Maybe not "evil," but we are all asshats. Some of us have civility to counter it, others do not. I'd say most humans are the type without the civility to counter the assery.
Humans: Are we evil?
- Thread starter redisforever
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, I tend to think humans are more inclined to think about thenselves first, before considering the needs of others, because we subconsciously rank survival over being nice. I would probably say humans are evil, now that I have thought about it, but they also have the ability to be kind. But that's really only because of societal pressure.CM156 said:
Here's the real proof that people are evil: That show might get cancelled due to poor ratings and it didn't even get nominated for any Emmys.Strain42 said:
You may be right. I don't think people are consciously evil, and I assume even Hitler thought he was the good guy in the end. I think society tells us what good and evil are, and it's our jobs to stick to that guideline.Volstag9 said:
Great minds have thought about this for years and their is still not an answere that we can agree upon. Your essentially asking how man is in the state of nature and nobody can realy know as we are constantly surrounded by society and the artificial things it imposes on us.
A person is evil.
People are good.
(There are people who subvert this, but most people when left entirely to their own devices will act in complete self interest.
People are good.
(There are people who subvert this, but most people when left entirely to their own devices will act in complete self interest.
This.Soviet Heavy said:
In my opinion, whether or not people are good or evil isn't a black'n'white issue. There's a huge grey area with individuals scattered across the spectrum. Some people are inherently more evil than others, I'll admit to that.
You might want to put parameters on your definitions of "good" and "evil".
I think that we are inherently good. I would say inherently "neutral", but it seems that the majority of folks end up "good". Evil seems to be something that stems only from environment. When we see an "evil" person, we can pinpoint where things went "wrong". Even then, the same environment that produces evil in one person might not produce evil in another.
I know it is all the rage in the media and on the internet to point out how "evil" everyone is. It makes it easier for us to accept our own shortcomings; "see how evil everyone else is? I'm less evil than them, so I'm okay" or "if we are inherently evil, any evil in me isn't my fault". Both of those lines of thinking, however, demonstrate a feeling of guilt (albeit by attempting to shirk it). Guilt I think is something lacking in evil. Evil doesn't care to rationalize its actions, it doesn't have to, it will do as it will do.
Then, maybe some people are truly just born evil. I think that such people are the exception.
I think that we are inherently good. I would say inherently "neutral", but it seems that the majority of folks end up "good". Evil seems to be something that stems only from environment. When we see an "evil" person, we can pinpoint where things went "wrong". Even then, the same environment that produces evil in one person might not produce evil in another.
I know it is all the rage in the media and on the internet to point out how "evil" everyone is. It makes it easier for us to accept our own shortcomings; "see how evil everyone else is? I'm less evil than them, so I'm okay" or "if we are inherently evil, any evil in me isn't my fault". Both of those lines of thinking, however, demonstrate a feeling of guilt (albeit by attempting to shirk it). Guilt I think is something lacking in evil. Evil doesn't care to rationalize its actions, it doesn't have to, it will do as it will do.
Then, maybe some people are truly just born evil. I think that such people are the exception.
Whats good and evil are largely decided by sociatal norms. For example it was perfectly just and reasonable for a woman in ancient Rome to place an unwanted newborn on the trash heaps outside the city for the rats. While it was concidered sick and evil for two women to have sex. Whats "evil" or "good" like everything else is pretty subjective.
Wow, there are so many things I could say about this argument, but I'll just simplify it and say that one groups actions at one time don't represent the whole of humanity.themutantlizard said:
This made my dayStrain42 said:
.OT: I think individuals are inherently good while society is inherently evil, causing an eternal struggle that has lasted throughout the ages. If you think about it, very few people want to be the bad guy; the best bad guys tend to think they are genuinely doing something good. But in society, there's a ton of suffering.
So yeah, we're both. Go figure
Let's say you flip a coin and get ten heads in a row. Is the coin objectively more heads than tails? Not at all. One aspect of its essence simply "acted out" more than the others. In the same way, Hitler, the Pope, Jesus, Buddha, Charles Manson, etc. are neither "good" or "bad" in essence but instead simple had one or more negative/positive traits arise due to their circumstances.
Human beings are neither "good" or "evil" at their essence; they're just the sum of all their "good" or "evil" actions. There is no inherent moral essence to individual people. It may be simpler to say that Hitler was evil, but that's not really correct. Hitler's essence or soul whatever you'd call it did not possess an identifiable evil; like the coin, his essence was a neutral agent. It's just that through his choices and his environment, actions arose from that neutral essence that were evil.
So are humans basically good or bad? Neither. Humans are, at their core, completely free of any "good" or "evil." Only their actions can be described that way.
Human beings are neither "good" or "evil" at their essence; they're just the sum of all their "good" or "evil" actions. There is no inherent moral essence to individual people. It may be simpler to say that Hitler was evil, but that's not really correct. Hitler's essence or soul whatever you'd call it did not possess an identifiable evil; like the coin, his essence was a neutral agent. It's just that through his choices and his environment, actions arose from that neutral essence that were evil.
So are humans basically good or bad? Neither. Humans are, at their core, completely free of any "good" or "evil." Only their actions can be described that way.
I think we aren't evil, but we would naturally do thingss against what is currently wrong by morals, like murder, but in the wild most animals do murder their own kind, like for territory and whatnot, but I don't think thats evil, just not socially acceptable.
