People: Inherently good or Inherently evil?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James_2_24
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jman507 said:
I would disagree with you on the part that if taught in love and given security the child will overcome. My arguement is over “will,” I think would propose that it is not “will,” but “in a better position to overcome.” I would still say while it may be generally true someone in an environment of love and security may do better than someone in the opposite environment, humans are of the such you will be able to find exceptions to the rule easy enough.
Click to expand...
True, but I have a lot of HOPE when I teach a child.🙂 Peace.
 
Nothing inherently evil, that is, evil in its substance, purpose and will, can exist. Since all existence is drawn from God, who is infinitely good, that which is evil can only be said to be unlike God. Evil is therefore not its own reality. It is a perversion of something that is good.

Even in the examples cited by your opponent, the actors involved do not do an evil thing because it is evil, as would be required by any inherently evil entity, they do it because they hope to achieve some good for themselves. That humans seek their own good, even if their methods are flawed, is itself an answer to the inherent evil argument. An inherently evil being can’t work towards good for anything or anyone, including himself.
 
The question is a false dilemma. The proper answer is: neither.

Humanity is inherently good, but fallen. We are created in the image and likeness of God. That’s GOOD folks. It’s why we DO have the capacity to love, to give, to be selfless…

But there was that fall. As a result, we have a tendency towards the vices: gluttony, sloth, lust, pride, rage… These are the sources of our problems.

False worldviews almost always fall into one error or another. Those who view man as inherently good tend to view societal problems as being solely caused by external influences. By making such a fundamental mistake, they ensure that they will NEVER make any progress on fixing things.

Those who view man as fundamentally evil tend to eventually view all matter as evil and disengage in the hope of a spiritual reality in the future that will be free of the corrupting influence of ‘the flesh.’

IMO, this is one of catholicism’s crown jewel teachings that needs very badly to be further reinforced!
 
manualman said:
The question is a false dilemma. The proper answer is: neither.

Humanity is inherently good, but fallen. We are created in the image and likeness of God. That’s GOOD folks. It’s why we DO have the capacity to love, to give, to be selfless…

But there was that fall. As a result, we have a tendency towards the vices: gluttony, sloth, lust, pride, rage… These are the sources of our problems.

False worldviews almost always fall into one error or another. Those who view man as inherently good tend to view societal problems as being solely caused by external influences. By making such a fundamental mistake, they ensure that they will NEVER make any progress on fixing things.

Those who view man as fundamentally evil tend to eventually view all matter as evil and disengage in the hope of a spiritual reality in the future that will be free of the corrupting influence of ‘the flesh.’

IMO, this is one of catholicism’s crown jewel teachings that needs very badly to be further reinforced!
Click to expand...
When teaching VERY YOUNG children, one can see they have NOT YET been influenced by the outside world. If IDEALLY they could be brought up with the idea of their being inherently GOOD instead of what you hear from parents, ie. S/he’s such a bad girl/boy, there may be fewer misfits in the world. If a child is given the dignity s/he needs to grow as God naturally intended, we would have less strife in the world. Read “The Absorbant Mind” by Maria Montessori, first woman doctor in Italy, ca. 1900s. She was also a Catholic of course.🙂 Peace.
 
elt1956, You just crossed the line I warned about.

Those wonderful innocent children will STILL inevitably grow up to struggle with sin because sin is NOT just the result of external pressures, but the effects of Original Sin. That is on the inside, not just the outside. When a movement expresses a belief that all corruption is the result of external influence, it has already lost the battle.

Absolutely, do your best as a parent to preserve the innocence of your kids, but even if you do a perfect job of it your kids still won’t grow up to be perfect.
 
manualman said:
elt1956, You just crossed the line I warned about.

Those wonderful innocent children will STILL inevitably grow up to struggle with sin because sin is NOT just the result of external pressures, but the effects of Original Sin. That is on the inside, not just the outside. When a movement expresses a belief that all corruption is the result of external influence, it has already lost the battle.

Absolutely, do your best as a parent to preserve the innocence of your kids, but even if you do a perfect job of it your kids still won’t grow up to be perfect.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. :highprayer: Peace.
 
