• In a state of nature, nothing is evil.

    The statement « humans are naturally evil » requires three things to be true :
    1-That humans have a nature.
    2-That evil exists as a natural state.
    3-That the nature of human beings is indissociable from evil.

    The last two points are false. There is no logical reason to reject the first claim, so let's imagine an human in a state of nature. The rules of human civilization don't apply to nature, because they are intrinsically unnatural. Consequently, humans in a state of nature have no authority but themselves. Genesis asserts humans have knowledge of good and evil. But it is obvious that humans do not have a « morality program » built in. Knowledge of good and evil instead refer to the authority of people to decide what is good or evil. This is particularly true in a state of nature, where everyone has the right over everything, even over the bodies of other human beings. Thomas Hobbes was an ardent defender of this point of view.

    The 3rd notion (that evil is indissociable from human nature) was held and subsequently countered by many philosophers, but was ultimately not proved. Some people distort the Bible to justify their claim that it is, while it actually states the opposite. Jesus was an human being, yet Christianity holds that he was without any sort of sin. And resurrected people, if indeed there is a resurrection (and I have no doubt that there is), are held to be sinless. Sinlessness implies the complete absence of evil, but nothing in the Bible suggests humans will lose their distinctive humanity at the resurrection. So resurrected humans are natural humans (being resurrected through God, who created all natures), yet are not evil.

    The truth is that humans are naturally good, being created to serve a good purpose, but are inclined toward evil. The origin of that inclination is deadness of faith.

  • The Bible says yes.

    Ever since Adam and Eve committed mans first sin, we have all been born sinners and impossible to live up to Gods standards. But because God loves us he sent his son Jesus who lived a perfect life, we can be forgiven for our sins. That is why I gave it all to Jesus

  • Our Destruction and Malevolence

    Humans are the subject of evil since Xun Zi said "Humans Nature is Evil and Goodness in caused by intentional activity".Conveying that Human Nature is the dark side of our selves and Goodness is only caused by good deeds,or morals based on his/her personality therefore,Human Nature IS evil and something we as Humans don't know how we sub come to this force.

  • Well, technically, yes...

    The premise of this argument needs clarification!

    Does it mean: Humans are naturally inclined to be evil
    Or: Being evil is a natural part of human psychology

    The latter is true. There are obviously truly good humans, invalidating the first statement, and the second is definitely true because it happens - and nothing unnatural can happen, can it?

  • Corruption and irresponsibility

    Nobody is accountable for corruption in society, including environmental pollution and depletion of resources, which affects the future generations. Bernie Madoff defrauded thousands and ruined the lives of hundreds. But all he got was life imprisonment. Bernie Madoff is one of numerous fraudsters who exist in society but they never get caught like him because they pounce on the weak and gets away with it. The man who warned of the Space Shuttle disaster became marginalized and ostracized before and after the incident by the colluding corrupt peoples in the government and society. Kids have sex and kids have children without any plan or serious thought. Society fosters them because society is filled with numerous irresponsible people called the majority. It leads to child abuse and adults who grow up hating society. More and more, education and knowledge is hated, while the superficiality like plastic surgery, laziness, and cronyism is widespread. Useless heroes like rock musicians, entertainers, athletes, who foster immorality, irresponsibility, superficiality, and lies are worshipped. In the name of compassion, people who feel they are entitled from others, while they themselves contribute little or nothing to the betterment of the world, grows and grows. Most of the poverty and STDs in the world is not caused by Nature or God, but by human corruption and irresponsible sex acts. Conclusion: Majority of human beings are evil.

  • Look Around At The World

    As ruler of this world if man is naturally good then this world would abound in goodness and evil would be more the exception.
    This world abounds in evil and goodness is too often the exception.
    Man is not naturally good.

    Simple observation clear this one up real fast .

  • Humans have their default as malevolence.

    The headline explains most of what I want to get into first. We may have good, but it cannot outshine the bad. We will always display our dark side, some more frequently and powerfully than others. It is impossible to cleanse the bad, or be truly good.

    Let's explore some proof of this!

    Sexism: To avoid taking sides, I will display cases of both genders receiving unfair treatment.
    Women - For starters, they can be paid less in jobs. Also, they commonly have less rights in countries throughout the world. Does that sound like something truly good people would do?
    Men - If a woman hits a man, nobody gives a ****. If a man hits a woman, he can go to jail. Typically, men will be treated unfairly in court as well. Real example: In a simple argument with no prior physical contact, a woman glassed a man. The woman continued to sue and win.

    Racism: Summing it up in one word. Slavery. We treated people like animals and exhausted them with labor, didn't value their life, and dumped them in horrible living conditions. That sounds pretty evil.

    Child labor/abuse: Across the world, children are beaten senseless at home by siblings, relatives, or even their parents. Not only that, they are also put to work in sweatshops, or worse. They shouldn't be stuck in these terrible conditions, but humans do it anyway.

    Rape: Around 30% of people, men and women, have been raped. Being forced into sex is not something to laugh about, nor is it something a moral species would do.

    As you can see, with all these supporting details, it is fair to reach the conclusion that humans are naturally evil.

