Humanities Paper
Are human beings born to be good? Or are we naturally born to be evil? Sigmund Freud believed that people were innately bad, and by bad I mean in ways like being destructive, cruel, and selfish. He believed that if it weren't for society telling us what we were allowed to do and what we couldn't, civilization would collapse. These constraints, he believed, created a certain discontent within people. However, Confucius thought the opposite, in which humans are born good-spirited. When I think about this question I would have to agree with Confucius. There is a spectrum of theories that support both good and evil within the human race, each with valid points that explains the range of our interests, being either for ourselves or for others. Past experiences and observations allow me to take the stance, and support the argument that humans are caring and genuinely good individuals and have the will and desire to help those around them.
Some psychologists would agree with Sigmund Freud that humans are selfish, cruel and aggressive. Before Freud come up with his theories, Thomas Hobbes explained his theories about human nature much similar to Freud’s views. Thomas Hobbes declared that primitive human life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Hobbes had a very pessimistic view of human nature and felt that the natural state of humans was much similar to being “beast-like.” According to Hobbes, he claims that, “I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death” (3). Hobbes’ comment makes me almost assume that he sees no good in humans whatsoever and that possibly he was part of the generation when they explained people as “barbaric.” From learning about those times, my only assumption is that Hobbes did not have any encounters or experiences when humans really showed good qualities in certain situations.
Another psychologist that I mentioned early that thought humans are intrinsically bad is Sigmund Freud. Sigmund Freud presents this in his work:
Men are not gentle, friendly creatures wishing for love, who simply defend themselves if they are attacked, but… a powerful measure of desire for aggressiveness has to be reckoned as part of their instinctual endowment. The result is that their neighbor is to them not only a possible helper or sexual object, but also a temptation to them to gratify their aggressiveness… to seize his possessions, to humiliate him, to cause him pain, to torture and kill him (2).
Freud’s explanation here almost puts me in a pessimistic state. I almost feel as if he believes there is no hope for humans and the way that they behave. I would love to question him and ask him whether he thinks that humans are always evil and committing acts of cruelty every second of the day. I would have to argue that I do not believe in Freud’s theory. I just don’t believe that humans are always doing wrong. How many bad things can humans do in one day? In some points in their lives, whether they know it or not, they had made a good gesture that came deep within their hearts. To focus on a more optimistic view about human nature, the philosophers that thought humans were intrinsically good were Confucius and John Locke. Locke believed that people were inherently good. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature is characterized by reason and tolerance. Also Jean-Jacques Rousseau would agree with Locke and Confucius that humans are good. Rousseau declared that humans in early times were “noble savages.” That is, humans are naturally and innately good and it is civilization that turns man into a beast. I would agree with Locke and Rousseau because I think all people are born good willing. I also think that everybody is different and have different perspectives, therefore people have different perceptions on what good really is. Confucius wrote the analects and his work talks about the Golden Rule we know today and how to become a good person. According to Ping Yan in his article states that, “Confucianism that highlights ethic, morality and personal cultivation is pursuing “goodness”. “Goodness” as it implies seeks the inner tranquility and peace of people’s heart and a friendly and harmonious human relation. The main goal of Confucianism is to pursue the “goodness” of people’s inner world, “goodness” among social members and “goodness” among different ranks of society” (109). In my opinion, Confucius had many answers to life that I agree with today. Confucius looked like a very peaceful and inspiring man to learn from. I know he felt that it was best to not only improve yourself but others as well. The comment made above really makes me believe that humans are good. When watching the news all you hear and see about is killings and negative things that people have done. Looking past all of that I still truly believe that people are still innately good. Finally, after researching each philosophy and their thoughts on human nature, I have learned that all philosophers are all right to a certain degree, they are just looking at a different angle. Basically my thoughts are that humans evolved as social creatures, and we are highly cooperative. Our emotions/morality evolved with us, as it helps us bond. Some human behavior are deemed as good, some deemed as evil depending on the observer, good and evil are just a matter of our own interpretations. Being good or being evil is just a label others throw around to manipulate people. The only thing we can be certain of is that, we behave in such a manner to survive, nothing more nothing less. However, my final point about why I still believe that humans are good is that humanity is capable of a more positive and improved way of life today than in the past.