Evil does not exist, it is a word we made up to explain an absence of good. This is from the internet: (abridged to fit protocal)
“Nothing,” the student replies. “I only have my faith.”
“Yes, faith,” the professor repeats. “And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.”
The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. “Professor, is there such thing as heat?”
“Yes,” the professor replies. “There’s heat.”
“And is there such a thing as cold?”
“Yes, son, there’s cold too.”
“No sir, there isn’t.”
The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. “You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.”
“Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.”
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.
“What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?”
“Yes,” the professor replies without hesitation. “What is night if it isn’t darkness?”
“You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use to define the word.”
“In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?”
The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. “So what point are you making, young man?”
“Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.”
The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. “Flawed? Can you explain how?”
“You are working on the premise of duality,” the student explains. “You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.”
“It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.”
“Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?”
“If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.”
“Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.
“Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?”
The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.
“To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.”
The student looks around the room. “Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?” The class breaks out into laughter.
“Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelt the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.”
“So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?”
Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.
Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. “I guess you’ll have to take them on faith.”
“Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,” the student continues. “Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?”
Now uncertain, the professor responds, “Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”
To this the student replied, “Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.”
The professor sat down.
PS: the student was Albert Einstein
 
Gil_M said:
Evil does not exist, it is a word we made up to explain an absence of good. This is from the internet: (abridged to fit protocal)
“Nothing,” the student replies. “I only have my faith.”
“Yes, faith,” the professor repeats. “And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.”
The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. “Professor, is there such thing as heat?”
“Yes,” the professor replies. “There’s heat.”
“And is there such a thing as cold?”
“Yes, son, there’s cold too.”
“No sir, there isn’t.”
The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. “You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.”
“Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.”
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.
“What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?”
“Yes,” the professor replies without hesitation. “What is night if it isn’t darkness?”
“You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use to define the word.”
“In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?”
The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. “So what point are you making, young man?”
“Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.”
The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. “Flawed? Can you explain how?”
“You are working on the premise of duality,” the student explains. “You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.”
“It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.”
“Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?”
“If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.”
“Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.
“Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?”
The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.
“To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.”
The student looks around the room. “Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?” The class breaks out into laughter.
“Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelt the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.”
“So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?”
Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.
Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. “I guess you’ll have to take them on faith.”
“Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,” the student continues. “Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?”
Now uncertain, the professor responds, “Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”
To this the student replied, “Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.”
The professor sat down.
PS: the student was Albert Einstein
Click to expand...
Wonderful!!👍
 
The easy answer is that people are inherently good simply because God created us in His image and in each of our hearts He placed a yearning for Him. He who is all good, all loving…He created us to love Him back!

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat
 
Because of the sin of Adam, people are indeed inherently evil. That is why everyone must believe and be baptized. But Baptism does not relief the temptations caused our basic flawed nature. That is why the Sacrament of Penance was instituted.

Someone who prayed to be relieved of temptation asked Mother Angelica why after he prayed for three hours his temptations became threefold. She responded that without temptation, we would not be able to overcome it to gain God’s blessing. She told him that if he was given three times as much temptatation, then he had three times more opportunity to please God. Her reasoning and wisdom are unassailable.
 
Bob_Rowland said:
Because of the sin of Adam, people are indeed inherently evil. That is why everyone must believe and be baptized. But Baptism does not relief the temptations caused our basic flawed nature. That is why the Sacrament of Penance was instituted.
Click to expand...
Nope! There is an enormous difference between good, but fallen and ‘inherently evil.’ An entire encyclopedia can be filled with the logical outcome of failing to comprehend the difference! The idea of ‘inherently evil’ man is one of Calvin’s basic mistakes and arguably THE one that lead to the rest of his theological disasters.

Its called the narrow way for good reason!
 
James_2_24 said:
I was in a discussion with a co-worker who believes people are inherently evil and I argued that people are inherently good.

His argument was very similar to this one which I found on ConvinceMe.net:

People are inherently bad.

ARGUMENT 1: People show no regard to welfare of others, and help people only when THEY get something.
Click to expand...
All people act with an element of Self-motivation. When I help the lady who just dropped all her groceries, I do it, because I’d like some-one to help me(golden-rule), and It makes me feel good to help another. So my motivation is guided by my own wants.

However, there is a big difference between stupid seflishness and smart-selfishness. There is what is known as immediate gratification(stupid selfishness), and that which is about something bigger than ourselves.

A Nun does not become a Nun, purely for altruistic motives. She believes that this is how she can build a closer relationship with God, so even she will have an element of self-motivation in what she does.

