Small Questions - Part 1

[Doctor_Wu]

I have a few small questions for the group...

And i hope the podium regulars will indulge my need to know the answers. :look:


First question...


Are people basically good?



(((EDIT)))
To clarify... the "No" option should not be construed as suggesting that you think people are basically bad. Feel free to clarify your answer with commentary... as some already have.

[Drio]

I voted no. I get amazed sometimes when people just seem to think about themselves. This applies to all sorts of things.. inconsiderate neighbors cranking their boom systems knowing it can be heard for 3 blocks.. just inconsiderate things like that. So many people actually get a kick out of ruining someone elses day! I dunno, maybe I'm just noticing the bad more than the good. I guess I'm torn between the two.

[newtbomb]

No, people are only interesting in doing good things if it benefits themselves in some way.

[cosmic_kid]

I voted good, because of the ability of the human spirit to triumph over adversity! And voting no would make me more depressed... :P

[Flatline]

I voted "YES"...I believe that we are at a basic level good or at least completely neutral...I think that bad behavior is learned, and that good behavior is a basic instinct if you will to keep our species at the head of the food chain... ;)

[dalesd]

I like this question.

If you believe that people are inherently evil, then why would you ever want to elect someone who's basically evil to lead you? There's no guarantee that you'd get a 'good' person to be your leader. In fact, since evil people are more likely to seek power, the chance that you'll elect someone evil increases.

If you believe that people are inherently good, there's no reason to have a government to lead you. If people are good, they can be counted on to do the right thing, and don't need the force of government to impose goodness on them. Plus, as in the case above, you still have the problem of the few evil ones seeking power.

Some psychologists will say that this question is like a mirror. If you feel that you are basically good, you tend to see the good in other people. And vice versa.

I hope this doesn't spoil your question. If it does, PM me and I'll change it to a [spoiler] or something.

[danlbuckley]

I voted no. People are swayed by the ruler of this world, who is hostile to God. It is only their fear of God or their fear of being punished by legal means that keeps us relatively civil.

[Drio]

I like this question.

If you believe that people are inherently evil, then why would you ever want to elect someone who's basically evil to lead you? There's no guarantee that you'd get a 'good' person to be your leader. In fact, since evil people are more likely to seek power, the chance that you'll elect someone evil increases.

If you believe that people are inherently good, there's no reason to have a government to lead you. If people are good, they can be counted on to do the right thing, and don't need the force of government to impose goodness on them. Plus, as in the case above, you still have the problem of the few evil ones seeking power.

Some psychologists will say that this question is like a mirror. If you feel that you are basically good, you tend to see the good in other people. And vice versa.

I hope this doesn't spoil your question. If it does, PM me and I'll change it to a [spoiler] or something.
Indeed.. a very simple.. yet great question.

Your point regarding this question being like a mirror.. there's another point of view as well. I find myself in disbelief when I see people acting selfishly because it's not what I would do myself. If someone were to look around and think "All these people are acting much like myself.. and I'm a good person.. I don't notice anything wrong with their behavior.."
Your argument still stands of course.. just another way of thinking about it.

I notice I seem to go back to equating "good" to being considerate of others.. am I alone in that thinking?

[Drio]

I voted no. People are swayed by the ruler of this world, who is hostile to God. It is only their fear of God or their fear of being punished by legal means that keeps us relatively civil.
The ruler of the world is hostile to God? What do you mean?

[XXnarg]

It's not for me to judge others like this.

[Drio]

It's not for me to judge others like this.
And the winner of the 'easy way out' contest is..... Xnarg!!! Show our contestant what he's won!! ;)

We judge people in here all day long.. why stop now?

[XXnarg]

And the winner of the 'easy way out' contest is..... Xnarg!!! Show our contestant what he's won!! ;)

We judge people in here all day long.. why stop now?Sorry, on this website I judge ideas, statements, posts, images, discussion, etc., but not people.

