Is man inherently good or evil? To answer that question we will examine humanity’s past and present acts. We will discuss the causation of man through their natural acts, through wars, conflicts and common acts of violence. We will show that humanity is neither inherently evil nor good. However, we often settle our personal disagreements through common violent acts. Wars are fought because we want to establish our dominance or have some kind of agenda. Briefly mentioned are some common theories suggesting the reasoning behind such wicked behaviors. Also discussed is the examination of each team member’s personal values, which is an idea, accepted by individuals or a group; beliefs are any cognitive content held as true; morals are principles of right and wrong or, conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles. These are based in cultural and social constructs which vary from culture to culture. Thomas Hobbes, a 17th century philosopher viewed human beings as naturally egoistic creatures who seek their own welfare, even if this leads to aggression against others. Hobbes argued that people join into society to gain security from others. A century later Jean-Jacques Rousseau disputed Hobbes’ theory, and in 1762 Rousseau wrote humans are natural compassionate loners. But, unlike animals, human behavior is not determined by instinct; human behavior is acquiescent; it changes in the societies within which humans live. Rousseau argues that the violent traits that Hobbes attributes to human nature are actually caused by the type of society in which people live and not essential human nature (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 2007).
The principles that determine the character of man are morals, values and beliefs. It is within these principles that will decide whether humanity is inherently good or evil.
In our team, we have individuals whose beliefs, morals and values have some faith-based influence and others whose beliefs, morals and values are a product of their surroundings such as family and friends or people of influence. Rupert and Danielle’s beliefs, morals and values have a foundation based in faith: treat others as we want to be treated, the importance of honesty and putting education first from childhood was instilled. Family and church shaped the foundational teachings that are a part of their everyday lives as adults. These foundational tenets are what forms and shapes their core beliefs. Stacey, Heidi, and Pamela’s core beliefs are a direct result of family upbringing, which has become a part of their personal philosophy. Education is of value to our team as well and it is because of that core value that Danielle, Pamela, Rupert, Stacey and Heidi returned to school.
Further, throughout history decisions and acts based on values, morals and beliefs have sometimes led to evil acts, costing millions of lives. In an editorial titled, “Who will deliver Darfur from Evil?” the author described reports of people thrown into fires, partially skinned and injured (2005). So, why do people commit evil acts? According to Yaakov Astor, the answer includes “avoiding the negative clears the path of our inherent goodness” (2003). Thus, we can avoid the negative to bring out our goodness. Is this possible? Adolf Hitler chose to prey on people’s fears, and “terror [was] his principal means to achieve his ends; and he became in the eyes of virtually the whole world an incarnation of absolute evil” (2005).
Let us give a definition to evil and then draw some connections to why this behavior occurs on an individual level. Accepted by most, the definition of evil is a wicked behavior or inflicting some form of harm to another. Thus, based on the definition we have concluded that there is a correlation between evil and crime. Therefore, from this information we will safely say that any crime that includes malice is an evil act because it is with deliberate intent to cause harm to another by infringing on their basic human rights.
If criminal acts and evil may be linked, it is important to further investigate why humans commit such evil acts on one another. To explain this, there are biological, environmental and free will based theories. Pier and Levitt (2008) have paid much attention to the biological aspect of evil. Their studies have shown that genes can depict the personality of an individual. Additionally, Cesare Lombroso’s most popular work The Criminal Man in 1911 mentioned the idea of being biologically predisposed to evil. Lombroso’s theory does not outwardly discuss genes but thoroughly discusses its foundation of atavism. Atavism is the idea that people of an evil or criminal nature have not fully evolved. His earlier writings suggest that atavism can be seen because of the physical features of those individuals which is the result of their biological make up.
To know that a person can be predisposed biologically to be evil, we will also look at the other main theories. Sociologists would argue that the environment is the cause of evil behavior, and theorize that our negative and wicked acts are a direct product of our environment. One of the most acknowledged in this theory is Edwin Sutherland. The Differential Association theory states “Individuals become predisposed toward criminality because of an excess of contacts that advocate criminal behavior” (Hagan, 2008, p. 158). Sutherland and his Differential Association theory are vital to understanding why people can be influenced into following through with such negative acts. There are nine propositions to support Sutherland’s theory. “1. Criminal behavior is learned; 2. Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication; 3. The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups; 4. When criminal behavior is learned, it includes: (a) techniques of committing crime, which are sometimes very simple; and (b) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes” (Hagen, 2008, p. 159). This theory clearly shows how individuals are easily coursed into committing evil acts. The final theory is free will. The idea of free will is most associated with Cesare Beccaria, who argues that individuals choose to be wicked and commit terrible acts on each other to gain something for selfish reasons. This gives rise to the theory that humanity is, in fact, evil. Beccaria’s insight into punishment is extensively documented; he believed it should be swift and certain. None of these theories stand alone. When combined, they document that a person is more likely to commit an evil act if he or she chooses to if they have the gene and are taught the behavior. Often these criteria make a person a high-risk candidate to commit criminal or evil behavior. Thus, it is arguable that it may be harder for humans to commit good acts and much easier to commit evil ones.
