Is everyone inherently good?

onelongsong

deadnothingbetter wrote:

What is evil to you?

I was reading Will Smith's comments about Hitler and how the Jewish Defense League ignorantly took his comments out of proportion and got me to thinking about this. Most people would argue that Hitler wasn't a "human" and that he was pure evil. But what the hell is evil in the first place? Does that make Hitler a child of the devil?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=4052017&page=1

people are inherently bad. they must be taught to be good. otherwise they resort to their natural instincts which is food; protection; and reproduction.

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

people are inherently bad. they must be taught to be good. otherwise they resort to their natural instincts which is food; protection; and reproduction.

so why when were children/toddlers do we instinctively feel such things as regret or sorrow if we know *instinctively* weve done something wrong??

no one is born evil.... its our surroundings surely

sexysurfergirl

theres a difference from been born imperfect, and born evil.
...were born imperfect, but with the human instincts of goodness

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

so why when were children/toddlers do we instinctively feel such things as regret or sorrow if we know *instinctively* weve done something wrong??

no one is born evil.... its our surroundings surely

i've got a puppy. he feels i love him and care for him and when i'm cross with him; he shows sorrow too. but if left on his own; like feral dogs; he too would revert to his natural instincts.

if we are not taught good from bad; evil does not exist for us because we wouldn't know what evil is. evil may be you trying to steal my food.
i'm sure that smart bloke could explain natural instincts better. i'm recovering from a brain injury so please forgive me.

catefrances

evil is a construct.
was there any differentiation between good and evil before religion? my thinking is that all things that are deemed evil are just natural instincts. instincts that are suppressed by a society that feels we are above such things. above all the other animals that inhabit the earth. that somehow we are able to control these things. and that in doing so, we are able to elevate ourselves above the animals. evil needs a morality to sustain and 'justify' it. is that morality an absolute? maybe. personally i doubt it. but maybe tis also subjective. what do you all think?

onelongsong

LikeAnOcean wrote:

Keep in mind, everyone has a different definition of what is good and what is evil.. right and wrong basically comes down to political views.

what kind of political views does a young child have? the word inherently brings the discussion to birth. if the title were ARE PEOPLE BASICALLY GOOD OR BAD; then the answer would be divided. for the most part; people are good to people who are good to them. if you are good to me; i'd be the best friend you ever had. if you are bad to me; i'd be the worst enemy you ever had. the division comes when good meets bad. those who will take advantage of people because they are good (and trusting, etc).

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

i've got a puppy. he feels i love him and care for him and when i'm cross with him; he shows sorrow too. but if left on his own; like feral dogs; he too would revert to his natural instincts.

if we are not taught good from bad; evil does not exist for us because we wouldn't know what evil is. evil may be you trying to steal my food.
i'm sure that smart bloke could explain natural instincts better. i'm recovering from a brain injury so please forgive me.

yep animals will revert to fending for themselves etc if needs must, but they wouldnt suddenly do evil acts...
they kill to eat cos they must...they dont kill things just because they want to for no reasons...

their instinct is to look after themselves i agree...

but evil only exists because people CHOOSE that course in life i would say

sexysurfergirl

catefrances wrote:

evil is a construct.
was there any differentiation between good and evil before religion? my thinking is that all things that are deemed evil are just natural instincts. instincts that are suppressed by a society that feels we are above such things. above all the other animals that inhabit the earth. that somehow we are able to control these things. and that in doing so, we are able to elevate ourselves above the animals. evil needs a morality to sustain and 'justify' it. is that morality an absolute? maybe. personally i doubt it. but maybe tis also subjective. what do you all think?

good point....
but our instincts tell us 'evil is wrong', thats why were not all child molesterin, evil killers....

religion has alot to do with it though yes

catefrances

sexysurfergirl wrote:

good point....
but our instincts tell us 'evil is wrong', thats why were not all child molesterin, evil killers....