Some psychologists would agree with Sigmund Freud that humans are selfish, cruel and aggressive. Before Freud come up with his theories, Thomas Hobbes explained his theories about human nature much similar to Freud’s views. Thomas Hobbes declared that primitive human life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Hobbes had a very pessimistic view of human nature and felt that the natural state of humans was much similar to being “beast-like.” According to Hobbes, he claims that, “I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death” (3). Hobbes’ comment makes me almost assume that he sees no good in humans whatsoever and that possibly he was part of the generation when they explained people as “barbaric.” From learning about those times, my only assumption is that Hobbes did not have any encounters or experiences when humans really showed good qualities in certain situations.
Another psychologist that I mentioned early that thought humans are intrinsically bad is Sigmund Freud. Sigmund Freud presents this in his work:
Men are not gentle, friendly creatures wishing for love, who simply defend themselves if they are attacked, but… a powerful measure of desire for aggressiveness has to be reckoned as part of their instinctual endowment. The result is that their neighbor is to them not only a possible helper or sexual object, but also a temptation to them to gratify their aggressiveness… to seize his possessions, to humiliate him, to cause him pain, to torture and kill him (2).
Freud’s explanation here almost puts me in a pessimistic state. I almost feel as if he believes there is no hope for humans and the way that they behave. I would love to question him and ask him whether he thinks that humans are always evil and committing acts of cruelty every second of the day. I would have to argue that I do not believe in Freud’s theory. I just don’t believe that humans are always doing wrong. How many bad things can humans do in one day? In some points in their lives, whether they know it or not, they had made a good gesture that came deep within their hearts. To focus on a more optimistic view about human nature, the philosophers that thought humans were intrinsically good were Confucius and John Locke. Locke believed that people were inherently good. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature is characterized by reason and tolerance. Also Jean-Jacques Rousseau would agree with Locke and Confucius that humans are good. Rousseau declared that humans in early times were “noble savages.” That is, humans are naturally and innately good and it is civilization that turns man into a beast. I would agree with Locke and Rousseau because I think all people are born good willing. I also think that everybody is different and have different perspectives, therefore people have different perceptions on what good really is. Confucius wrote the analects and his work talks about the Golden Rule we know today and how to become a good person. According to Ping Yan in his article states that, “Confucianism that highlights ethic, morality and personal cultivation is pursuing “goodness”. “Goodness” as it implies seeks the inner tranquility and peace of people’s heart and a friendly and harmonious human relation. The main goal of Confucianism is to pursue the “goodness” of people’s inner world, “goodness” among social members and “goodness” among different ranks of society” (109). In my opinion, Confucius had many answers to life that I agree with today. Confucius looked like a very peaceful and inspiring man to learn from. I know he felt that it was best to not only improve yourself but others as well. The comment made above really makes me believe that humans are good. When watching the news all you hear and see about is killings and negative things that people have done. Looking past all of that I still truly believe that people are still innately good. Finally, after researching each philosophy and their thoughts on human nature, I have learned that all philosophers are all right to a certain degree, they are just looking at a different angle. Basically my thoughts are that humans evolved as social creatures, and we are highly cooperative. Our emotions/morality evolved with us, as it helps us bond. Some human behavior are deemed as good, some deemed as evil depending on the observer, good and evil are just a matter of our own interpretations. Being good or being evil is just a label others throw around to manipulate people. The only thing we can be certain of is that, we behave in such a manner to survive, nothing more nothing less. However, my final point about why I still believe that humans are good is that humanity is capable of a more positive and improved way of life today than in the past.