I have to write a paper on whether human nature is naturally good or naturally evil and give reasons why. However, I don't even know where to begin. Could you help me by sharing your beliefs? Totse to the rescue!

Begin by defining good and evil.

quote:Originally posted by rent-a-revolution:

Begin by defining good and evil.

I mean the current political definition of good and evil, as in committing violent crimes vs. charity and goodwill.

Oh, in that case, here's a good article on biological altruism:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/

I believe that humans are generally evil but comes along the social contract and all right minded people play nice then.

Its not necessarily that we are naturally good or evil but that naturally we will do whatever it takes to "stay alive" or get ahead. its an instinct that everything has. for example if killing a person meant safety and protection from evil for you would you do it? well in modern times we people might be a little hesitant but when we had no rules and were governed by our instinct we would kill without hesitation. but what if the scenario was help a person to better yourself? of course a <i>normal</i> person would help out the unfortunate one and the same choice would probably be made even if we lived in a time that had no laws that goverend us.

Its kind of hard to answer your question. id say that naturally a person is ruled by his instinct to move toward "pleasure" no matter the cost but when you add all these laws telling what you can and cant do then thats when things get a little complicated. good luck on that assignment.

Alright, I pretty much just invented a theory... Here's the angle I'm taking. I'm going to explain that HUMANS are neutral but SOCIETY makes us behave individually good. I'm going to explain that humans naturally do that which benefits themselves, and both good and evil have benefits. However, evil also has the problem of society disapproving and punishing you, so we become accustomed to goodness as a result. I'm going to say that guilt is the knowledge of behaving outside of social boundaries and evil causes guilt. Behaving "good" has indirect benefits that are usually lesser than the usually direct benefits of "evil," but "good" doesn't bring guilt or fear of revenge or social disapproval. Thus, it is a society-conditioned tendency for most whole-minded individuals to behave in a way that society considers "good." What do you guys think?



[This message has been edited by ADogg (edited 09-25-2006).]

[This message has been edited by ADogg (edited 09-25-2006).]

alrite im jus another dumb kid spikin his mind, not to say that the rest of u are. My head is up my ass so if i confuse dun worry jus take note of what u understand. I jus want to shed a lil of my own light on the subject, I want to give u a FEW (not all) things to keep in mind. I will do this by explaining and through the use of example:

Before I do this im gonna take time to apologise for my grammar or misspelling, and if I stray from or completely miss the point im tryin to make. like i said before my heed is up my ass. too much dabbling in amongst the herbs nd booz nd weman nd loud beatz nd fuck knows wut else. but i do still think bout shit. I'll accept criticism. Mozart had his critics too. see if u can name 3 of them. thats right u bloody cant can u?

1: Context.

2: Moral Stances.

3: The Law of the Land.

4: Religion.

5: Past Events.

6: Present Events.

1: Example: The punishment for murder in my country is a life sentence, in parts of America the punishment is death. Either way they are taking the killer off the streets where they are a danger to society. Therefore taking the utilitarianist stance maximising the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest amount of people. The lesser of two evils. Many different scenarios spring up in day to day life, the way people act depends on their surroundings and the situation. people mainly act on animal instinct. If someone points a gun at you and you also have a gun, you could freeze and get fucked up or defend yourself and put one in the fuckerz skull. one shot double tap.

2: Moral Stances: - Egoism - The stance of an egoist is to make decisions that will benefit themselves in the long run. - Utilitarianism - The stance of the utilitarian is to make decisions based on bringing the maximum amount of happiness to the greatest number of people. -Religious Authority - This moral stance is based upon what is found in Religious scripts such as written form of "the ten commandments". (its been a long time since 2nd year of high school, so bare with me)

3: The Law of the Land: These will mainly depend on what country your living in and what Government your under. The laws themselves are in place to keep order in society and to prevent "evil" and preserve "good". call me lazy but thats all im sayin on that. oh and fuck the blake bastart police!

4: Past Events: Going Through many wars from prehistory to modern times. in war atrocities can happen. people can act in an evil manner. Nations can not be labelled as "good" or "evil" because of the actions of one man, unit or a whole army. It is the human desire of that man, or leader to create or command atrocities or act in an evil manner, through ignorance or emotion: anger, jealousy etc.