religion has alot to do with it though yes

no... our instincts tell us that child molestation is offensive to our sensibilities. not that it is evil. instincts that are quite possible moulded by the society in which we live. tis society generally that tells us what is evil. when was it decided what age a child is? some societies do not even have a childhood that is universally recognised. some cultures go straight from childhood to adulthood through ritual. so where is that in between where one grows and matures into what could be quite possibly deemed an acceptable ideal of an adult?
as for us not all being evil killers... what makes you think that all killers are evil?

sexysurfergirl

catefrances wrote:

no... our instincts tell us that child molestation is offensive to our sensibilities. not that it is evil. instincts that are quite possible moulded by the society in which we live. tis society generally that tells us what is evil. when was it decided what age a child is? some societies do not even have a childhood that is universally recognised. some cultures go straight from childhood to adulthood through ritual. so where is that in between where one grows and matures into what could be quite possibly deemed an acceptable ideal of an adult?
as for us not all being evil killers... what makes you think that all killers are evil?

erm erm....

your good!

onelongsong

catefrances wrote:

evil is a construct.
was there any differentiation between good and evil before religion? my thinking is that all things that are deemed evil are just natural instincts. instincts that are suppressed by a society that feels we are above such things. above all the other animals that inhabit the earth. that somehow we are able to control these things. and that in doing so, we are able to elevate ourselves above the animals. evil needs a morality to sustain and 'justify' it. is that morality an absolute? maybe. personally i doubt it. but maybe tis also subjective. what do you all think?

i think your hatred for religion bleeds into subjects without you knowing it. inherently brings us to birth as i just said. and a child has no comprehension of religion. especially one not taught right and wrong which i bellieve the original question is.

HOWEVER; if we are discussing older people (say teens and up) i believe you'd be correct. well; to a point. i'm spiritual but would have no problem killing someone to protect myself. i don't think that's evil but i suspect you would.

love ya cate.

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

yep animals will revert to fending for themselves etc if needs must, but they wouldnt suddenly do evil acts...
they kill to eat cos they must...they dont kill things just because they want to for no reasons...

their instinct is to look after themselves i agree...

but evil only exists because people CHOOSE that course in life i would say

go to an inner city and look at some of the children left to fend for themselves. they will kill you for your car or purse. again; for survival.

onelongsong

catefrances wrote:

no... our instincts tell us that child molestation is offensive to our sensibilities. not that it is evil. instincts that are quite possible moulded by the society in which we live. tis society generally that tells us what is evil. when was it decided what age a child is? some societies do not even have a childhood that is universally recognised. some cultures go straight from childhood to adulthood through ritual. so where is that in between where one grows and matures into what could be quite possibly deemed an acceptable ideal of an adult?
as for us not all being evil killers... what makes you think that all killers are evil?

since you brought religion into this; in biblical times a girl was married with her first child by age 14. thus it's not child molestation. it's simply picking the fruit when its ripe.

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

go to an inner city and look at some of the children left to fend for themselves. they will kill you for your car or purse. again; for survival.

yeah so they do it for survival....they wouldnt kill you because they were evil, and for no reason....

i agree with that.... but we wouldnt kill etc without reason as a child .... maybe by accident... but thats a whole different thing!
we naturally want to please others and do good when were little dont we?

am i alone on this one???

electronblue

my friend says, "there's a lot of bad, and a little good."...~

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

i think your hatred for religion bleeds into subjects without you knowing it. inherently brings us to birth as i just said. and a child has no comprehension of religion. especially one not taught right and wrong which i bellieve the original question is.

