Mankind Is Inherentaly

Ignorant.

Predominantly good.

We wouldn't identify things as good and evil otherwise.

digsbe said:

Sinful. I know that all humans are born with a sinful nature. We kill, we have sexual immorality, we are selfish, we disregard what we don't want to accept. People can be good, but the default is to be evil.

Click to expand...

So evil is defined by the Bible?

pbrauer said:

Several years ago, I was listening to conservative talk show host Dennis Prager say the main difference between conservatives and liberals was that conservatives think mankind is basically evil while liberals think mankind is basically good. I agree with him.

Click to expand...

In that case, how come both think we need our base natures regulated in one form or the other?

sawyerloggingon said:

Lets go with the most simple of selfless acts. You are entering a store and someone is about to come out with arms full of groceries. You open the door for them and stand back as they exit. How is that selfish in any way shape or form?

Click to expand...

That's not a selfless act it's courtesy, there's nothing at stake.

From a religious perspective that I was brought up which is Lutheranism mankind is inherently evil (by default enemy of God and all that.) From a prospective of evolutionary biology mankind would be neither good or evil. I do not think in terms of good or evil for individuals but to an extent to their conduct I view it in terms as right or wrong which is not quite the same as good or evil. I do not believe that it is meaningful to label a group with such terms.

digsbe said:

Sinful. I know that all humans are born with a sinful nature. We kill, we have sexual immorality, we are selfish, we disregard what we don't want to accept. People can be good, but the default is to be evil.

Click to expand...

What an absolutely horrible way to go through life. I feel sorry for you if that's truly what you believe.

So you yourself are inherently evil then? That's what you're saying?

Without choosing to be "good" - your default is evil?

Really?

From The Prager Show!

I recently devoted my biweekly column in the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles to analyzing why most Jews believe that people are basically good despite the fact that this belief is neither rational nor Jewish. In a lifetime of teaching and writing on Judaism, I have never encountered a single normative statement in 3,000 years of Jewish writing that asserted that man is basically good.

Why would liberals in general, and Jewish liberals in particular -- given the Jews' singularly horrific history at the hands of other human beings -- react so strongly against someone who wrote that people are not basically good?

In my original article, I offered one explanation: Since the Enlightenment, the secular world has had to believe in man (or "humanity") because if you don't believe in God and you don't believe in humanity, you will despair.

But one critic opened my eyes to an even deeper reason most liberals do not acknowledge that people are not basically good.

This is what he wrote:

"What a sad world it would be if we all believed as Dennis Prager that mankind is inherently evil."

And this is what I responded:

"I did not write that man is inherently evil. I wrote that he is not basically good. And, yes, that does make the world sad. So do disease, earthquakes, death and all the unjust suffering in the world. But sad facts remain facts."

"A distinguishing characteristic of liberals and leftists," I concluded, "is their aversion to acknowledging sad facts."

First, as with my correspondent above, people on the left tend to be unwilling to accept the sadness and pain that recognition of such facts creates. Leftism is often predicated on avoiding pain. That is a major reason why the left dislikes capitalism and free markets. Free markets create winners and losers, and the left does not like the fact that some people lose and some win.

This antipathy to having losers expresses itself on the micro level as well. Many liberals oppose children playing in competitive sports because they can lose -- sometimes by a big score. That is why many schools now emphasize "cooperation instead of competition." They do not want children experiencing the pain of losing, let alone losing by many points. That is also why liberals introduced the absurd idea of giving sports trophies to all kids who play, win or lose. God forbid that only the winners receive trophies; the kids who didn't win may experience pain.

Second, the left lives by theories and dogmas into which the facts of life must fit. That is why left-wing ideas are usually wishful thinking.

The Dennis Prager Show

Humans are neither good nor evil because good and evil don't exist-- they are subjective (and usually self-serving) labels that humans use to categorize human behavior. It's all pretty meaningless once you realize that what most people define as good or evil is simply whatever benefits them or harms them.

spanky said:

That's not a selfless act it's courtesy, there's nothing at stake.

Click to expand...

Time is at stake. Everyone is in a hurry these days and taking a moment to help someone is a selfless act.

It's funny how even non religious people often quote others as being good or evil. I think those terms impose some sort of mystical quality to thoughts and deeds that aren't there. Good deeds are productive, while bad deeds are destructive. One is enlightened, while the other is ignorant. One is appreciative and confident, while the other is not. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than realizing we're born uneducated, inexperienced and imperfect, so that over time we can learn and grow to become unique thru our errors and successes.

pbrauer said:

Several years ago, I was listening to conservative talk show host Dennis Prager say the main difference between conservatives and liberals was that conservatives think mankind is basically evil while liberals think mankind is basically good. I agree with him.

Click to expand...

Why Do People Do Evil?

Decent people have sought to identify the roots of evil since the first indecent person inflicted cruelty on an innocent person. And people have come up with one or more of nine explanations, most of which are indeed valid.

1. The Devil
2. Genes
3. Parents
4. Religion
5. Money
6. Power
7. Pursuit of the good
8. Sadism
9. Boredom

I believe there is a tenth explanation that is greater than all the others and is particularly widespread today.

10. Victimhood. A lifelong study of good and evil has led to me conclude that the greatest single cause of evil is people perceiving of themselves or their group as victims. Nazism arose from Germans' sense of victimhood -- as a result of the Versailles Treaty, of the "stab in the back" that led to Germany's loss in World War I and of a world Jewish conspiracy. Communism was predicated on workers regarding themselves as victims of the bourgeoisie. Much of Islamic evil today emanates from a belief that the Muslim world has been victimized by Christians and Jews. Many prisoners, including those imprisoned for horrible crimes, regard themselves as victims of society or of their upbringing. The list of those attributing their evil acts to their being victims is as long as the list of evildoers.

This is also true in the micro realm. Family members whose primary identity is that of victim usually feel entirely free to hurt others in the family. That is why psychotherapists who regularly reinforce the victim status of their patients do the patient and society great harm.

If my belief is even partially correct, the preoccupation of much of America with telling whole groups that they are victims -- of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia and classism, among other American sins -- can only increase cruelty and evil in America.....snip~

The Dennis Prager Show

:2razz:

Viktyr Gehrig said:

Humans are neither good nor evil because good and evil don't exist-- they are subjective (and usually self-serving) labels that humans use to categorize human behavior. It's all pretty meaningless once you realize that what most people define as good or evil is simply whatever benefits them or harms them.

Click to expand...

Yes, concepts of good and evil are basically selfish oriented.

sawyerloggingon said:

Time is at stake. Everyone is in a hurry these days and taking a moment to help someone is a selfless act.

Click to expand...

Taking a moment to help someone else makes the helper feel good about him or herself. They think "I'm a good person".

Rewards aren't always money, in fact many times they are not.

spanky said:

Taking a moment to help someone else makes the helper feel good about him or herself. They think "I'm a good person".

Rewards aren't always money, in fact many times they are not.

Click to expand...

If doing something good for someone else makes you feel good and that is the only reason you do it then you are basically in the man is inherently good camp.

sawyerloggingon said:

If doing something good for someone else makes you feel good and that is the only reason you do it then you are basically in the man is inherently good camp.

Click to expand...

Inherently selfish. He's not doing it because it helps someone else, he's doing it because it makes him feel good about himself. Just because the outcome appears to be unselfish doesn't mean the motivation was.

You see, that's how society defines good and evil. If the outcome is something society approves of, it's good even though the motivations for both the good act and evil act emanate from the same selfish or self preservation inclination.

More good than evil.

spanky said:

So evil is defined by the Bible?

Click to expand...

Mostly, yes.

Dragonfly said:

What an absolutely horrible way to go through life. I feel sorry for you if that's truly what you believe.

So you yourself are inherently evil then? That's what you're saying?

Without choosing to be "good" - your default is evil?

Really?

Click to expand...

Yes, I am inherently evil. My nature is self serving, my nature is to assume that I am the judge of right and wrong or good and evil just like every other human's inerrant evil nature.

The default nature is to be evil, people can chose to do good deeds but our inherent nature is evil.

spanky said:

Inherently selfish. He's not doing it because it helps someone else, he's doing it because it makes him feel good about himself. Just because the outcome appears to be unselfish doesn't mean the motivation was.

Click to expand...

But in order to feel good about helping someone else, one must believe that helping others is a good thing. That puts that person in the "people are good" camp

I wouldn't say evil, but I would say seriously flawed and prone to self-harm.

All cultures are different and the definitions of good and evil are different in every culture.

Americans have the capacity to be unbelievably altruistic and benevolent and those who have been in life or death situations know that men sometimes give their lives for complete strangers for no obvious reason whatsoever. On the other hand, sometimes you do what you have to do to survive. Sometimes you don't.

spanky said:

Inherently selfish. He's not doing it because it helps someone else, he's doing it because it makes him feel good about himself. Just because the outcome appears to be unselfish doesn't mean the motivation was.

Click to expand...

Again, you don't understand what "selfish" means. Selfish does not mean "doing something because it makes you feel about yourself." Selfish means " doing something for yourself at the expense of other people." Holding a door open for someone to help them is 100% not selfish because it is not done at the expense of another person. Now, if one were to hold open a door for someone just to get praised and in the process, knocks someone over to do so, THAT would selfish.

Spanky, the statement is phrased " there's no such thing as a selfless act". This doesn't mean every act is selfish, but that every act is in someway self centered.

Not that surprising, since the basis of morality is " do unto others..."

selfish - takes the path of least resistance.