Are human beings born without evil?

[lemondiesel]

If a thread about this already exist, please link

Please, try and refrain from talking about original sin, baptism or whatever else in this thread.

Now my question. When human beings are born, are they born with the traits of doing good and evil? I remember watching a George Carlin stand up once and he said, “It is amazing that if your child turns out evil, parents are quick to blame things like friends, drugs, video games, etc. It is even more amazing that if your child turns out to be successful and great it life, it is then reflected back onto the parents and they recieve credit without hesitation.”

Now i am not saying that situation happens all the time, but when you think about it, it makes absolutely perfect sense. (rational sense) Human beings are animals, more specifically we are mammals. The one distinct trait about mammals is that the young are raised, protected, and taught survival skills by the mother (maybe father) You can see this with the large majority of mammals.

So, does evil and good exist at birth, or is it taught/influenced by the parents? (could go on for generations after generations)

 

[colmcille1]

If a thread about this already exist, please link

Hi there, there are numerous threads on the subject of evil.

Please, try and refrain from talking about original sin, baptism or whatever else in this thread.

This is a CATHOLIC forum! What would you have us discuss?!

Now my question. When human beings are born, are they born with the traits of doing good and evil? I remember watching a George Carlin stand up once and he said, “It is amazing that if your child turns out evil, parents are quick to blame things like friends, drugs, video games, etc. It is even more amazing that if your child turns out to be successful and great it life, it is then reflected back onto the parents and they recieve credit without hesitation.”

You are off on the wrong foot already when you cite George Carlin. May I respectfully suggest the Clubhouse. It’s listed in the forums.

Now i am not saying that situation happens all the time, but when you think about it, it makes absolutely perfect sense. (rational sense) Human beings are animals, more specifically we are mammals. The one distinct trait about mammals is that the young are raised, protected, and taught survival skills by the mother (maybe father) You can see this with the large majority of mammals.

There is an anthropomorphism thread wherein you could address this issue.

So, does evil and good exist at birth, or is it taught/influenced by the parents? (could go on for generations after generations)

Hope my comments haven’t put you off debating your topic.
God Bless,
Colmcille1.

 

[Garyjohn2]

I think children are born with evil. I mean, not EVIL like they are terrible or something…but human beings are selfish by nature, and this is a form of evil. Children always have to be taught to share, and put other’s needs ahead of their own sometimes.

Well, that’s my observation!

 

[Califman831]

everyone is born with original sin which is washed away by the sacrament of baptism

newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm#IX Baptism
newadvent.org/cathen/11312a.htm Original Sin

 

[lemondiesel]

I think children are born with evil. I mean, not EVIL like they are terrible or something…but human beings are selfish by nature, and this is a form of evil. Children always have to be taught to share, and put other’s needs ahead of their own sometimes.

Well, that’s my observation!

This is more of the answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Now, why do we define selfish as evil? Say I have the best candy in the whole wide world, the best. You beg and beg me for some and over n over I tell you no, its mine. You finally persuade me after days and days, and I finally give you it. Turns out, you were allergic to sugar and died.

Would being selfish have saved your life? When do we draw the line on what is actually evil?

 

[Garyjohn2]

This is more of the answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Now, why do we define selfish as evil? Say I have the best candy in the whole wide world, the best. You beg and beg me for some and over n over I tell you no, its mine. You finally persuade me after days and days, and I finally give you it. Turns out, you were allergic to sugar and died.

Would being selfish have saved your life? When do we draw the line on what is actually evil?

Hehe, well that is kind of a silly example but I guess it could actually happen. There are different types and degrees of selfishness of course. If you have enough candy to feed two people, and you just withhold it from a friend simply because you don’t feel like sharing, that is wrong…don’t you agree? Well, that’s the way I was raised.

If you know someone is allergic, and you withhold the candy…then that is a noble thing to do.

If you don’t know someone is allergic, and you give candy and they are harmed, it’s not your fault…it’s not wrong.

Now, if someone was allergic to candy, and you didn’t know it… but you are withholding candy from them out of pure selfishness… I would say that is wrong. It’s the intent of the heart that makes it wrong. In your position, having the candy, you are being mean. I guess it could turn out to be a good thing in some very rare cases, but we’d have to take it case-by-case to really decide. From a 3rd person omniscient perspective, it’s easy to say “good thing that kid with the candy didn’t share!” but I think its the intention that counts. In terms of “good and evil”, God judges the heart. Besides, there are worse fates than death.

Selfishness itself, when you have enough to provide for others, is wrong.