As youth and adolescents, individuals often commit crimes. These crimes, though small, do however inflict pain on others whether emotional or physical. For example, repeated vandalism can cause massive amounts of stress to a victim or even physically harm them. A child or children do not fully understand the kind of damage he or she is causing; it is just harmless fun. These types of acts don’t necessarily graduate into more serious acts but the seed and inclination is there. Either the bad ingrained behavior is instinctive because of environmental programming, because of conditioning or because of predisposition; it is there nonetheless. For example, a child at age three breaks a vase, their parent tries to discover who did it and the toddler lies to his or her parents. The capacity for self-preservation is instinctive and one the child manifests through lying. These simple acts explain the true nature of humanity and that is to be evil. Though evil is within our nature, we do have the ability to make choices and develop morals, values and beliefs that have a positive foundation that enables us to make the best choices.
Thus, whether humanity is inherently good or evil is more complex than these two binaries can answer. It is a combination of factors that include environment, society, and culture as well as inborn genetic traits that coalesce into specific behaviors, whether they are criminal or evil in nature. It’s not as simple as black and white, and as many theories attest, there are shades of gray that combine to lead to what we may call “evil” behavior. At best, humans are a myriad of choices they make, experiences they have, and the environment in which they live. It is no doubt, however, that whatever our morals, values and beliefs develop into influence our behavior and whether we categorize it as “good” or “evil.”
References
Aronson, E, Wilson, T, & Akert, R. (2007). Social psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Astor, Y. (2003). Human Nature: Inherently Good or Evil? Ethics of the Fathers 1:7.
Hagan,F. (2008). Introduction to Criminology. Thousand Oaks, Califorinia: Sagee Publications.
Pieri, E., & Levitt, M. (2008). Risky individuals and the politics of genetic research into aggressiveness and violence. Bioethics, 22(9), 509-518. Retrieved from MEDLINE with Full Text database. Who Will Deliver Darfur from Evil? The Lancet. Feb 12-18, 2005. Vol.365 (9459), pp. 545-6.
Adolf Hitler. (2005). In Great Lives: A Century in Obituaries. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com/entry/collinsgl/adolf_hitler
References: Aronson, E, Wilson, T, & Akert, R. (2007). Social psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Astor, Y. (2003). Human Nature: Inherently Good or Evil? Ethics of the Fathers 1:7. Hagan,F. (2008). Introduction to Criminology. Thousand Oaks, Califorinia: Sagee Publications. Pieri, E., & Levitt, M. (2008). Risky individuals and the politics of genetic research into aggressiveness and violence. Bioethics, 22(9), 509-518. Retrieved from MEDLINE with Full Text database. Who Will Deliver Darfur from Evil? The Lancet. Feb 12-18, 2005. Vol.365 (9459), pp. 545-6. Adolf Hitler. (2005). In Great Lives: A Century in Obituaries. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com/entry/collinsgl/adolf_hitler
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
References: Franzoi, S. L. (2009). PSY 110: Social psychology: 2009 custom edition (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Custom Publishing, P.37-39.…
- 430 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Meyer, John P.; Becker, Thomas E.; Vandenberghe, Christian. Journal of Applied Psychology89. 6 (Dec 2004): 991-1007. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.apus.edu/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.991…
- 2905 Words
- 12 Pages
Best Essays -
Thomas Hobbes, an Enlightenment philosopher, claimed that mankind is naturally evil and selfish and will cause conflicts “if any two men desire the same thing, which they nevertheless cannot both enjoy” or have differing opinions, in order to gain more power so that they can freely pursue their selfish desires, especially “during the time men live without a common power” and “in that condition which is called war, every man against every man,” and are therefore incapable of self-governing. Hobbes’ position on human nature is easily observable; intolerance and bigotry causes violence and general public…
- 1210 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
References: Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D. & Akert, R. D. (2009). Social psychology (7th ed.). Upper Saddle…
- 1936 Words
- 6 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.) (2010). Handbook of social psychology (5th ed.,Vol. 1). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons…
- 1479 Words
- 6 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Cited: Myers, D. G. (2010). Social Psychology. (10th ed., p. 141, 237). New York: McGraw-Hill.…
- 848 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Man, inherently evil or good? A question that only opinions can answer. What is evil? Killing 'is evil,' rape 'is evil,' torture 'is evil,' and man 'is evil.' History and a certain familiar book show evidence that supports that man is 'evil.' "The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft. interred with their bones," a quote from Shakespeare. The 'good and just' deeds done dies with the people who accomplished it. Nothing is inherently good.…