I leave that judgment stuff to those who think they are worthy, :lmao:

[Drio]

Sorry, on this website I judge ideas, statements, posts, images, discussion, etc., but not people.

I leave that judgment stuff to those who think they are worthy, :lmao:
Liberals aren't people? ;)

Why do people get the 'high and mighty' feeling by 'not judging'? You know damn well you've got opinions and thoughts on it. We aren't deciding if Johnny goes to hell and Suzie goes to heaven. We're debating human nature.

[mrlaugh]

I voted "YES"...I believe that we are at a basic level good or at least completely neutral...I think that bad behavior is learned, and that good behavior is a basic instinct if you will to keep our species at the head of the food chain... ;)

I think I'd argue its learned to be either good or bad, and it's much, much easier to learn to be bad, so I voted no :cool:

[XXnarg]

Liberals aren't people? ;)

Why do people get the 'high and mighty' feeling by 'not judging'? You know damn well you've got opinions and thoughts on it. We aren't deciding if Johnny goes to hell and Suzie goes to heaven. We're debating human nature.Why do you introduce the term "Liberals" to this discussion?

I guess we're talking about different things. I focus on the effects of a person's actions and behavior, not whether or not the person himself is good or bad.

People seen as good can do bad things. People seen as bad can do good things. Arguing over the person and not the action is a waste of time.

The truly easy way out is to pin labels on everyone and everything. Enjoy! :lmao:

[Aluvus]

Why do you introduce the term "Liberals" to this discussion?
Funnily enough, other people are able to remember posts you made, say, yesterday. Even if they weren't in this thread.

[XXnarg]

Funnily enough, other people are able to remember posts you made, say, yesterday. Even if they weren't in this thread.Yes, some people do seem obsessed, don't they? :bounce:

I wonder if those same people remember the posts I make attempting to help others in the tech support and other forums, or if they just focus on my political statements?

[Drio]

Yes, some people do seem obsessed, don't they? :bounce:

I wonder if those same people remember the posts I make attempting to help others in the tech support and other forums, or if they just focus on my political statements?
Are you kidding me? You can't walk 5 feet without muddying things with liberal slams! I brought up liberals because you bring them up often.. and silly enough.. mostly in the context of "I bet a liberal would think this.. or do that". I wouldn't have brought it up.. but to claim a non judging behavior.. I don't think so. And I'm not saying judging is a bad thing mind you.. I'm not on your case for that, I find it quite natural and I dare say, unavoidable.

I certainly wasn't saying that you fit into the category of a 'bad person' at all! (Is that why you mentioned your efforts in the tech lounge??) I think our political views have very little to do with any 'good or bad' nature we may have in us. I think it's much more simple than that.

[Flatline]

I think I'd argue its learned to be either good or bad, and it's much, much easier to learn to be bad, so I voted no :cool:

I disagree...if we were not born with instincts telling us NOT to just go out and harm as many as possible or by as evil as you can t each other, then the species would die off...and propagation of the species is a basic quality of every species on the planet...I dont believe in absolute evil or good, and since I believe that good is overwhelmingly the norm in our society then evil must be learned...otherwise evil would be the norm, and NOT the exception. True? ;)

[XXnarg]

Are you kidding me? You can't walk 5 feet without muddying things with liberal slams! I brought up liberals because you bring them up often.. and silly enough.. mostly in the context of "I bet a liberal would think this.. or do that". I wouldn't have brought it up.. but to claim a non judging behavior.. I don't think so. And I'm not saying judging is a bad thing mind you.. I'm not on your case for that, I find it quite natural and I dare say, unavoidable.

I certainly wasn't saying that you fit into the category of a 'bad person' at all! (Is that why you mentioned your efforts in the tech lounge??) I think our political views have very little to do with any 'good or bad' nature we may have in us. I think it's much more simple than that.WOW! :lmao:

[The Raddish]

"Evil spelled backwards is "live", and we all want to do that now, don't we?"

--three mod respect points for anyone who can tell me the movie that came from. Bonus if you can tell me the character's name that spoke those words.