Nothing wrong with admiting that humans act in a way that serves their own purpose. Just depends on what the purpose is.
EXAMPLE: A baby will attempt to take toys from others until learning that sharing will earn their parent’s approval.
Click to expand...
Actually, you will find the behaviour of little girls and little boys to be quite different. Girls have a more concensual decision making process. Reason being, their emotional centre and communication centre is more developed than boys(larger in female brain than male). They will look for affirmation and confirmation from each other and parents because they understand the subtle nuances of another’s communication IE the tightening of their mothers mouth when she’s worried. That’s why baby girls look at faces more often than boys.

Little boys are different, because their emotional centres in the brain develop slower.

A babies attempt to take toys, has to do with their stage in Human development, and nothing to do with people being “inherantly” evil.

The fact that we “teach” our infants to behave civilly, is NOT a very good argument for humans being inherantly Evil. LOL!!
ARGUMENT 2: People are, inherently selfish and only do some thing when they can get something out of it.
Click to expand...
EXAMPLE: those who are altrurists, in the race of evolution, will fall behind and therefore disappear, and only the selfish will survive.
Click to expand...
As can be shown in many other species, this is simply not the case.

For certain Primate species, the male will dominate and females will be submissive. But if an AGGRESSIVE rude male takes charge, the females fight him till he submits then a new decent male monkey takes charge(thats the simple version).

From an evolutionary perspective, social creatures will need to work together. The stronger their capacity to do that, the more they will survive.

Give the Hole in the Ozone as an example. CFC’s were creating huge damage, and the entire world, regardless of religion or culture, or greed stopped manufacturing them.

We CAN do it and we often take great pleasure in helping the needy.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, people are inherently bad and becomes good only after they attain more knowledge.
Click to expand...
Saying we are inherantly bad, but are ONLY good after knowlege, is like saying our “desire” for knowlege has nothing to do with who we are “inherantly”.

Perhaps the reason we crave knowlege, is because it is what helps put us toward a path that is good.

Sorry, but your friend gaves some pretty ****** arguments.
 
Gil_M said:
Evil does not exist, it is a word we made up to explain an absence of good. This is from the internet: (abridged to fit protocal)
PS: the student was Albert Einstein
Click to expand...
Funny…considering Einstein was an Athiest.

Actually I’ll correct that:. No-one really know’s what he was, he tends to be owned by both camps. He disregarded believers as much as he did non-believers.
 
The thread title says it all. Is man’s natural instinct to do good, or to do evil? I’d just like to hear some thoughts on this matter.
 
Man is basically good because he is created in the image and likeness of God. Moreover, God looked at everything that He created and said that it was good.

Unfortunately, the fall of man seriously damaged us. The sin of Adam and Eve carries serious consequences that make us prone to sin. Moreover, we are, as scripture points out, born in unbelief and disobedience.

Without God’s grace we can do only some naturally good things, but we are totally unable to do anything that is pleasing to God. Scripture tells us that anything we do outside of faith is sin.

We are not totally depraved as Calvinists would have us believe, but we have a “total inability” to lift ourselves out of sin or please God. Man is totally dependent on God’s mercy and grace to accomplish these things.

Frank Sheed’s book Theology and Sanity is perhaps the best book ever written describing the effects of the fall. I highly recommend this book along with James Akin’s book The Salvation Controversy. These books go into great depth on the topics surrounding your question and are filled with excellent insights.

I hope this helps.
 
Interesting, but I was hoping for more disucssion than that.😉

What will man do, if left to his own devices?
 
Man will generally act selfishly. Simply look around the world and examine all that is wrong with it. That is natural man at work. Grace up lifts man, while the flesh causes man to sin.

Natural men might not always act in evil ways. Without grace man might operate at a level that is not at the lowest possible state imaginable, but that isn’t saying much. The state of sinfulness would be much worse than it is now. Unfortunately, we have an incredible amount of evil in the world. This evil is the result of the fall.
 
BlaineTog said:
People are inherently selfish, but it doesn’t follow that they are inherently evil. Your average person knows right from wrong and when it comes down to it will generally choose right, but they will take any opportunity to avoid that moment that they can.
Click to expand...
Our inherent selfishness is part of our fallen nature. It helps the Evil One lie to us, but with Christ we can overcome our fallen nature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top