from person to person, but even without any laws, certain boundaries will be naturally made. There will be individuals who aren't afraid to steal or kill other person for the benefit of himself or his loved ones/family. There will be individuals who only care about themselves.

Secondly, any form of law, whether found in religion or secular societies, exist for a reason. There has been no anarchy society that lasted too long for obvious reasons.


LOL..i think we can have a good discussion on a philosophy class <33.

going back to the topic:
can i ask you? do you think Rousseau is right in saying "MAN is naturally good....but corrupted by society?"
argh..i do believe in that too..i think i believe in a lot of things..argh...my head..
3066 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09 , edited 6/20/09

leilockheart wrote:

do you think Rousseau is right in saying "MAN is naturally good....but corrupted by society?"


I personally found Rousseau to be... contradictory in his theory and statements. Perhaps it's because I only did some light reading on Rousseau (I've been more of a Hobbes/Kant person).

If my facts are somewhat straight, Rousseau states that man is born with fixed "Traits" that are ultimately good, but is shifted and changed based on education/society/etc. to become corrupted traits. He states that humans are born with "good traits", but at this point is completely unrecognizable in its purest and "Good" format.

The only thing that bugs me is that this view can be easily countered by the simple argument:
Man is born with natural traits that are good. Man builds society; hence natural traits are the foundation of society. Society changes man's traits, and is corrupted.

Or in a more mathematical format:
Premise 1)Man = Natural Traits
Premise 2)Natural Traits = Good in purest form
Premise 3)Man ---> Society
Premise 4)Society ---->Corrupts Natural Traits

Premise 5)Man----->Corrupts Natural Traits [Premise 3+4]
Premise 6)Man-----> Corrupts Man [Premise 5+1]
Premise 7)Man----->Corrupts Natural Traits [Premise 2 +6]

I'm not stating that I COMPLETELY disagree with Rousseau's primary statement that "Man has natural good traits", because I do believe in that as well, but the way he tries to explain it is very mind-boggling. Perhaps it's because I haven't lived in the Enlightenment period, but I doubt I'll learn anything about his philosophy anytime soon.

Unless Rousseau has his own elaborate definition of good (which i think he might have defined), I don't see where his argument is going. Again, like I've said, Rousseau isn't a big interest of mine so if you know any reading that fills in some of the gap, let me know.
311298 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09 , edited 6/20/09

makix wrote:


leilockheart wrote:

do you think Rousseau is right in saying "MAN is naturally good....but corrupted by society?"


ok i will ü


18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/20/09

leilockheart wrote:

iono but i agree in Hobbe's philosophy.


" the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbe's said that men are naturally selfish. We live for our own sake. We live for our own interest. He called the state of nature as war against every man. Men are basically living for their own selves, for self-preservation.

And i, as a person, realized that what he said is true. Though, many others say they arent selfish, i believe that they are actually are. Many give to charity or donate to foundations expecting nothing in return. However, the truth is they actually did that for themselves and not for the sake of others. They donated money bec. they want to go in heaven (for Christians) or want to accept a good karma or many other "unconscious" purposes they have.

'There is a little something You forgot, On avridge the Atheist give to charity just as often, so those atheist who do not fear some god? Why do they give?
Humans in the end are Pack or Hurd animals.. They gather together into groups because that is what there nature is.
210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Outside Of Reality
Offline
Posted 6/20/09

Kill099 wrote:

Human nature is neither neutral, good, or evil, society just labels it as such. In the end, humans is just how nature designed it to be, a creature capable of using tools for survival and self satisfaction.


Sums it all up for me.
311298 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/20/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


leilockheart wrote:

iono but i agree in Hobbe's philosophy.


" the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbe's said that men are naturally selfish. We live for our own sake. We live for our own interest. He called the state of nature as war against every man. Men are basically living for their own selves, for self-preservation.

And i, as a person, realized that what he said is true. Though, many others say they arent selfish, i believe that they are actually are. Many give to charity or donate to foundations expecting nothing in return. However, the truth is they actually did that for themselves and not for the sake of others. They donated money bec. they want to go in heaven (for Christians) or want to accept a good karma or many other "unconscious" purposes they have.

'There is a little something You forgot, On avridge the Atheist give to charity just as often, so those atheist who do not fear some god? Why do they give?
Humans in the end are Pack or Hurd animals.. They gather together into groups because that is what there nature is.


lol..you are right..ü
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.