EDIT: Just so you know, Google won't help you on this one. The flick is quite obscure.

[Drio]

WOW! :lmao:
Just because you're laughing doesn't mean you're right. Sorry. You want a list of Xnarg quotes that contain "I bet the liberals..*derrogatory comments*..." or "If I thought like a Democrat.."?

I actually missed your earlier post:

I guess we're talking about different things. I focus on the effects of a person's actions and behavior, not whether or not the person himself is good or bad.

People seen as good can do bad things. People seen as bad can do good things. Arguing over the person and not the action is a waste of time.

The truly easy way out is to pin labels on everyone and everything. Enjoy! :lmao:
Maybe we are going about this question in different ways... Sooo, by this reasoning, if I were helping a little old lady cross the street, but a piano falls from the sky and lands on her as we cross... I'm 'Bad'.

Or, say I'm doing something 'bad', like throwing a live baby into a dumpster. That child would have grown up to be the next Hitler! But now I'm "good"? Because the outcome was good? We have little to no control of outcome of our actions. All we have is our intentions.

I found this answer to fit the bill the best so far:
No, people are only interesting in doing good things if it benefits themselves in some way. Sad but true I think.

[Danman114]

"Evil spelled backwards is "live", and we all want to do that now, don't we?"

--three mod respect points for anyone who can tell me the movie that came from. Bonus if you can tell me the character's name that spoke those words.


EDIT: Just so you know, Google won't help you on this one. The flick is quite obscure.
Google knows all...

[pperry0501]

I voted "YES"...I believe that we are at a basic level good or at least completely neutral...I think that bad behavior is learned, and that good behavior is a basic instinct if you will to keep our species at the head of the food chain... ;)


I disagree. I think that people are born "bad" and it is a natural instinct. If people were born good, children would not have to be taught how to "be good." They wouldnt be tempted to steal candy from a store, or tell a lie to get out of trouble with their parents. People are naturally selfish, among other things, and must be taught to behave otherwise.

[Digerati]

blank slate.

[dalesd]

"Evil spelled backwards is "live", and we all want to do that now, don't we?"

--three mod respect points for anyone who can tell me the movie that came from. Bonus if you can tell me the character's name that spoke those words.


EDIT: Just so you know, Google won't help you on this one. The flick is quite obscure.

"Rock & Rule"
The character that spoke that line was "Mok"

[XXnarg]

...Maybe we are going about this question in different ways... Sooo, by this reasoning, if I were helping a little old lady cross the street, but a piano falls from the sky and lands on her as we cross... I'm 'Bad'.

...We have little to no control of outcome of our actions. All we have is our intentions...As I've said before, I don't judge the person, so I'm not going to say that lady herself was good or bad. I'll judge her action and the effect.

Yes, I agree that intentions are important, but they aren't enough. We have to factor in the actual result. The person who saves the child from the burning building does more good than the person who merely intends to do it but doesn't.

Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones. All men mean well.

[adams135]

Are people basically good?

Depends upon what your definition of good is and what you mean by people (all people, most people, some people).

[Drio]

As I've said before, I don't judge the person, so I'm not going to say that lady herself was good or bad. I'll judge her action and the effect.

Yes, I agree that intentions are important, but they aren't enough. We have to factor in the actual result. The person who saves the child from the burning building does more good than the person who merely intends to do it but doesn't.


Ok gotcha. I was moreso arguing on the side of intentions that are carried through and put into action. Just thinking about something doesn't help/hurt anyone.

And true.. I'm sure Saddam meant well in his own whacked out mind.. but the results are hard to argue as being "good". All a matter of perception I suppose.

Wu? Do we get another question today? :bounce:

[dalesd]

Are people basically good?

Depends upon what your definition of good is and what you mean by people (all people, most people, some people).

Don't forget "Are" and "basically". :P

Soemone famous once said:
"It depends on what your definition of "is" is." :lol:

(Explanation for the grammar impaired: 'are' and 'is' are both forms of the same verb, 'to be')

[Doctor_Wu]

blank slate.