  • Huams are born evil

    Ever since humans were born on earth they damaged everything they are almost killing earth from pollution and the world is getting worse and worse everyday and yet they still aren't helping and how many animal we are losing everyday and getting extinct just because of humans who damage the wrold

  • Huams are born evil

    Ever since humans were born on earth they damaged everything they are almost killing earth from pollution and the world is getting worse and worse everyday and yet they still aren't helping and how many animal we are losing everyday and getting extinct just because of humans who damage the wrold

  • Child abuse and rape

    One in three children are abused, one in three women are raped, and one in five men are raped. These are conservative estimates. The people who are not raping women and children are stealing from the people they work with, cheating on their taxes, complaining about minorities stealing their jobs, and shitting on the one or two nice people they know who don't screw others over because they make them insecure about their own shitty life choices. They don't save money or curb their spending but they want the government to cut their taxes. They feel entitled to everything they have but spend all their time figuring out how to get out of doing work. And then they go home and watch Disney movies and teach their kids how great people are. Fuck all of you.

  • No, otherwise everyone would be evil

    Look at a baby. Would you say he or she is evil? No way right. So we know that people are NOT BORN EVIL.

    From an Islamic perspective:
    Where does evil come from? It comes from ignoring or rejecting Guidance from God and letting Satan lead you to that which God does not want. Evil originally came from Satan, because he had a choice and decided to disobey God. But now, man can be evil and influence others to be evil (he was influenced by Satan).

    So, man has a great capacity to be evil. But NOT naturally evil.

    This is from an Islamic perspective.

  • We created morality

    The default state is not having morality. Roses, donkeys and cockroaches do not have morality. We do. The fact that we have the concept of morality makes us not evil. Yes, there are breakings of this rule, but the fact that we bothered to create morality, to create laws to enforce that morality shows us that we cannot be inherently evil.

  • Don't think so

    I believe that humans are evil, but not naturally. Society shapes us into evil things. About babies. They aren't malicious in any way when they are first born. But once society becomes evident to them, they change based on that. I have yet to meet a truly good human being though.

  • Human nature is not one thing, neither 'good' nor 'bad' overall.

    There is tension in the world between two partially true beliefs -- both of which claim evidence from evolution. These two views are:

    1. "People are basically good and just need to be nurtured and freed"
    2. "People are basically bad and need to be controlled to keep from killing each other"

    Given the tremendous evidence on both sides, perhaps it might be useful to consider a third thesis that embraces both of them:

    3. "Human nature is not one thing, neither 'good' nor 'bad' overall. People in general have been genetically endowed by evolution with a wide variety of tendencies and capacities that respond to -- but are not necessarily controlled or determined by -- their environment. And so we see all sorts of individual and cultural behaviors, providing evidence to defend virtually any assertions about 'human nature.'"

    We might therefore conclude that our challenge at this stage of evolution is to recognize that 'human nature' is richly diverse and flexible. Perhaps our task is to use our powers of consciousness, intelligence, and choice to explore the full range of who we are and can be in various circumstances, aiming both to accept our whole selves and to co-create more life-serving, meaningful and joyful ways of being together.

    Among the things we might take into account is the evocative power of our assumptions about ourselves, each other, and what's possible. For example, elementary teacher Jane Elliott did a famous experiment in 1968 in which her young students behaved -- with unexpected intensity -- according to her assumptions about how bright and competent they were. One day brown eyed kids were smart and blue eyed kids stupid, and the next day the opposite. Her results suggest that in many circumstances our assumptions about each other have a profound effect on which aspects of us show up in the world. And this is only a small piece of what is going on within us and among us. We have much more to learn about this and other dynamics if we wish to consciously and wisely engage our full evolutionary heritage as humans.

    We could also develop evolutionary versions of political philosophies like liberalism, conservatism, anarchism, libertarianism, and communitarianism. Each of these worldviews invokes key facets of human nature that other philosophies downplay or disparage. Since, from an evolutionary perspective, all facets of our humanity have a certain functionality under particular circumstances, evoutionary reframings may allow for integrating these embattled ideologies into more inclusive, holistic, and benign political worldviews.

    We are the ones we've been waiting for -- and we are all we need. We just need to live into being the people and societies we know we need to be. Evolution has much to teach us about the full pallette of humanity that's available to us, and the interplay of our strengths and weaknesses in the world we face -- a world which we and evolution have made.

  • Great expectations on Fundamental Human Nature..

    What happened next tells us even more about human nature. After the show, infants were given the choice of reaching for either the helping or the hindering shape, and it turned out they were much more likely to reach for the helper. This can be explained if they are reading the events of the show in terms of motivations – the shapes aren't just moving at random, but they showed to the infant that the shape pushing uphill "wants" to help out (and so is nice) and the shape pushing downhill "wants" to cause problems (and so is nasty).