HOWEVER; if we are discussing older people (say teens and up) i believe you'd be correct. well; to a point. i'm spiritual but would have no problem killing someone to protect myself. i don't think that's evil but i suspect you would.

love ya cate.

hmm... my hatred for religion?
tis true i am an atheist but my values are grounded in religion. i acknowledge that. twas not til i was 11 years old that my beliefs changed. i disagree that a child has no concept of religion. that is a generalist statement and one to which i do not subscribe. there are children who are brought up in religion from the cradle. and ther are those who are not. i grew up in what could be considered a sectarian bordering on atheistic household, yet i was baptised, did my first holy communion and went through confirmation. why was this? my parents did not attend church. not even on high holy days. my da was educated by catholic priests and yet renounced anything to do with religion. so my question would be, was my partaking in these religious ceremonies due to societal pressure in one form or another? were my parents hedging their bets? my own children(of which i have 4) are not baptised and have never taken part in any religious ceremony at all. that will be their decison if/when it arises. i answer their questions as unbiased as i can and quite often ask more questions of them than i answer. i do this cause i want them to think what it is they are asking. i want them to come to their own conclusions, not be influenced by someone who does not share their beliefs or who does not have the answers. having said that, i am fully aware that my non believing attitude is influencing them.
oh and btw i am fully aware of how my lack of religious beliefs 'bleed' into my opinions. and like you i would kill someone to protect myself. i would also kill to protect my children.

thou shalt not kill is not the contention, if we are talking thus. thou shalt not MUDRER is. there is a difference.

JordyWordy

i really want to contribute to this but this is hard to have constructive points on cos its so subjective.....but i will say that i do not believe that people come into the world with an inherent evil nature.

inherently good would make me happy, but it makes so little difference in reality cos outside influence changes you so much.

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

since you brought religion into this; in biblical times a girl was married with her first child by age 14. thus it's not child molestation. it's simply picking the fruit when its ripe.

i think i covered this in my statement that some societies go from childhood to adulthood with nothing in between. when is one considered an adult? it differs greatly between societies. and even sometimes within the same society. but 'we' judge it only from the perspective with which we grew up. tis all we know.

searchlightsoul

deadnothingbetter wrote:

What is evil to you?

I was reading Will Smith's comments about Hitler and how the Jewish Defense League ignorantly took his comments out of proportion and got me to thinking about this. Most people would argue that Hitler wasn't a "human" and that he was pure evil. But what the hell is evil in the first place? Does that make Hitler a child of the devil?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=4052017&page=1

IMO Good and evil don't exist. The world is not black and white.

onelongsong

catefrances wrote:

hmm... my hatred for religion?
tis true i am an atheist but my values are grounded in religion. i acknowledge that. twas not til i was 11 years old that my beliefs changed. i disagree that a child has no concept of religion. that is a generalist statement and one to which i do not subscribe. there are children who are brought up in religion from the cradle. and ther are those who are not. i grew up in what could be considered a sectarian bordering on atheistic household, yet i was baptised, did my first holy communion and went through confirmation. why was this? my parents did not attend church. not even on high holy days. my da was educated by catholic priests and yet renounced anything to do with religion. so my question would be, was my partaking in these religious ceremonies due to societal pressure in one form or another? were my parents hedging their bets? my own children(of which i have 4) are not baptised and have never taken part in any religious ceremony at all. that will be their decison if/when it arises. i answer their questions as unbiased as i can and quite often ask more questions of them than i answer. i do this cause i want them to think what it is they are asking. i want them to come to their own conclusions, not be influenced by someone who does not share their beliefs or who does not have the answers. having said that, i am fully aware that my non believing attitude is influencing them.
oh and btw i am fully aware of how my lack of religious beliefs 'bleed' into my opinions. and like you i would kill someone to protect myself. i would also kill to protect my children.

thou shalt not kill is not the contention, if we are talking thus. thou shalt not MUDRER is. there is a difference.

i must have mispoke. when i hear the word inherently; the senareo that comes to mind is a child born and raised without parents. thus my post that the child will revert to natural instincts.
i'm stuck on the word inherently because once that child is taught something; it isn't inherent.
i'm sorry if i said something to offend you. i didn't mean to.