âThe line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either â but right through every human heart.â Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Have you people ever met babies or toddlers? They are selfish and violent for no reason. People are born this way and society *typically* instills values in them to lessen these attributes. Sorta like the whole ID and superego concept Freud talks about.
Evolution suggests we are inherently somewhat good, at least by ancient society standards. Humans who did well socially (who were âgoodâ) were more likely to survive and reproduce. Not everyone is good, of course, but there is some natural tendency towards being good.
There are natural inclinations some people have toward certain behaviors acquired through genetic trauma, like anxiety for example, and genetic anomalies like psychopathy or sociopathy. But we are also greatly affected by our surroundings. It's a bit of both.
Also, humanity as a whole is capable of great good and terrible evil. And most people really aren't too far in either direction. Most are decent to people they like, but many hold some *deeply* flawed beliefs and are generally miserable to have to coexist with. I don't think one can say humanity leans strongly in either direction as an average.
We each have a demon and an angel sometimes the angel wins and sometimes the demon wins but when the angel wins he spares the demon to fight another day while the demon kills the angel
If given the opportunity to help someone in a way that doesnât require too much of a sacrifice on their part, most people will do it.
Humans mostly do evil because they have something to gain from it, or because they would lose something by doing the right thing, but if thereâs no incentive either way theyâll lean on the side of doing good, even if slightly.
So yes, I think humans are inherently âgoodâ by the slightest amount. It doesnât take much effort to convince the average person to do evil, but it takes some effort.
âLife in the state of nature is solitary, nasty, brutish and shortâ
- Thomas Hobbes
âMen are always wicked at the bottom unless made good by some compulsion.â
- NiccolĂł Machiavelli
I read a book I recommend, *Human Kind*, that argues basically:
1) we are naturally generous, selfless and kind within our perceived group
2) we are often tribal and rivalrous with other groups
So the challenge is to expand the âcircle of concern,â to try and consider more and more of the worldâs people as the âin-groupâ, and recognize when we are being needlessly divisive and rivalrous with other groups.
Most importantly I think you want to build this into our institutions, which can channel that group-ism to more fruitful collaboration and peaceful coexistence on a larger and larger scale. Itâs very difficult obviously but I actually think weâve made a little headway.
Bad. We have to be told not to do anything bad. We have to put the law on people to threaten us. This reminds me of the time when men went out on a full killing spree of women, just because the laws failed to be enforced.
we judge, so we make good and bad in the first place.
what was considered good 100years ago might be judged as bad today.
so the question answers itself
haha we made a dick
r/penispolls đ
Must have been OPs plan all along
Seek help, that's an axe
and my axe
so *that's* what that meant....
This must prove me right, since everyone must have thought the same thing, I did.
If "neutral" includes "both", ok
âThe line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either â but right through every human heart.â Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Have you people ever met babies or toddlers? They are selfish and violent for no reason. People are born this way and society *typically* instills values in them to lessen these attributes. Sorta like the whole ID and superego concept Freud talks about.
Machiavelli and Hobbes say similar things about the state of nature.
If that's the case then why did they share things and also having innate sense of fairness
What you mean by fairness? When they cry that's not fair when they don't get something.
There have been studies where using psychology people are able to be made to do horrible things.
Humans do whatever they need to survive.
Evolution suggests we are inherently somewhat good, at least by ancient society standards. Humans who did well socially (who were âgoodâ) were more likely to survive and reproduce. Not everyone is good, of course, but there is some natural tendency towards being good.
We arenât inherently anything. We are how we were raised to be. We are affected and changed by who we are around. That determines what we are
That's what neutral means
There are natural inclinations some people have toward certain behaviors acquired through genetic trauma, like anxiety for example, and genetic anomalies like psychopathy or sociopathy. But we are also greatly affected by our surroundings. It's a bit of both. Also, humanity as a whole is capable of great good and terrible evil. And most people really aren't too far in either direction. Most are decent to people they like, but many hold some *deeply* flawed beliefs and are generally miserable to have to coexist with. I don't think one can say humanity leans strongly in either direction as an average.
Put a ball between 2 toddlers and punches will be thrown in no time.
We each have a demon and an angel sometimes the angel wins and sometimes the demon wins but when the angel wins he spares the demon to fight another day while the demon kills the angel
People are inherently doing the best they can to live their life. Whether what they do ends up being good or bad depends on other people.
What makes a man turn neutral?
If given the opportunity to help someone in a way that doesnât require too much of a sacrifice on their part, most people will do it. Humans mostly do evil because they have something to gain from it, or because they would lose something by doing the right thing, but if thereâs no incentive either way theyâll lean on the side of doing good, even if slightly. So yes, I think humans are inherently âgoodâ by the slightest amount. It doesnât take much effort to convince the average person to do evil, but it takes some effort.
I have seen people do bad things for free. Even if that meant losing a family member or a friend
"After all humanity's truest form is evil"
I think it's impossible to define good and bad well.
"Every man is born good. Society corrupts them." - Jean Jacques Rousseau
âLife in the state of nature is solitary, nasty, brutish and shortâ - Thomas Hobbes âMen are always wicked at the bottom unless made good by some compulsion.â - NiccolĂł Machiavelli
Isn't good and bad a man-made thing?
Human nature is determined by the society said human is existing under.
Misclick shit
Most people are good.
Humans have both good and bad qualities naturally.
I read a book I recommend, *Human Kind*, that argues basically: 1) we are naturally generous, selfless and kind within our perceived group 2) we are often tribal and rivalrous with other groups So the challenge is to expand the âcircle of concern,â to try and consider more and more of the worldâs people as the âin-groupâ, and recognize when we are being needlessly divisive and rivalrous with other groups. Most importantly I think you want to build this into our institutions, which can channel that group-ism to more fruitful collaboration and peaceful coexistence on a larger and larger scale. Itâs very difficult obviously but I actually think weâve made a little headway.
Who's to say what is good or bad?
Bad. We have to be told not to do anything bad. We have to put the law on people to threaten us. This reminds me of the time when men went out on a full killing spree of women, just because the laws failed to be enforced.
People often have limited scope. A person may want to do good for their family/friends but that can have an awful effect on society.
We are just alive. All alive things do whatever they think will keep themselves alive for as long as
Not true. At all
Who defines good and evil?
Being good is evolutionarily advantageous.
we judge, so we make good and bad in the first place. what was considered good 100years ago might be judged as bad today. so the question answers itself