I'm happy as long as it gets just one more season. Use season 4 to wrap up the show and I'll be happy.Glass Joe the Champ said:
I actually dunno how they were planning on going more than 4 years anyway since each season is a year...
But yeah, I think it's one of the best shows on TV. It'd suck if it got canceled when it's so close to possible finale status.
in our hearts we all truly can be good and have the capability to do so.
the actions we do that some may claim to be for a "good or better one" may be viewed in the wrong light which is labeled as "wrong or evil". and self-less actions that will be committed for whatever reason will always face opposition.
for example:
one man fights for his country. purely and unabashedly because he loves his homeland, family and friends alike. he may fight for his country because its the only home he has truly ever known. he may fight because he has put much of his trust in his fellow countrymen who inspire him to fight for it as well. whatever his reasons, his enemy will view him as a evil man fighting for a "evil empire" and he may be compelled to do the same. he may show compassion, he may show no quarter. whatever his actions, he will witness the deaths of his people and appropriately label his enemy. but in a dark time as such he will be upheld by his country as the brave hero who is doing his duty. some of his people will not agree with his sense of duty as others do, but many will.
or. . .
a man and his posse rob/hold hostage a financial highrise that belongs to the "enemy". (government, corporation, you name it.)
they destroy it, claiming hundreds of lives and billions in investments to spend for the next attack and to give back to the oppressed. meanwhile the opposing force labels them as evil-doers and radical separatists (whatever dirty name you want to call em) and sics their media and much of their funding into their propaganda machine.
the fugitives return to their home, revered as heroes as this is one big step in the many that will follow to destroy the "evil empire". they may or may not care they are labeled as "rebels" or "savage militant bastards", because they had to blow up some innocents to indirectly strike at the enemy. they may express remorse, or none for the "bastards responsible" that hold equally no remorse for their own crimes. these are all sacrifices that they have viewed unfortunate but necessary. they are fighting for good cause in their country eyes and some others. however many will shun them for their reasoning, they will fight in belief it is the right thing to fight for.
kids picking on other kids is natural. people picking on other people is normal. war is the ultimate evil facet that mankind has created and escalated from throwing rocks to swords to finally firearms. forces that will fight each other with or without question and spare little or none.
who is good and who is evil is determined by the victor. who is truly good or evil must be understood by all and both sides. there is truth and there is lies. there are war atrocities and human rights alike but the light in which they are committed must be viewed unbiased and justly. both sides must pay reprimands or there is no good and only a shaken shattered world of men.
there are all sorts of evil. some misinterpreted mental disorders. some for deliberate pleasure or recompense. most of em committed in war so i figured itd be a good example. these are my two cents.
the actions we do that some may claim to be for a "good or better one" may be viewed in the wrong light which is labeled as "wrong or evil". and self-less actions that will be committed for whatever reason will always face opposition.
for example:
one man fights for his country. purely and unabashedly because he loves his homeland, family and friends alike. he may fight for his country because its the only home he has truly ever known. he may fight because he has put much of his trust in his fellow countrymen who inspire him to fight for it as well. whatever his reasons, his enemy will view him as a evil man fighting for a "evil empire" and he may be compelled to do the same. he may show compassion, he may show no quarter. whatever his actions, he will witness the deaths of his people and appropriately label his enemy. but in a dark time as such he will be upheld by his country as the brave hero who is doing his duty. some of his people will not agree with his sense of duty as others do, but many will.
or. . .
a man and his posse rob/hold hostage a financial highrise that belongs to the "enemy". (government, corporation, you name it.)
they destroy it, claiming hundreds of lives and billions in investments to spend for the next attack and to give back to the oppressed. meanwhile the opposing force labels them as evil-doers and radical separatists (whatever dirty name you want to call em) and sics their media and much of their funding into their propaganda machine.
the fugitives return to their home, revered as heroes as this is one big step in the many that will follow to destroy the "evil empire". they may or may not care they are labeled as "rebels" or "savage militant bastards", because they had to blow up some innocents to indirectly strike at the enemy. they may express remorse, or none for the "bastards responsible" that hold equally no remorse for their own crimes. these are all sacrifices that they have viewed unfortunate but necessary. they are fighting for good cause in their country eyes and some others. however many will shun them for their reasoning, they will fight in belief it is the right thing to fight for.
kids picking on other kids is natural. people picking on other people is normal. war is the ultimate evil facet that mankind has created and escalated from throwing rocks to swords to finally firearms. forces that will fight each other with or without question and spare little or none.
who is good and who is evil is determined by the victor. who is truly good or evil must be understood by all and both sides. there is truth and there is lies. there are war atrocities and human rights alike but the light in which they are committed must be viewed unbiased and justly. both sides must pay reprimands or there is no good and only a shaken shattered world of men.
there are all sorts of evil. some misinterpreted mental disorders. some for deliberate pleasure or recompense. most of em committed in war so i figured itd be a good example. these are my two cents.
As a whole, we're very chaotic. Not necessarily destructive, in that sense, but what is considered natural at so-and-so point in history would be considered crazy or ridiculous today. So by chaotic I guess I mean freaky and complicated. It is difficult to judge humans as a whole though. It varies on a person by person basis, just look at an alignment chart off the internet.