I agree.


Man is born innocent.

Neither good nor bad. Both can be taught. Both can be learned.

[Flatline]

I disagree. I think that people are born "bad" and it is a natural instinct. If people were born good, children would not have to be taught how to "be good." They wouldnt be tempted to steal candy from a store, or tell a lie to get out of trouble with their parents. People are naturally selfish, among other things, and must be taught to behave otherwise.

This is why I stated I dont believe in pure bad or good...just to clarify, if the kid is too young to know the rules of society (dont steal, dont lie, etc) he or she cannot be deemed bad or good but learning instead...as a child grows he/she tests the bounderies that they can sucessfully get to (stealing a candy, telling lies, etc)...selfishness is not a trait that is overwhelmingly prominent in our society, if it were then charities would be bankrupt, hardly any money would have been gathered for the tsunami victims, etc. Unfortunately the selfish ones in society these days get the press coverage, not the good deeds...I know you are religious perry so I dont think you believe your last post completely, if we are born bad then a child that dies at say one or two months old goes to hell? I am pretty sure you dont agree with that, kids dont come out wanting to harm others and steal and lie and do bad things, children are born innocent, arent they?...if bad were the norm then the world would be one hell of a cesspool, even more than it already is! :nod:

[Slavakion]

People are only as good as they are. Hmm... that didn't come out right. People have an equal capacity for goodness or badness. It's all about personal choices and how the person was raised. Then again, how are you defining "good"?

[pperry0501]

This is why I stated I dont believe in pure bad or good...just to clarify, if the kid is too young to know the rules of society (dont steal, dont lie, etc) he or she cannot be deemed bad or good but learning instead...as a child grows he/she tests the bounderies that they can sucessfully get to (stealing a candy, telling lies, etc)...selfishness is not a trait that is overwhelmingly prominent in our society, if it were then charities would be bankrupt, hardly any money would have been gathered for the tsunami victims, etc. Unfortunately the selfish ones in society these days get the press coverage, not the good deeds...I know you are religious perry so I dont think you believe your last post completely, if we are born bad then a child that dies at say one or two months old goes to hell? I am pretty sure you dont agree with that, kids dont come out wanting to harm others and steal and lie and do bad things, children are born innocent, arent they?...if bad were the norm then the world would be one hell of a cesspool, even more than it already is! :nod:
I agree and disagree. When children are of the age that they were to lie or steal, I believe that they DO know what they are doing is wrong. For example, if a child brakes a vase, and knows it was bad, and that they are in trouble, they will lie to get out of it. They know that its wrong but dont want to get in trouble. I believe that children are born both innocent and with a sin nature. Theres a difference between doing something wrong and knowing you did something wrong. If you got pulled over for speeding, but you didnt see a speed limit sign, the officer is going to give you a ticket anyway. The same is with small children-they may not KNOW that theyre doing wrong, but they naturally tend to do bad things. I dont think that small children go to hell either. It is when they reach an age of understanding and they KNOW what is right but still do wrong that they are held accountable.

[Parafly9]

Gees these "Small Questions" are a good series, Wu.

I like this one. I say "Yes" inherently good. I would guess that upon birth given no outside influences people would be inherently good. I guess this depends on how you define "Good", but I think most people would not murder, etc., unless it were a survival issue or something else. I don't think they would do something considered "bad" without an ulterior motive.

[Candide]

I agree.


Man is born innocent.

Neither good nor bad. Both can be taught. Both can be learned.

My dealings with small children have led me to believe we are born selfish and greedy. We will remain that way unless we are taught differently.

[Hurricane]

My dealings with small children have led me to believe we are born selfish and greedy. We will remain that way unless we are taught differently.

I completely agree!

[paperboy05]

My dealings with small children have led me to believe we are born selfish and greedy. We will remain that way unless we are taught differently.

I would have to agree also. Working retail you learn that people are inherently @$$holes.

[ImaginaryFriend]

Its an entirely subjective question.