5: Present Events: Some would say we were not right to invade Iraq. I believe someone should have, but not us. Muslim management would have been an idea then we wouldnt have what I believe to be a modern crusade crisis. History is repeating itself. except in a more dangerous state, I see it as a christain vs. muslim thing about to happen. with hizb allah and lebanon fighting the israel and the u.s.a sending the israel bombs through our airports. They smile and shake hands but rly i think we are skating on thin ice. Suddam may have been "evil" but we do ourselves no favours. i realise i am straying from the point. Suddam committed serious war crimes and his regime was overthrown, i like bush and blair, cheers for givin me a war to go fight in! but for real, iraqi woman and children gettin caught in the crossfire, who do u think they would say was evil? sometimes we have gd intentions but the way we carry them out is not so gd.

u mite think im some fuckin maddy, well i'd probly agree, but i jus have so many views i cannot possibly fit them in and i even get lost in them, sometimes missing the point completely. i jus want to get my point across and give the reader something to read about, if u dun read this i will come find u and blinded by rage i will gouge out ur eyes and skull fuck u till ur skull is nothin but a bucket of cum and bloody chunks, i think lack of sleep does this to me, sorry damaged goods. i hope u get the points i am tryin to make.

quote from Nicholas Cage in "LORD of WAR" 'The earliest human remains were found with spearheads in their rib cages' or summin along the lines.

Mankind has been made to, or evolved to preserve his own life and defend himself, Basic animal instinct Human Nature in my mind is to be both good and evil when they are required. even when not required, one may carry out a gd deed. One may also carry out an evil one. We are built for both. like Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde in that movie "the league of extraordinary gentleman"

make sense? does to me.

Both definatly you can say evil when we have our survival instinct. I Bevilve we are made to be about ourselves first but wanting to help others as long as it doenst endanger ourselves so both in my opinion.

you generalise too much when you say good or evil for example many would say killing is always wrong but would killing in self defence also be wrong.Many consider smoking weed to be wrong but just go to BLTC and youll get completly different opinions good and evil are relative so from whos point of view are you speaking about?

quote:Originally posted by rent-a-revolution:

Begin by defining good and evil.

If you are required to commit evil either by choice or in the event of unknown consequance then it may be passed as morally correct even though it was incorrect to do so.....!!!?!>!!?!?!>!>?>

quote:Originally posted by ADogg:

I mean the current political definition of good and evil, as in committing violent crimes vs. charity and goodwill.

Fine. Suppose you commit a violent crime and donate the loot to charity.

There is no such thing as "good" and "evil". These are labels we place on things, rather arbitrarily, to indicate whether or not we approve of them.

Back to topic. . . humans are born selfish to the point of sociopathy. As we evolve spiritually, we learn--or remember--enlightened self-interest.

Ultimately--since we are All One--what is best for one is best for all.



[This message has been edited by ArmsMerchant (edited 09-27-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by ADogg:

I have to write a paper on whether human nature is naturally good or naturally evil and give reasons why. However, I don't even know where to begin. Could you help me by sharing your beliefs? Totse to the rescue!

Take a look at the big picture, see humanity as a whole, we have had our Hitlers and our Ghandis but most of us are somewhere in between.

Peace http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

I believe that human nature is naturally evil, because it's naturally selfish. You can look at the world and see that. People sympathize with those in humbling positions, but never feel what that person's feeling strongly enough to be moved with compassion to help that person, because it's not in our nature to love. It's in our nature to desire love. Even to desire to be loved, and to desire to love. Why? Because we were created to seek God out. God is love. People will do what doesn't inconvience them. They'll go for 'quick fixes' that don't last to save themselves time that they're going to end up wasting anyways. Look at children. They want. Everything is all about them. Unfortunately, weak christians, and the people of the world are conformed to their nature, instead of God's. We're transformed by the renewing of our minds. The way we think has to be reprogramed by the programmer. (The Holy Spirit). Why don't you ask yourself. Watch the people around you, and ask them questions along the lines of, "What would you do if...".

Most of the time, it's going to be what benefits 'self'. If you find someone who does what's best to benefit both parties, they're full of wisdom, and you should listen to them.

Question yourself, and DOUBT YOUR DOUBT!!

Hellz,

You say that humans are naturally evil,

but also created to seek god's love.

That seems like some ass-backwards

bullshit seeing as how god made all

the rules and engineered our tendencies.

Also, I think you're a dumb cunt.

It doesn't matter for shit what species you are. It depends on someone himself whether he/she is good or evil. That counts for any sentient being in the fucking universe.

That assignment is invalid. There is no way to define humans as good or evil. It's all that individual person sees it. I feel that it's perfectly fine and good that I'm bi, but to my parents, it's evil and I'm going to Hell, just because I like pussy as well as dick. There's all sorts of examples of this through out time. Was the slavery of African Americans for hundreds of years good or evil? It depends on who you are and how you were raised. Hitler thought he was doing the right thing killing all the Jews, so to him - and most of Germany - he was doing the good, right thing; to the rest of the world, it was total evil. And my username being germangirl is just because I'm obssessed with the german language and culture, I'm not from Germany and I'm not supporting nor defending what Hitler did in any way, I'm simply making a point that there is absolutly no way to do this assignment and you should write your paper or whatever on this fact.