Man is inherently good/evil
- Thread starter cleanbluesky
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 1,297
- Location
- London
Stag said:
Not sure why ... But i'll check it out if I can
AcidHell2 said:
So you are saying people in third world countries are living on animal instincts?
Balddog said:
I agree. I think we are basically animals driven by our instincts and tribal/herd nature! Whether or not that makes us good or evil all depends on how you define those words. Although i think the evidence provided by history would suggest to me tht as a species we are more evil than good!
Due to the fact that good and evil are purely subjective, answering this question just provides a mirror back to ourselves and how we have been treated in life, or would treat others.
If the answer given is that 'man/mankind is inherently evil', then the person may have seen/learned/endured enough to show that to themselves, the same can be applied for stating that man/mankind is inherently good.
At the end of the day man/mankind has a great potential to be good or evil
If the answer given is that 'man/mankind is inherently evil', then the person may have seen/learned/endured enough to show that to themselves, the same can be applied for stating that man/mankind is inherently good.
At the end of the day man/mankind has a great potential to be good or evil
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 1,297
- Location
- London
WhyohWhy said:
You have been watching too many movies.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2003
- Posts
- 8,107
cleanbluesky said:
Man is Man
The word Evil……is a very strong attribute to have chosen to label man as and looking at the dictionary definition here interested me:
Dictionary said:
And with this I reference to evil as a noun and Idiom.
Last edited:
Zefan said:
Really? Do you mean to suggest an evil-do-er is doing good in the eyes of those who are also evil? Similarly, is a do-good-er doing evil in the eyes of those who are also good?
Since it is possible for a man to be both good and evil at the same time, yet the evil course tends to be the simplest solution, i believe man to be inherently good because if the inverse were true we would only ever seek evil deeds.
It is also possible to be entirely good by rejecting evil deeds but it is impossible to be entirely evil because some evil deeds may be for the greater good.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 1,297
- Location
- London
Clinkz said:
No. Its subjective to whoever experiences these deeds. People who are not involved in the situation and are not observers don't care and don't judge these things.
The person doing it might not realise it is "evil" by your definition. They might know it's not good - but not to the point of it being evil.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 1,297
- Location
- London
Clinkz said:
Youre not getting my point. Evil is only evil in the eyes of an observer who thinks it is evil.
How can you force your cultural values on others who might not feel the same way ?
Things which might be considered evil here might not be in the Far East.
"Evil" as you seem to put it is some sort of moving goalpost which varies from person to person. Is it excusable ? Depends on the cultural climate of where the deed was committed and whether it is considered evil there.
So committing "evil" here is not excusable (whether the person knows it is evil or not) as whatever is done needs to fit into the local cultural framework. But you cant translate the same deed to some other country and call it evil.