    The researchers used an encore to confirm these results. Infants saw a second scene in which the climber shape made a choice to move towards either the helper shape or the hinderer shape. The time infants spent looking in each of the two cases revealed what they thought of the outcome. If the climber moved towards the hinderer the infants looked significantly longer than if the climber moved towards the helper. This makes sense if the infants were surprised when the climber approached the hinderer. Moving towards the helper shape would be the happy ending, and obviously it was what the infant expected. If the climber moved towards the hinderer it was a surprise, as much as you or I would be surprised if we saw someone give a hug to a man who had just knocked him over.

    The way to make sense of this result is if infants, with their pre-cultural brains had expectations about how people should act. Not only do they interpret the movement of the shapes as resulting from motivations, but they prefer helping motivations over hindering ones.

    This doesn't settle the debate over human nature. A cynic would say that it just shows that infants are self-interested and expect others to be the same way. At a minimum though, it shows that tightly bound into the nature of our developing minds is the ability to make sense of the world in terms of motivations, and a basic instinct to prefer friendly intentions over malicious ones. It is on this foundation that adult morality is built.

  • Are humans naturally evil? No.

    Fundamentally speaking, are humans good or bad? It's a question that has repeatedly been asked throughout humanity. For thousands of years, philosophers have debated whether we have a basically good nature that is corrupted by society, or a basically bad nature that is kept in check by society. Psychology has uncovered some evidence which might give the old debate a twist.

    One way of asking about our most fundamental characteristics is to look at babies. Babies' minds are a wonderful showcase for human nature. Babies are humans with the absolute minimum of cultural influence – they don't have many friends, have never been to school and haven't read any books. They can't even control their own bowels, let alone speak the language, so their minds are as close to innocent as a human mind can get.

    The only problem is that the lack of language makes it tricky to gauge their opinions. Normally we ask people to take part in experiments, giving them instructions or asking them to answer questions, both of which require language. Babies may be cuter to work with, but they are not known for their obedience. What's a curious psychologist to do?

    Fortunately, you don't necessarily have to speak to reveal your opinions. Babies will reach for things they want or like, and they will tend to look longer at things that surprise them. Ingenious experiments carried out at Yale University in the US used these measures to look at babies' minds. Their results suggest that even the youngest humans have a sense of right and wrong, and, furthermore, an instinct to prefer good over evil.

    How could the experiments tell this? Imagine you are a baby. Since you have a short attention span, the experiment will be shorter and loads more fun than most psychology experiments. It was basically a kind of puppet show; the stage a scene featuring a bright green hill, and the puppets were cut-out shapes with stick on wobbly eyes; a triangle, a square and a circle, each in their own bright colours. What happened next was a short play, as one of the shapes tried to climb the hill, struggling up and falling back down again. Next, the other two shapes got involved, with either one helping the climber up the hill, by pushing up from behind, or the other hindering the climber, by pushing back from above.

    Already something amazing, psychologically, is going on here. All humans are able to interpret the events in the play in terms of the story I’ve described. The puppets are just shapes. They don't make human sounds or display human emotions. They just move about, and yet everyone reads these movements as purposeful, and revealing of their characters. You can argue that this “mind reading”, even in infants, shows that it is part of our human nature to believe in other minds.

  • Fhdgh gh dghfdg

    Arrrr grow up all of yaz arrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yazarrrr grow up all of yaz

  • We have incentive to create misery, but have inhibitions against doing so.

    Even before they learn speech, toddlers hug and comfort distressed infants.

    They also hurl cats against walls.

    We are a species that competes for sex and opportunity, but cooperates to eat, raise children and protect ourselves from threats. Our competition is opportunistic and largely amoral, but our cooperation is empathic and self-sacrificing.

    Evil can be defined as the deliberate use of power to hurt physically, harm psychologically or destroy mortally. We all have that capacity, and incentive to exercise it.

    However what creates evil is neither capacity nor incentive, but rather our environment's incapacity to create inhibitors which invoke empathy and highlight common cause. Absent that environment, and in the face of fear, competition urgency and risk, we turn to hurt, harm and destruction.

    So humans are not naturally evil, but our environments sometimes intrinsically are.

  • Naturally, we are not evil:

    I think that human beings, in a natural state, are neither good nor evil. We are in a neutral state. Naturally, we are meant to live, breath, eat, and carry out other necessities of life. Carrying out life processes isn't morally good or evil. It just is. But, our actions say whether we are good of evil. There are some good people out there, and some bad. But I think that naturally, we are not evil, but based on our actions, we are subject to either being good or evil.

  • Part of nature.

    When people think of evil, they tend to think along the lines of the seven deadly sins, e.G., Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, and Pride. The only thing religion has an issue with is that they represent otherwise good things to an excess. Example, there is nothing wrong with eating but eating too much (gluttony) is considered evil.
    In nature, more is not only better but instrumental to survival of the species. In nature, an animal that get too much is always more likely to continue the species vs one that does not get enough. Nature also tends to be competitive, so just having enough may not be good enough to ensure the survival of your genes or your species. If anything, this would mean that evil is essential to survival so if anything it would be nature that forces us as well as all other life to be evil.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Network says2015-01-24T06:08:54.667
My vote was miscounted (it was a false Yes, intended to be a No), so the percentages are incorrect. I don't know if there is some procedure in these cases, or if it is impossible to change it.