Are people good or evil?

Light · Post by **Light** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:51 am

koan wrote:

Are people good or evil?

I believe people are essentially good. That is why we have a conscience. If we were evil then our conscience wouldn't weigh on us so heavily when we do hurtful things or see others being hurt.

Would one need a conscience if one does not have evil? The conscience is just the stearing wheel.

Of course we are both good and evil, and to deny our evil, we would deny our good as well, for good and evil need each other.

And evil, devine evil please? And what is good? My evil can be good for me and bad for others and vica versa. My truth is not always another persons truth.

Even more if I say that my truth is good, that could be evil already:)

To deny your own evil, wont make you a good person...Only to accept your evil, will allow you to control it.

Only I am not 100% sure, there is another point of view in my mind as well. I used to accept or like to believe that there is no darkness only abscense of light. And therefor there is no hate only abscence of love.

I don't think the metafor is correct. True, there is no darkness, darkness can not come, only light can disapear or be blocked. It does not get dark outside, its just the earth blocking the light.

But light and darkness are not the same as good and evil...

Well I thought about this a lot and have different theory's I have not been able to turn them into one.

I almost have been breaking my mind about this subject... But more and more I am becoming confinced that they both excist and not parallel because they need each other to stay in balance.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 6:41 am

People are neither intrinsically good or evil, its the actions that they undertake during their lives that defines them. Biologically there is no good or evil, only actions that enhance or retard a species chance to survive, but culturally there is are good and evil choices that we can make (depeding upon the culture). In the Christian framework, war is evil, murder is evil, selfishness is evil, etc, but very few people seem to really believe in those things. Anyway.

eyesofcoal · Post by **eyesofcoal** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:01 pm

i believe that people are usually good on the outside but not on the inside. its just some people who decide to be and say whatever they want

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:50 pm

If a person does something good so that everyone will see what a good person they are... doesn't that take away from the spiritual goodness of the act?

I don't really believe that good and evil exist separately from each other.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:52 pm

koan;935027 wrote: If a person does something good so that everyone will see what a good person they are... doesn't that take away from the spiritual goodness of the act? Yes...I believe it does...Selfishness...

koan;935027 wrote:

I don't really believe that good and evil exist separately from each other.

The entire logic in the concept has to be that way...But I do believe they are mutually exclusive, yet it can appear to others as if evil people can do good acts...John Gotti giving to charity to boost his image among the people comes to mind...

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:04 pm

koan;935027 wrote: If a person does something good so that everyone will see what a good person they are... doesn't that take away from the spiritual goodness of the act?

I don't really believe that good and evil exist separately from each other.
Yes I think motive matters. Someone doing a good thing for show taints the goodness. The ends do not justify the means.

However: There are no purely unselfish acts.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:43 am

Thankfully, the good people in this world far out number the evil .

Good people don't need to change their lives.... it's the bad people who constantly feel the need to reinvent themselves .

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:10 am

Of all the threads on all the forums in all the world, someone had to go and bump this one?

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:29 pm

Out of the worlds population being that of the unthinkable thousands of years ago to add to the fact that the average human beings life expectancy is significantly higher as well, add to that the abolishment of slavery throughout the world and how anyone could feel that the majority of people are evil would be beyond me...I would love some elaboration...

The real question is "are people unethical or ethical?"...

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:44 pm

It's a fundamental axiom of Christianity that through the whole of recorded time every person ever born was inherently evil and hell-bound at the moment of birth (with two trivial exceptions). I think that degree of constant repetition over twenty centuries through the entire Western world has an effect on why "anyone could feel that the majority of people are evil", it's a background fact which has influenced Western philosophy because philosophers who refused to think it tended to get tortured by virtuous priests in pointy black hats.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:51 pm

spot;936289 wrote: It's a fundamental axiom of Christianity that through the whole of recorded time every person ever born was inherently evil and hell-bound at the moment of birth (with two trivial exceptions). I think that degree of constant repetition over twenty centuries through the entire Western world has an effect on why "anyone could feel that the majority of people are evil", it's a background fact which has influenced Western philosophy because philosophers who refused to think it tended to get tortured by virtuous priests in pointy black hats.

You're giving too much credit to individuals and their religious devotion...

From my personal observation I would say that 8 out of 10 people I know consider themselves Christian or Roman Catholic but only 1 out of 10 of them go to church...

I don't see how Christianity has anything to do with whether or not the majority of people are evil or not unless you're suggesting that the majority of Christians are evil...

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:55 pm

K.Snyder;936293 wrote: I don't see how "Christian" has anything to do whether or not the majority of people are evil or not unless you're suggesting that all Christians are evil...We're in the Philosophy forum wondering why philosophers of the Western world have had this notion for so long that people are inherently evil. I'm providing a bit of history explaining why Christianity comes into the answer. The Christians killed philosophers - and anyone else - who said it wasn't true.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:08 am

spot;936296 wrote: We're in the Philosophy forum wondering why philosophers of the Western world have had this notion for so long that people are inherently evil. I'm providing a bit of history explaining why Christianity comes into the answer. The Christians killed philosophers - and anyone else - who said it wasn't true.

Those people claiming to be Christians were wrong.

The concept of religion is for that religion to be "divinely right", therefor anyone claiming to be of that specific religion who commits what morale people consider to be wrongs against humanity those people who committed those wrongs were wrong but their religion shouldn't be blamed...However, when a religion demands for wrongs to be committed upon any life whatsoever as defined by the divinity of morale sanctity that religion is wrong in it's instance...That religion being written by people to whom were wrong...The concept of religion is meant to be infallible...It's up to individuals to understand which instances associated with which religion is morally correct as defined by the divinity of morale sanctity...

