Human being is naturally good or evil? What do you think?

Question

Human being is naturally good or evil? What do you think?

Answer 1

Yes, he is.

Answer 2

Good and evil are human concepts. We're just part of nature like any other animal.

Answer 3

They are neither good nor evil !!! They are opportunists for sure as any animal would be -trying to make a living from that which is around in his environment!!

  Good and evil are constructs -made up by a society or any group of people to explain and guide the desired behavior !!

  For example , a head hunter believes killing and decappitating his victim is good and not evil since it satisfies the groups belief that vengeance is good and keeps the balance between the tribes that are at close proximity and at war to compete for resources and females!!!!  

  I can give tons of examples -including our own society but i will spare you!!!!!!1:-))

Answer 4

"There is nothing good nor bad that thinking makes it so"

Answer 5

Neither.  People are, after all, animals, rather intelligent ones, but still animals.  Some compete constantly for money, which allows them to have basic needs:  security, food, shelter and whatever else they want.  Others are able to realize that they need other people and it might be best to allow them some of the goods.  Maslow called them self-actualizers.  

"The self-actualizers also had a different way of relating to others.  First, they enjoyed solitude, and were comfortable being alone.    And they enjoyed deeper personal relations with a few close friends and family members, rather than more shallow relationships with many people.

They enjoyed autonomy, a relative independence from physical and social needs.  And they resisted enculturation, that is, they were not susceptible to social pressure to be "well adjusted" or to "fit in" -- they were, in fact, nonconformists in the best sense.

They had an unhostile sense of humor -- preferring to joke at their own expense, or at the human condition, and never directing their humor at others.  They had a quality he called acceptance of self and others, by which he meant that these people would be more likely to take you as you are than try to change you into what they thought you should be.  This same acceptance applied to their attitudes towards themselves:  If some quality of theirs wasn’t harmful, they let it be, even enjoying it as a personal quirk.  On the other hand, they were often strongly motivated to change negative qualities in themselves that could be changed.  Along with this comes spontaneity and simplicity:  They preferred being themselves rather than being pretentious or artificial.  In fact, for all their nonconformity, he found that they tended to be conventional on the surface, just where less self-actualizing nonconformists tend to be the most dramatic.

Further, they had a sense of humility and respect towards others -- something Maslow also called democratic values -- meaning that they were open to ethnic and individual variety, even treasuring it.  They had a quality Maslow called human kinship or Gemeinschaftsgefühl -- social interest, compassion, humanity.  And this was accompanied by a strong ethics, which was spiritual but seldom conventionally religious in nature.

And these people had a certain freshness of appreciation, an ability to see things, even ordinary things, with wonder.  Along with this comes their ability to be creative, inventive, and original.  And, finally, these people tended to have more peak experiences than the average person.  A peak experience is one that takes you out of yourself, that makes you feel very tiny, or very large, to some extent one with life or nature or God.  It gives you a feeling of being a part of the infinite and the eternal.  These experiences tend to leave their mark on a person, change them for the better, and many people actively seek them out.  They are also called mystical experiences, and are an important part of many religious and philosophical traditions.

Maslow doesn’t think that self-actualizers are perfect, of course.  There were several flaws or imperfections he discovered along the way as well:  First, they often suffered considerable anxiety and guilt -- but realistic anxiety and guilt, rather than misplaced or neurotic versions.  Some of them were absentminded and overly kind.  And finally, some of them had unexpected moments of ruthlessness, surgical coldness, and loss of humor.

Two other points he makes about these self-actualizers:  Their values were "natural" and seemed to flow effortlessly from their personalities.  And they appeared to transcend many of the dichotomies others accept as being undeniable, such as the differences between the spiritual and the physical, the selfish and the unselfish, and the masculine and the feminine.

Metaneeds and metapathologies

Another way in which Maslow approach the problem of what is self-actualization is to talk about the special, driving needs (B-needs, of course) of the self-actualizers.  They need the following in their lives in order to be happy:

Truth, rather than dishonesty.

Goodness, rather than evil.

Beauty, not ugliness or vulgarity.

Unity, wholeness, and transcendence of opposites, not arbitrariness or forced choices.

Aliveness, not deadness or the mechanization of life.

Uniqueness, not bland uniformity.

Perfection and necessity, not sloppiness, inconsistency, or accident.

Completion, rather than incompleteness.

Justice and order, not injustice and lawlessness.

Simplicity, not unnecessary complexity.

Richness, not environmental impoverishment.

Effortlessness, not strain.

Playfulness, not grim, humorless, drudgery.

Self-sufficiency, not dependency.

Meaningfulness, rather than senselessness.

At first glance, you might think that everyone obviously needs these.  But think:  If you are living through an economic depression or a war, or are living in a ghetto or in rural poverty, do you worry about these issues, or do you worry about getting enough to eat and a roof over your head?  In fact, Maslow believes that much of the what is wrong with the world comes down to the fact that very few people really are interested in these values -- not because they are bad people, but because they haven’t even had their basic needs taken care of!"

Answer 6

I think both. They are constantly fighting against each other!

Answer 7

you take away the power(electricity), the laws, the food and the water, and you scare them, then people are naturally evil and they will do whatever it takes to survive no matter what. it is instinct that we have not evolved from yet. people may be good for their entire lives and try to keep evil to a bare minimum but naturally, humans are evil.

Answer 8

Naturally good, I think. Even the evil people think that they are good in their own minds.

Answer 9

Neither. Good and evil are subjective terms. What is considered good today may not be considered good a few generations from now and what is evil today may be acceptable or even good.

Case in point: In most European cultures, just a few hundred years ago, a woman seeking a divorce was considered evil and wretched no matter what the reasoning. In the Jewish communities a few thousand years ago, homosexuals, prostitutes, woman who slept with married men, woman who got pregnant before marriage were stoned...a.k.a. murdered. Today, while many people still think of prostitutes, homosexuals and people who engage in infidelity to be sinners, they are NOT considered by most to be evil and at least in the civilized world, they are NOT put to death.

Millennia ago, it is believed that men chose their spouse by fighting the other men in the tribe and the strongest man took the woman of his choice. If she wasn't interested in him...Oh well, he was the strongest and he took her. End of story! Today, this is rape. A few hundred years ago, if a man impugned another mans honor, there would be a fight and if one was killed, such was the risk of such actions. End of story. Today, this is assault and murder. What was once a good and just act is now criminal and evil.

So, to your question, a person is not born wither good or evil.

However, people do have certain predispositions. Some people are just naturally more calm while others are more intense or even hyper.  Some people are born for a propensity for confrontation while others are far more harmonious. However, being human beings, we have the ability to over come our predispositions and become the person we want to be...if we are willing to take the time to do so.

Thus, the argument over behavior being nature or nurture are ridiculous. A person who wants to change, can change...baring any mental illnesses, but they have to want to change.

~~

Answer 10

People are basically good. They have hidden tendencies that make them do harm. These tendencies stem from past traumatic experiences that they are unknowingly  stuck in. Such as, times of being in pain and unconscious, birth, accidents, operations etc. They act out those moments as it feels "correct" however they are not observing life as it is now but as I say stuck in these past incidents. This is irrational. It sets them into bad habits and they (we) perpetuate those bad habits. When you "run out" those past moment by recalling them a person no longer has the compulsion to do harm. So, yes  they are basically good. It's their "reactive mind" who's the villain.