Good or bad in what way?

Good according to religion?

Good as in good enough to survive?

Good as in good soldiers?

Good as in good to society?

Its an open-ended question. Answering it is like looking in a mirror. Its a reflection of what you are or think you see.......

[Parafly9]

I would have to agree also. Working retail you learn that people are inherently @$$holes.

Selfish & Greedy, and even being in Arsehole, doesn't necessarily make you "bad" though.

For example, animals killing each other isn't bad when they do it for food. Likewise, if a human had to kill another human for food, I wouldnt' call that being "bad" if it were in a vacuum. However, if a human killed another human just for the enjoyment of it ... or if a human stole from someone just for the hell of it, then that would be bad.

[Candide]

Its an entirely subjective question.

Good or bad in what way?

Good according to religion?

Good as in good enough to survive?

Good as in good soldiers?

Good as in good to society?

Its an open-ended question. Answering it is like looking in a mirror. Its a reflection of what you are or think you see.......

That's why I couldn't bring myself to vote for either absolute choice in the poll.

[Slinger]

My dealings with small children have led me to believe we are born selfish and greedy. We will remain that way unless we are taught differently.huh?! Maybe those children were raised from selfish and greedy parents.

[Neo Tocqueville]

Man is born innocent.

Neither good nor bad. Both can be taught. Both can be learned.

Thought you might like the more nuanced approach taken by the Quran on this topic.


Of particular interest in the model of the self is the concept of ‘Nafs’ - the Arabic word used in the Qur’an and translated as ‘self’ or ‘soul’. Due to the different possible states of the self, different types of ‘Nafs’ have been described in the Quran. From the Islamic point of view Nafs can be good or evil as it can be pulled toward higher potentials of the self or lower potentials of the self (Quran, 95:4-6 (http://www.geocities.com/masad02/095.html)). Earthly existence is about choice - which way will we go? Again the idea of the journey of the self is important. We are capable of choosing various paths - some which are consistent with Islamic aim in life and others which are not. The point is that the self is always in a dynamic flux - the same person experiences different states within themselves at different times.

Three important states of the self mentioned in the Quran include:

Nafs Ammara (the commanding or lower self) Quran 12:53 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/012.qmt.html). This self is prone to the lower aspects of the self, representing the negative drives in man. It can be viewed as analogous to the Freudian concept of ‘id’ e.g ‘I want to do it now… I don’t care if it’s right or wrong.’

Nafs Lawwama (The self reproaching self) Quran 75:2 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/075.qmt.html) This state corresponds to the self when it becomes aware of wrong- doing and feels remorse. A parallel between the Freudian concept of ‘superego’ and nafs lawwama may be drawn. The feeling of “I shouldn’t have done that” or “why did I do that – I wish I hadn’t…”

Nafs Mutmainnah (The peaceful self) Quran 89:27-28 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/089.qmt.html) This is the state of inner peace and happiness, when you feel satisfied and content in yourself. This is the state that we are aiming to achieve. In order to achieve the state of tranquility and peace one has to activate the remorseful self (e.g. through sincere repentance) and control the lower commanding self (through self discipline).
[Source: Towards Islamic Psychology (http://www.quranicstudies.com/article42.html), by Salma Yaqoob]

[Candide]

huh?! Maybe those children were raised from selfish and greedy parents.

No, it's a temporary state with the children. As soon as they have teeth you have to watch them with other small children. Peaceful conflict resolution is learned. It's not a natural inclination. They want - they take.

[Jhaan]

I tend to think most people are kind and not evil. But if I use the definition of "righteous" for good, then I'd have to answer no to your poll.

[paperboy05]

Selfish & Greedy, and even being in Arsehole, doesn't necessarily make you "bad" though.

That's an excellent point Para. Although I do agree with you I think the general thought when thinking of those 2 (or 3) words is that the majority of the time it is bad, ergo, the person[s] is/are bad. Probably not the truth, but IMO just the general perception when dealing with those "attributes" of a person.