You don't have to be religious to be morale and upon the discovering of a religion that is perfect in all it's forms you've discovered the one and only true religion...

The rest are those who go by interpretation being bordered by divine righteousness...Divine righteousness being love and every instance that preserves it...

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:11 am

K.Snyder;936302 wrote: Those people claiming to be Christians were wrong.Those people claiming to be Christians had Papal authority. Christianity is a reasonable term for the Church as well as the turn-the-other-cheek practical religion of the Bible. In this case I use it to refer to the Church.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:14 am

spot;936303 wrote: Those people claiming to be Christians had Papal authority. Christianity is a reasonable term for the Church as well as the turn-the-other-cheek practical religion of the Bible. In this case I use it to refer to the Church.

The Papal authority was written by a person claiming to be correct in his "Christianity" but was wrong in the instances of murder or the torturing of human beings.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:22 pm

My personal observation is that most people who feel the need to consider themselves "christian" are very moral people. However, the same amount of people I encounter that do not claim any religion tend to be very moral as well.

I also believe that many people can be moral individuals yet can be very unethical at times. I personally define morality to be fundamental principles as opposed to ethics from which I consider to be minor glitches some people obviously take enjoyment from...

What I believe, quintessentially, is that most people are born with the potential to partake in good or evil deeds. However, I'd like to stress my personal belief that the context of "good" and "evil" society uses is inaccurate to a much greater extent than most realize. I don't consider many things to be "evil", from which others might, rather, I deem what most see as "evil" to be derived from simple ignorance.

A child growing up without guidance is more prone to make "undesirable choices", as defined by any majority within said society, from which ultimately ends in the interpretation of "evil".

Would "you" consider someone burning another person alive "evil" or the result of ignorance?

I don't see "evil" like others see it. I see choices that can only be defined as "good" or "evil" from which illustrates my belief that people aren't born into anything at all, rather what they eventually choose to be based off of the choices they make.

The real question being are we all divine products of every instance we'd experienced during our childhood or can we truly give meaning to the word "spirit" at all?

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:30 pm

K.Snyder;1271416 wrote: My personal observation is that most people who feel the need to consider themselves "christian" are very moral people. However, the same amount of people I encounter that do not claim any religion tend to be very moral as well. Where I also wanted to go with this is that these statements prove that I feel everyone is never born inherently "good" or "evil" by observing what any particular religion not only accepted but partook in wicked acts to the contrary of the beliefs of individuals that consider themselves followers of that religion today. Obviously those people aforementioned would need to be moral individuals, otherwise you observe the opposite. By no means I consider even a small majority of "christians" to be "evil" regardless of whether or not I have absolutely no use for religion.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:32 pm

The question "Are people good or evil?" gives rise to an observation that I feel defines it quite perfectly!

The answer however has to be dictated by the majority of definitions placed behind religion/atheism. Why?

One has to define what religion or atheism is to themselves.

Firstly, I feel that atheism can only be defined by ones resentment of religion. If this wasn't true there would be no need to even define the word "atheism". I'm not bothered with what's justifiable so I'm left to give my definition of religion.

I feel that religion is an indication of ones desire to see great fortune for life, but this ideology becomes very dangerous when applied to a state of peace!

Without inherent "danger" I see absolutely no need for religion whatsoever and I'll enlighten you as to why now.

Based off of the observation that I feel religion is "an indication of ones desire to see great fortune for life" this means that religion is very dangerous equal to the numbers of peoples living in the world that claim to be religious because this implies that it's "correct" in assuming the majority of the worlds population is "evil". When this happens religions with different ideologies clash and thus you get "war". This also means that because "good" and "evil" is intrinsically applied to the very definition of religion that anyone viewed as being opposed to religion("atheism") is viewed as being "evil" which is entirely why you get the word "inquisition". This proves that religion is disastrously rude, ignorant, selfish, and very definitively evil when applied to a state of peace.

"religion" is a very cynical ideology when derived from peaceful backgrounds and is very uncouth!

It's, albeit not funny, but ironic that "religion" is also very expected when applied to states of war. It's entirely how the question "Are people good or evil?" comes about

This also proves why I feel that "evil" is a misguided definition, bound by the aforementioned definitions, and is viably unnecessary and cynical!

I much prefer "ignorant". At least this way we can strive forward to a possible cure but because I know Natural Selection to be apart of God I'm afraid this might take quit a very, very, very, very, very, very long time :yh_tired

I'll do my part, can you do yours!?!??!??!? :yh_wait

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:08 am

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I can't help myself... therefore I must by definition be inherently evil...

GUFFAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:27 am

Neither, it is just that good people can do incredible evil things. The worst of which is indifference. Those who choose not to act against evil acts are contributors to evil.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:24 am

Hannibal I believe is a primary example of my knowledge to this

He was brainwashed at an early age to despise Romans by his father

How is it one could consider this "evil" as opposed to "ignorant"?

Sure he "committed" what might appear to be "evil" acts but if the beginning point is of one origin the end must be of the same, which defines the latter more accurately. It's entirely why I use the expression "The ends justify the means, ALWAYS!" because the saying is correct in both ways just the ends are more easily perceived

Lest, of course, one could care less about all life from which the entire worth of the individual need not be concerned about at all!

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:47 am

AussiePam;1277260 wrote: :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I can't help myself... therefore I must by definition be inherently evil...

GUFFAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You couldn't be because "evil" doesn't exist :yh_wink