The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Are humans naturally evil (Con) or good?(Pro)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 340 times Debate No: 91514
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




While maybe we aren't evil, humans certainly are born to be. Humans are naturally evil, selfish, and violent. We all have desires to do horrible things, such as steal, rape, and murder.

I am eager to hear your guys' thoughts on the matter.


How are they born to be evil exactly? Most humans are born to follow a set of laws that protect them from being evil(you can't go up to Dragon_ and stab him for no reason, can you?).

While I believe humans aren't born to be evil, they're not born to be good either. It's up for that human to decide his values/beliefs. While it wasn't right to murder millions of Jews, that was Hitler's values and beliefs. FDR's values were to help America out of Depression, saving it as a whole. Trump's is to be an egomaniac (still support him though).

In conclusion, it's all about perspective.
Debate Round No. 1


Evilness is marked by a disregard for other people's happiness. This can include being selfish or flat out enjoying others' suffering. Hitler is evil because he is a white supremacist who believes anyone not like him are not people. Trump, however, is not evil, at least his political policies. His racist views are not evil as he (appears) to believe that immigrants really are harming America. He is not trying to snuff out people he believes are inferior, like Hitler. He just wants to protect his country. Whether his plans are crazy or not is another debate.
I do not believe good and evil is a subjective thing. Good is wanting to help others, evil is a willingness to harm them. In my opinion, any action or belief can be classified as good, evil, or neutral.
As such, humans are naturally evil, or at least more evil than good. Animals do not have a morality outside of their own families and groups. Anyone who isn't like them doesn't matter to them. How are humans different? Sure, now people can get genuine joy from helping others, but that is the influence of society. Look back in history and see the cruelty of our ancestors, how much more willing to kill they were. Notice the more primitive, simple societies they live in. Now, with more people and a bigger need for more rigid societies, we are relatively moral. We now have the ability to care for others because we are TAUGHT that. Morality actually goes against the natural order.


"Look back in history and see the cruelty of our ancestors, how much more willing to kill they were."
There's a problem with this.

-The reason many people were "willing to kill" was for perfectly logical reasons. Native Americans only killed for what they needed. If they had to attack other tribes, it was to get resources to make sure their own tribe survives. Basically, you're saying it would be a good thing to slowly let your tribe starve to death. I don't think you'd be counted as "good" if you do that.

"Good is wanting to help others, evil is a willingness to harm them."

that which is morally right; righteousness.
"a mysterious balance of good and evil"

profoundly immoral and malevolent

Good and evil are entirely subjective. When other people think you're evil for stealing, you're good for helping your family survive. Like I said, it is entirely thanks to perspective.

"Evilness is marked by a disregard for other people's happiness. This can include being selfish or flat out enjoying others' suffering."

Lets hear that one more time:

by a disregard for other people's happiness.

Are people evil if they love their family and friends? I don't think so.

A final note, this debate is probably already over based on your forfeiture.
Debate Round No. 2


Yes, stealing for your own people can be evil, depending on the circumstances. If you are killing/harming more than you are saving, that is selfish. The natives actions then were not evil, as the Conquistadors invaded their land and caused famines and plagues. But look throughout history, how would humans NOW react to gladiatorial matches? What about the Bushido code? What about the Spanish inquisition? All of them benefit one particular group of people in SOME way, but is the entertainment of emperors worth the death of innocent gladiators? Things CAN be morally gray, but they CAN be good or evil. It would be ethically right to kill one man for your family, but would you be a good person for slaughtering a nation for your families survival? No.
The definitions you listed for good and evil coincide with mine. Harming few people for the sake of many is good, and the vice versa is evil.
As for my forfeiture, apologies. I have been rather distracted lately and I lost track of the time.


"how would humans NOW react to gladiatorial matches?"

Well, different people would react in different ways. It's as I've been saying.

Let me ask you a question.

If humans are born evil, how to some turn out good?

"The natives actions then were not evil"

Not only have I successfully upheld my BOP (hummans are naturally not evil), but you've contradicted your own BOP ( humans are naturally evil).

You've stated yourself that Native Americans were not evil. By Native Americans, you also mean the first humans to cross Beringia to get here, all the way back to the last Ice Age. Those were technically some of the first humans. Let me ask you another question:

If the first humans, in your words, I might add, are classified as "good", then how are humans born evil?

I rest my case.

(A final note, my arguments would be longer If I had more time. But, with school and such, I'm kind of in a bins these days. I apologize for the inconvenience.)
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by vi_spex 5 months ago
Posted by vi_spex 5 months ago
humans are good, evil dosnt exist in reality
Posted by lord_megatron 5 months ago
Humans ain't good or evil, but rather, selfish and greedy. We could have created a society where each human supports the other, a society where money doesn't exist and all resources are equally divided. But no the greedy ones take more than they need, and the selfish and good ones develop money to protect their resources. There are a small amount of good humans who want to help others, but most want to achieve their own ambitions first.
Posted by mall 5 months ago
Well looking at it logically from the primitive standpoint. Just in nature alone , secularly, a baby can do something good without being taught as well as vice versa . They can be taught and influenced to do both things . This is if a person believes in right and wrong fundamentally and not societal relativity alone. Primarily the criteria for right and wrong only applies to humans and not other things because when talking about incorrect vs. correct it only pertains to people . When it doesn't pertain to non-humans , those things don't fit into categories of do's and dont's at least not from the human perspective. This is not meaningful for a person that has an understanding of a law-less existence , no order to things and or regulations that truly conduct and cause everything else.
Posted by Oromagi 5 months ago
Neither. Good and evil have no meaning beyond the context of human society. Animals, plants, inanimate objects are not demonstrably good or evil so these ideas must be human inventions fulfilling a human need for external, elemental validation.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by mall 5 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Basically it's agreed that humans are not one sided to naturally being evil so my stance leans towards the pro's side. Explanation was also commented as well