 

[lemondiesel]

Now, if someone was allergic to candy, and you didn’t know it… but you are withholding candy from them out of pure selfishness… I would say that is wrong. It’s the intent of the heart that makes it wrong. In your position, having the candy, you are being mean. I guess it could turn out to be a good thing in some very rare cases, but we’d have to take it case-by-case to really decide.

Selfishness itself, when you have enough to provide for others, is wrong.

I am holding the candy out of pure selfishness, but you beg, beg, beg and beg some more and finally I just say whatever here is your candy no more! My pure selfishness could have saved your life, but you persisted to continue to try and get what you wanted, perhaps out of greed and jealousy?

 

[Garyjohn2]

I am holding the candy out of pure selfishness, but you beg, beg, beg and beg some more and finally I just say whatever here is your candy no more! My pure selfishness could have saved your life, but you persisted to continue to try and get what you wanted, perhaps out of greed and jealousy?

Hmm! Very interesting. That could be a good way of looking at it.

Would you say I would have gotten my…just desserts?
LOL

Seriously though, that might be an example where a virture (sharing) gets turned rotten by a vice (greed).

We have to remember though, that when it comes to Good and Evil…what they are and why they are important…we have to know that saving a life is not the greatest good, even though life is very precious, and important. Someone might be wicked all their life, and in the process accidently save some earthly lives…but would they still go to heaven for doing the right thing?

 

[lemondiesel]

We have to remember though, that when it comes to Good and Evil…what they are and why they are important…we have to know that saving a life is not the greatest good, even though life is very precious, and important. Someone might be wicked all their life, and in the process accidently save some earthly lives…but would they still go to heaven for doing the right thing?

Now it comes to defining what good and evil actually mean. Can one only describe good and evil for each situations? (meaning does it change for every situation?) How do we know what truly is good and evil, are these just concepts created by human beings to describe different situations?

If saving a life is not the greatest good, then why do Christians fight to end abortion? No need to continue on this, I was just stating a question that might make you ponder a bit on your statement.

Would that person still go to heaven? I am not a Christian, but if my memory is correct, as long as that person doesnt commit a mortal sin (maybe its another name) then God is always willing to forgive.

I think in order to even answer my question, we must decide how valuable life is. Is life a coincidence or is it the most precious thing conceivable?

I do thank you for giving your (name removed by moderator)ut.:coffeeread:

 

[lemondiesel]

Hmm! Very interesting. That could be a good way of looking at it.

Would you say I would have gotten my…just desserts?
LOL

Seriously though, that might be an example where a virture (sharing) gets turned rotten by a vice (greed).
?

Another situation I pondered over is,

Lets say I was a millionaire, and since I have sooo much money, I am going to give some to you. You are poor, homeless and need any help you can get. So I give you $100,000 cash!!! EXCITING I KNOW. Now, What if you decided to go gamble and test your luck. You bet it all, and lose. It leads to you getting killed because you can’t pay your losing.

Should I have been selfish and kept it to myself? I tried to be nice but I played a part in ruining your life. Is this guilt on me or you?

 

[fhansen]

Humans are born into a state of existence separated-emotionally and in terms of faith and obedience- from the God who created them. This state is called Original Sin and it is evil by virtue of the fact that God is ultimate goodness and any part of creation separated from or in rebellion against Him is inherently disordered. This was accomplished by the will of man. Man is not evil to any degree-He was created by God who created all things good. But to the extent that man does not yet love God, let alone fully believe in Him, with his whole heart, soul, mind and strength and his neighbor as himself, he’s still is in a state out of concert with his own nature and the goodness of creation.

 

[reggieM]

Another situation I pondered over is,

Lets say I was a millionaire, and since I have sooo much money, I am going to give some to you. You are poor, homeless and need any help you can get. So I give you $100,000 cash!!! EXCITING I KNOW. Now, What if you decided to go gamble and test your luck. You bet it all, and lose. It leads to you getting killed because you can’t pay your losing.

Should I have been selfish and kept it to myself? I tried to be nice but I played a part in ruining your life. Is this guilt on me or you?

How do you know that my getting killed “ruined my life”? Was I not going to die sometime anyway? The thing that matters is my eternal destiny – not my material success in this temporal existence.

Guilt and conscience point to accountability. In other words, you’re wondering about the demands of justice.

How your guilt is judged will depend on the laws and the lawgiver.

In this case, you’re talking about a metaphysical justice. You say that “I can’t pay my losing” so I get killed. But this is a future state. What if I don’t get killed by my children’t children have to suffer poverty and get killed because of the action?

If you want to know how this is judged and determined after I am dead, or if it will make some kind of difference – then you really need to consider Who is judging these matters in the end.

In the Catholic worldview, the morality of various actions is determined by their intrinsic value (something is good or evil in itself), and then the motive. Intrinsically evil acts can never be made good by one’s intention. But potentially good actions can be made evil by one’s intention.

