Is man inherently good or bad

[Dhoulmagus]

I believe bad and that every moral decision human societies have made were more based off economics than morality itself. For example, killing another human being became immoral when that human being was a farmer for a village or something. Pretty much the abolishment of slavery, workers rights, women's rights, and etc didn't happen until economics allowed so or it was forced upon(French Revolution). Man will not go out of his way to make a moral decision if it negatively impacts economics.

 

[Bible_Belt]

It's a central theme of the Bible that people suck, and everything they create is destined to fail.

 

[amazingswayze]

man is inherently selfish but that doesnt make him bad, all it means is that all men think alike. we all want the same things.

what is your definition of bad?

 

[Tenacity]

I believe bad and that every moral decision human societies have made were more based off economics than morality itself. For example, killing another human being became immoral when that human being was a farmer for a village or something. Pretty much the abolishment of slavery, workers rights, women's rights, and etc didn't happen until economics allowed so or it was forced upon(French Revolution). Man will not go out of his way to make a moral decision if it negatively impacts economics.

- No living being is either GOOD NOR BAD, as both are subjective points of view depending upon the angle of the living being.

- To the "producer", the primary consumer is bad, but to the secondary consumer the primary consumer is good as the secondary consumer eats the primary consumer.

- Most criminals don't see themselves as bad, they see other people as bad, mainly the people they are ripping off, stealing from, or killing. I know that sounds twisted.

Usually human beings get their moral code from some sort of religion that determines what is good or bad. Or, if not from a religion, they get their moral code from the established laws of the land.

With that being said, there's really no such thing as good or bad, all you pretty much have are legal and illegal acts.....but it does it confusing because sometimes you can have something be legal that's actually a pretty "bad" or fvcked up situation, such as how slavery and segregration were once legalized.

 

[Bokanovsky]

Human beings are neither inherently good or inherently bad. We are inherently selfish. Selfishness is an evolutionary trait that is necessary to ensure survival and procreation. "Good" and "bad" are nothing more than a set of artificial rules needed to ensure a functional society. A long time ago, our distant ancestors realized that they stood a better chance of survival if they associated and cooperated with each other by forming a tribe, village or some other social group and establishing a set of rules that people were supposed to abide to allow the community to function as such. This, too, was a selfish decision (maximizing an individual's chance of survival by attaching himself to a social group). So in a sense, "good" is anything that maximizes social cohesion while bad is anything that disrupts it.

 

[ChrisFloyd]

Man is inherently racist.

 

[Tictac]

Man is inherently racist.

Good thing that there's only one race on the planet - Homo sapiens.

 

[speed dawg]

The world was created good. Then, the world fell to sin. So essentially this good world is tainted with sin. Sin is essentially separation from God, who is the essence of all things good. Humans are capable of good under the impression of God, but without God we are left to our own vices, where sin is more attractive and powerful. That life leads to destruction.

Obviously there will be those who disagree but deep down I think we've all seen this SUPERNATURAL force play out in our own lives.

 

[Dingo]

Bad.... look around you.

 

[daddymonsterpoodle]

Stupid, selfish, shortsighted, yes. If that makes us bad then we are.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

elfishness is an evolutionary trait that is necessary to ensure survival and procreation. "Good" and "bad" are nothing more than a set of artificial rules needed to ensure a functional society.

Agree with the first part, not with the second part. People are inherently selfish. But there is "short term" selfish, and "long term selfish" just as their is "selfish selfish" and "overlapping or mutually beneficial selfish."

Bee's don't give a rats arse about flowers. They just steel the nectar.

Flowers don't give a rats arse about bees, they just sit back and let the bees cross pollinate them.

This selfish act helps each other out, without them even needing to know about this.

Adam Smith wrote about this as "enlightened selfishness" in "The Wealth of Nations."

Baker doesn't care about you, he only wants your money. But he knows he won't get it unless he makes bread you'll willingly buy.

MORAL BEHAVIOR

I believe any definition of "moral behavior" is based on a relatively homogeneous society where everybody agrees what's "right" and "wrong" based on how these "mutually selfish transactions" are carried out.

Or you could define "moral behavior" as the collectively understood set of principles that let this "mutually selfish behavior" come to a maximum point. OR to generate a maximum "running average" of the most maximum benefit in the aggregate.

Once it's codified into law, it's recognized as "natural law" that lets men operate at their "best" possible capacity.

I also believe that there are very FEW OCCASIONS in history where this "natural law" prevailed. It's almost always hijacked by those that are best at projecting power.

And that for the most part of human history, the ONLY law (moral or not) is this:

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.

It will always and eventually come to that point, upon which society will rise to a point of maximum centralization (the givers of the law) before collapsing in on itself.

 

[DiegoSantori]

We are both selfish and altruistic at the same time. If we were totally selfless, many of us wouldn't survive or reproduce. For instance, if two perfectly unselfish guys had a crush on the same girl (and she liked both of them equally), they'd both say, "You date her ... No, I insist! Please ... I want you to be happy...". Meanwhile, a more selfish guy would take her hand and lead her to the bedroom. His selfishness would give him a reproductive advantage. But if we were completely selfish, our ancestors wouldn't have been able to team up to hunt and gather.

That's why places like SoSuave tell men to be selfish but not to be a complete jerk. Being too much of an a**hole is going to make you too unattainable and she'll go cold. Being too nice, however, means that you have no back bone and that you don't take what you want. Unselfish nice guys believe in a social contract no one is honoring. They give of themselves until there is nothing left and then when they request the other party to uphold their end of the covert contract and are denied it, they respond with rage and confusion. Nice guys don't understand how nature works. Nature rewards those who are dominant but not aggressive. It rewards those who are selfish but who are also able to lead & help other people and provide direction when needed.

 

[wifehunter]

Evil...naturally.