[Parafly9]

That's an excellent point Para. Although I do agree with you I think the general thought when thinking of those 2 (or 3) words is that the majority of the time it is bad, ergo, the person[s] is/are bad. Probably not the truth, but IMO just the general perception when dealing with those "attributes" of a person.

I understand the connotation.

I just think we need to be careful to define "Bad" at the beginning of life. Taking things for your own survival I don't think qualifies as intrinsically "bad" or "evil" behaviour. Animals do it, and I don't think that is "bad" either .

I would classify truly "bad" behaviour as taking in excess, taking when not needed, and so on. I suppose it would be "excessive" behaviour.

[paperboy05]

I would classify truly "bad" behaviour as taking in excess, taking when not needed, and so on. I suppose it would be "excessive" behaviour.

Is that your only prerequisite (for the lack of a better word) to be bad, or is this just a major player in your mind?

[ASG]

I understand the connotation.

I just think we need to be careful to define "Bad" at the beginning of life. Taking things for your own survival I don't think qualifies as intrinsically "bad" or "evil" behaviour. Animals do it, and I don't think that is "bad" either .

I would classify truly "bad" behaviour as taking in excess, taking when not needed, and so on. I suppose it would be "excessive" behaviour.
Isn't that the definition of greed?

[talgot]

Gees these "Small Questions" are a good series, Wu.

I like this one. I say "Yes" inherently good. I would guess that upon birth given no outside influences people would be inherently good. I guess this depends on how you define "Good", but I think most people would not murder, etc., unless it were a survival issue or something else. I don't think they would do something considered "bad" without an ulterior motive.

I would disagree to an extent. But I will admit this view is based on my faith in God, so take it as you will... We are born of our father, that father being sin, that sin coming from the time of adam and eve giving this world to satan. We were given dominion of this world from God. We gave dominion to Satan. We are subsequently born of sin and on our own would tend toward bad. But as all things we can learn goodness and be good. But our nature is that of self and sin.

I would also ask would ,per your requisits, excess love and good will be greed and or wrong by your definition?

[Parafly9]

Is that your only prerequisite (for the lack of a better word) to be bad, or is this just a major player in your mind?

Major player. I'm sure there's more to it than that. I don't want to oversimplify what truly being "Bad" represents.

[Parafly9]

Isn't that the definition of greed?

Well... yes. I haven't thought about it enough to truly define it in this context. I was trying to draw a line between doing things that might be considered "bad actions" in civilized society to what truly is "bad". For example, I think someone who is born and was held away from societal influences; if they were hungry, they probably would take a loaf of bread from a market... I wouldnt' consider that "bad", even though it is a crime in our society. If the same person now killed someone for no good reason except malicious intent, then that WOULD meet my definition of "bad". If someone steals for some intrinsic satisfaction of stealing, that would be bad... but not if it is for hunger or some other reason.

I would also ask would ,per your requisits, excess love and good will be greed and or wrong by your definition?

How would excess love or greed be wrong? I'm not sure I understand your point.

When you say you believe Human are essentially Bad at birth, what do you mean?

Do you mean they would grow up and kill for no reason, harm for no reason, take pleasure in the suffering of others, and so on?

[talgot]

How would excess love or greed be wrong? I'm not sure I understand your point.

I was going off your definition of excess being bad. I was asking how does that fit your definition.

When you say you believe Human are essentially Bad at birth, what do you mean?

I don't think we are bad as far as intent at birth. I believe we are born of sin, meaning our nature would tend towards bad. I don't think at birth we are capable of being bad till its learned or the ability through consciousness or understanding develope.

Do you mean they would grow up and kill for no reason, harm for no reason, take pleasure in the suffering of others, and so on?

Not neccessaraly. Why kill if you could enslave others for more benefit to you? It depends on the influences you have. They are key to what your actions will be.

[paperboy05]

Major player. I'm sure there's more to it than that. I don't want to oversimplify what truly being "Bad" represents.

Gotcha, thanks. :iagree: with what you said then.