If the intention is good, then the act is good. If evil results from a good-intended act, then the evil has some other source than the good act.

Pain or pleasure, success or failure, wealth or poverty, long life vs short life – these are not the ultimate measures of what is good or evil.

In other words, we don’t judge the moral value of the action by the result but by the nature of the act and the motive.

 

[Garyjohn2]

Now it comes to defining what good and evil actually mean. Can one only describe good and evil for each situations? (meaning does it change for every situation?) How do we know what truly is good and evil, are these just concepts created by human beings to describe different situations?

If saving a life is not the greatest good, then why do Christians fight to end abortion? No need to continue on this, I was just stating a question that might make you ponder a bit on your statement.

Would that person still go to heaven? I am not a Christian, but if my memory is correct, as long as that person doesnt commit a mortal sin (maybe its another name) then God is always willing to forgive.

I think in order to even answer my question, we must decide how valuable life is. Is life a coincidence or is it the most precious thing conceivable?

I do thank you for giving your (name removed by moderator)ut.:coffeeread:

Yes, good conversations. I was away from my computer for the weekend.

Good and evil don’t change…they are real things. However, our perceptions of good and evil can change, and different situations can be shades of gray. Some situations may contain both good and evil, and some situations can be better or worse than others. Good and evil are not for us to define, but we can define certain actions as good or bad, based on our own conscience. The “twist” here is that to properly judge a situation or event as good or evil, our consciences must be properly formed…not just what “feels” or “seems” right or wrong. This formation includes learning from the age-old wisdom of the Church…and paying attention to the word of God, who is the actual definer of Good and Evil. There is true wisdom there.

Saving a life is one of the greatest goods, but I don’t think it is the greatest good. All life ends…but a soul is eternal. Saving a soul is a greater good than saving a life. Abortion is terrible, because it is the killing of an innocent life. This is indeed terrible! Not only that though, but it also turns someone else into a murderer, which puts their soul in peril. Both those reasons together is why abortion is so bad.

Life is a miracle, and all life has a place in God’s plan. It is all precious…and the senseless destruction of it is terrible. However, I’m not sure if I would call it the most precious thing conceivable. Our immortal souls are infinitely more precious than our earthly lives, because they last infinately as long. The love of God (right now in my mind) is the most precious thing conceivable.

I’m not an expert on all of these things, but it is my understanding!

Also, I know you wanted to veer away from overly-religious language…but the deeper you dig, the more you will hit the “foundation” of what we think and why.

 

[Garyjohn2]

Another situation I pondered over is,

Lets say I was a millionaire, and since I have sooo much money, I am going to give some to you. You are poor, homeless and need any help you can get. So I give you $100,000 cash!!! EXCITING I KNOW. Now, What if you decided to go gamble and test your luck. You bet it all, and lose. It leads to you getting killed because you can’t pay your losing.

Should I have been selfish and kept it to myself? I tried to be nice but I played a part in ruining your life. Is this guilt on me or you?

$100,000 cash is indeed very exciting! It’s a great act of charity to a poor stranger. This act would be rewarded! Who knows why you chose this particular poor person…maybe you liked their look, or maybe your heart was moved and this man was in the right place at the right time.

Either way, the poor man should see this as a gift from God. He randomly received a gift from a stranger. What what it that moved the rich man to give, all of a sudden? What events in the poor mans life lead up to him standing on that corner at that very moment the receive the gift? It was pure fate.

Now that the poor man has the funds, it is his free will that will decide it’s use. Gambling is not a sin in itself, but to squander one of God’s gifts is. If he has a family to take care of, or other responsibilities to take care of (including care of his own body through food and such), he is misusing the resouces that have been entrusted to him. This is wrong. If someone killed him because of his losing, the sin of murder would be on the killer, not the gambler.

In addition! If the gambler was gambling with money he didn’t have, and that is why he couldn’t repay the debt, then that might be condidered stealing (depending on the circumstance). That’s wrong too.

Again, I’m no expert, but I think I have it mostly right here.

 

[inocente]

Should I have been selfish and kept it to myself? I tried to be nice but I played a part in ruining your life. Is this guilt on me or you?

I’d say that giving $100,000 to someone without following through is not in itself very moral.

In the parable of the Good Samaritan, the Samaritan doesn’t give the poor guy money to get a cab to hospital, he does a much better job. Another example - A beggar asks you for money for food and you give him some, but unknown to you he’s an alcoholic. He buys booze and later that day dies of alcohol poisoning. A more moral action may be to buy him a burger and make sure he eats it. Assuming you first check he isn’t one of those professional beggars with a Cadillac around the corner of course.