- 535 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Morals, values, and ethics are one of the most important characteristics of a person. These features define who we are and what we believe in. Many different factors come in to play when determining a person`s morals, values, and ethics; childhood upbringing, later life experiences, family, friends, culture, religious beliefs, race, discussions with others, and many others that have an affect a person’s beliefs (Head, 2006). There are times when a person`s beliefs do not agree with someone else’s, which does not mean that one of these people is wrong, it means that we, as individuals, do not all think the same. As a whole, most people have a good sense of right and wrong, which is to say that for the most part most people have good morals, values, and ethics.…
- 2388 Words
- 10 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Have you ever wondered why your parents teach you manners? Or why they punish your for hitting your sister or biting your brother? Humans must be taught to be good because we are born inherently evil. The definition of evil is being somewhat wicked and immoral. The definition of good is being morally right and having integrity. Now, some people may say that this is a horrible thing to say, but if you think about it, how do all these bad things happen if people aren’t truly bad? Why do we have crime, rape, domestic violence, war, and murder? Not all people do these things and most people believe these are wrong, but there are people who still do it anyway. Humans can be good, if they try; however, humans are born inherently evil.…
- 391 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
References: University of Phoenix. (n.d.). Exploring Social Psychology. Retrieved from University of Phoenix, PSY285 - Social Psychology website.…
- 401 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
There are two conflicting views on human nature. Chinese scholar Hsun Tzu believed that man’s nature is evil and when man acts “good” it is only the result of what he called “conscious activity.” In the text, he describes conscious activity as “the part [of man] that can be acquired by learning and brought to completion by effort.” In other words, Hsun Tzu believed that man is naturally selfish, and that unless there are rules and principles put in place to guide men away from his natural inclinations, society would disintegrate into chaos and violence. Mencius, another Chinese scholar and fellow student of Confucius, believed the opposite. He thought that human nature is ultimately good and that people learn to be evil from various influences and experiences in their life.…
- 997 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
What is thought of as immoral to one person can be seen as ethical to another, and vice versa. This is due to the difference in the way humans perceive things, which is part of the intricacy of mankind. "During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man." (Hobbes) Hobbes states that Humans are naturally evil and need a powerful government to control them. Is it true? Rousseau thinks otherwise. "In reasoning on the principles he (Thomas Hobbes) lays down, he ought to have said that the state of nature, being that in which the care for our own preservation is the least prejudicial to that of others, was consequently the best calculated to promote peace, and the most suitable for mankind man in the state of nature is both strong and dependent involves two contrary suppositions. Man is weak when he is dependent, and is his own master before he comes to be strong." (Rousseau) The issue of good and evil is brought up in "Lord of the Flies" by William Golding, when innocent boys find themselves on a deserted island attempting to create a society similar to ours. What circumstances occur to them? How do past influences affect them? Are their actions good or evil? The actions of the boys were not a matter of being good or evil, but were actions for survival. A person's environment does not draw him towards good or evil, nor is he or she born with it inside. Humans have instincts that are not affairs of good and evil, but of survival.…
- 1497 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
The first proof to support the notion that humans are naturally evil is through the tendencies of human beings to commit crimes. According to Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), who is credited with the development of psychoanalytic theory, all humans have criminal tendencies. Furthermore all humans have natural drives and urges repressed in the unconscious. Through the process of socialisation, however, these tendencies are curbed.…
- 1507 Words
- 7 Pages
Better Essays -
The question of whether man is inherently good or evil has vexed humanity since its appearance. Is man naturally good? Does he live in a state of the noble savage? Or was his natural habitat ,nasty , brutish and short? These questions are important because they help inform the way in which we treat our fellow human beings and structure of society. They also affect the way in which we approach punishment; those advocating utilitarianism tend to view punishment as inherently bad and can only accept its use…
- 930 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
The Question of Humanity’s Morality Are humans inherently good or evil? Some people would say that humans are naturally good and compassionate, and have to try to be evil. Others argue that humans are evil, and to be good we have to overcome the evilness that naturally resides in us. In reality, mankind is neither inherently good nor evil. It is our brain development, upbringing, culture, and environment that determines where people are morally.…
- 923 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays