• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Human nature... Is man inherently good, or inherently flawed?

Schutzengel

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
719
Reaction score
226
Location
Florida, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This is the core of all political debate, where do you stand on the idea of human nature? Is man by his nature good or bad?
 
Inherently evil. Some of us transcend this, some don't.

My overall experience with humans is that if someone can take advantage of you - they will.
 
I believe man is inherently flawed, but that doesn't mean man is inherently evil. Human beings are by nature imperfect.
 
both of them.but some are worse while some are better
 
Here is what I have found over time, that most "Socialists" believe in the inherent good in man, that by his nature he is giving and kind, this is why they believe that socialism will work.

Those wild free market people like me think that man is inherently self-serving, and believe Adam Smith, and want to harness that self-serving nature to make the best world we can.
 

Actually some socialists believe that the two (good of the group vs. good of the individual) aren't mutually exclusive. That helping the collective is in fact a self-serving act. I don't nearly see it in as black-and-white terms as what you've laid out above.
 
Man is 'inherently' nothing; 'human nature' is nothing more than the old Christian argument concerning 'Original Sin' repackaged in a bright, shiny, naturalistic package for a new audience. Man is a multitude of conflicting drives; each drive has its own agenda independent of the whole (can I eat when I'm hungry if my body urges me to sleep?).
 
Schutzengel said:
This is the core of all political debate, where do you stand on the idea of human nature? Is man by his nature good or bad?
Click to expand...
These are not mutually exclusive conditions afaict.
We could be good and flawed.
 
young children do often enjoy sharing.

and then they also enjoy taking thing from others.

what does this mean? human beings are naturally and inherently complicated.
 
I don't view actors as being inherently good or bad. I view certain actions as being inherently good or bad.

If, by your question, you mean do I think people tend to act good or tend to act bad, I'd say it's a wash. I think most people live pretty decent lives and generally follow a sense of right versus wrong they've developed. It's not uncommon for people to abandon that code, though, myself included, when they stand to gain something personally.
 


Wow... I didnt realize I could do this and still be agnostic...
 

More in the what is the primary drive of man? I believe all actions to be self-serving... but that is just me.
 
Schutzengel said:
This is the core of all political debate, where do you stand on the idea of human nature? Is man by his nature good or bad?
Click to expand...

Human nature is essentially good. Humans have fixed, or natural drives towards the basic (food, sex, shelter, clothing), and the more profound (community, happiness, compassion).

Human flaws are many, but come from the corruption of man by various things; religion, government, culture, etc. For example, religion may tell man to hate another for an inexplicable, vaguely cosmological reason, government may tell man to hate foreigners or the political dissidents, culture may tell man to glorify selfishness and look down upon others. All of our artificial social structures corrupt man's nature in this way.

...at least that's my pet theory.
 
Schutzengel said:
Wow... I didnt realize I could do this and still be agnostic...
Click to expand...

You can't. Not really. The Christian metaphysic plagues so much of Western thought that it would require an annihilation event to do away with them: even our 'secular humanists' embrace an entire pantheon of 'rights', 'morality', 'agents' and 'actors', and so much other ideological debris.

You are what you do at any given moment. Consequentially you are never yourself from moment to moment.
 
Schutzengel said:
More in the what is the primary drive of man? I believe all actions to be self-serving... but that is just me.
Click to expand...

All actions might be self-serving, but not all actions serve the Self (the 'rational actor', the Homo economicus, is a misshapen parody of humanity). Urges come when they wish to come, not when you want them to come.
 
Schutzengel said:
More in the what is the primary drive of man?
Click to expand...

I don't think there is an all-encompassing primary drive. Self-preservation is a pretty strong one. But it's not complete.

Schutzengel said:
I believe all actions to be self-serving... but that is just me.
Click to expand...

Ah, the old "altruism doesn't exist" stance. I thought this had been shot full of holes ages ago. Oh well. How about a marine who jumps on a grenade to save his buddies? That certainly doesn't benefit said marine in any way.
 
It does... just not in the traditional sense, it is all a matter of cost/benefit.
 
Schutzengel said:
It does... just not in the traditional sense, it is all a matter of cost/benefit.
Click to expand...

Then please enlighten me. How does Marine A's act of jumping on a grenade benefit Marine A?
 
Schutzengel said:
This is the core of all political debate, where do you stand on the idea of human nature? Is man by his nature good or bad?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I've gotta' ride the fence along with StillBallin'. "Inherently flawed." Children are all about me-me-me-me-me. We teach them right-from-wrong, conscience, honesty, and all of the other things adults need to lead happy lives and work/play well with others. Well...we teach most of them. Some do a piss-poor job, and we end up with adult sociopaths. Some are taught by good example. Some are taught by bad example and see what they shouldn't do. Some humans themselves, though, are just...broken...and can't be taught by either.

So. Inherently flawed yet malleable. Ha!
 
man is inherently animal with the potential to be motivated by forces other than instinct. by following intellectual motivations rather than purely animal instincts, man has the capability to work together for the advancement of society and the species as a whole. this idea predates written history, is a part of the foundation of virtually every society, and is present in religious imagery.

think about it : God is considered the creative force of good whose laws we are encouraged to follow. the devil, meanwhile, is nearly always portrayed as an animal with human features. the imagery represents our evolution from earlier mammal form into a mammal with cognitive abilities. we can use those cognitive abilities to create, or we can use them to satisfy our animal survival instincts. we're at a crossroads, have been for some time, and which way it will land is anyone's guess. i like to think that we'll continue to build society and continue to learn and advance collectively as a species. it's certainly an interesting time to be human; perhaps the most interesting point in all of human history. we finally have the beginnings of the technological communication tools that we will need, and we also have intensely destructive tools that could bring down everything. i can only imagine that if there's a more advanced civilization watching us, they must be very curious about which path we'll choose.
 
We are all born with a conscience... Some listen to that conscience, while others selfishly ignore it.
 
I think humans are born inherently ignorant or start out with no knowledge. Some of us learn more than others about life on different subjects but nobody has all knowledge or emotional maturity (wisdom), which is what it would take to be completely flawless or good. Evil or bad is just someone being dumb, stubborn or crazy about something.
 
Last edited:
the_recruit said:
Then please enlighten me. How does Marine A's act of jumping on a grenade benefit Marine A?
Click to expand...

It is in where the individual making the choice places value, at the moment of the choice he places a higher value on the lives of several others than his own, and so therefore mitigates his loss by paying the lower cost.
 
Schutzengel said:
This is the core of all political debate, where do you stand on the idea of human nature? Is man by his nature good or bad?
Click to expand...

Man is both. That is the problem that is so difficult to reconcile and live with peacefully.
 
Schutzengel said:
It is in where the individual making the choice places value, at the moment of the choice he places a higher value on the lives of several others than his own, and so therefore mitigates his loss by paying the lower cost.
Click to expand...

All that demonstrates is that his action was not worthless in his own estimation. It does not demonstrate that Marine A's action benefits Marine A, which is the definition of self serving.

In fact, you're rather contradicting yourself by admitting Marine A places a higher value on the lives of others than his own. That's not "self-serving", that is altruistic motivation by definition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…