Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedAre people inherently good?
Results so far:
| Yes | 62% | 1135 votes | Total: 1838 votes | |
| No | 38% | 703 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesMy view point is being expressed on the "good" side of this debate simply because I have faith in mankind. Simply because I believe, if given the opportunity, people chose good. That someone is born inherently good or bad is starting with the presupposition that "good" and "bad" are definable by something outside of oneself. To have these terms in a judeo-Christian society implies that we are resorting back to the mores and morals of these religions. Judaism teaches that each persons is created with both a Yetzer Tov and a Yetzer Hora. The Yetzer tov, the good inclination, must stand in balance against the yetzer hora, the evil inclination. So in reality the yetzer hora is not an evil thing, but a tool for creating a greater good than blind obedience. Without the Yetzer Hora man would not have free will. I remember a quote from college, but unable to remember it's source, "We are all touched by the wholeness of the human condition". In other words, we are all alike. We have both good and bad, selfish and selfless, virtues and evil, as a part of our being.
Judaism does not believe that "original sin" marred the soul of mankind and we are now all doomed to be evil. Yes, we do believe that Adam sinned. But Adam could not have "sinned" if he had not had free will. Sequentially, he could not have had free will without both the evil and the good inclination. And each person after Adam is created exactly as Adam was created. Adam did make it harder to embrace the yetzer tov because he was cast out of The Garden and further away from the source of all good. We are not hopeless because of his sin, we actually have the potential for more good and well as more evil.
So back to the original question: Is man born inherently good? Life is good. The very instinct of motherhood is to have an emotional attachment with a child even before its' birth. Anyone watching the birth of an infant knows that there is something innate in the birthing process that drives the child to survive, to kick, to scream, to cry for nourishment and nurturing. This is good. This is very good. So yes, I would say a child starts out in life "good", with the Yetzer Tov driving him to LIFE, with the Yetzer Tov driving mother to give and nurture and care. The child experiences good. The very innocence of the child looks for good. But anyone evolved in the rearing of children sees the selfish aspect of survival kicking in, both inclinations struggling against each other, and it is the role of the adult, who has learned the value of good, to teach right and wrong to a child.
This reminds me of a story told by my rabbi about a wise grandfather who wished to explain the concept of the yetzer tov and the yetzer hora to his grandson:
"Avi" he began, " I must tell you something you have not known about your grandfather until now. There are two wolves who live within (and he pointed to his chest). One wolf seeks to make the world one of fighting and hatred, it want it's own way regardless of what it does to others. It wishes to steal from others, to murder, to hate, to be greedy. It will stop at nothing to get it's own way. But," he pauses and smiles,"The other wolf is the good wolf. He wishes to bring G-d into the world by giving to others, by being patient and kind. He wishes the best for all of mankind. He is a wolf that saves others."
The child starred at his grandfather for a few minutes in thought and then asked, "my, my grandfather what will you do about the bad wolf?"
"I will do nothing, child" he replied, "But, I will only feed the good wolf".
So this is why we are good. Because goodness exists, and we are taught to recognize it. This is why we cannot attribute some mysterious demon to the entire Nazi regime. Hitler was a man who fed the bad wolf, to the point that he was totally consumed by his evil inclination. And he taught those around him to do the same. With every minute of our lives we have opportunity to choose to do good...or to choose evil. The one we feed will win.
Learn more about this author, Ginger Betzer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Xunzi, one of three acknowledged Confucian thinkers, advocated for the unique position that man's nature is inherently evil. He argued that human nature cannot be acquired it is "what heaven supplies" and the product is the result of man's efforts. For example, if man has an original nature that is corrupt or bad then it requires ritual, training and knowledge in order for a transformation to occur that brings about a good product. Xunzi's argument is based on three essential premises, human nature "lacks" an innate moral compass and left to itself falls into contention and disorder, people desire the good but need guidance to find it, and all natures are the same in the beginning (unable to overcome/discipline desires) but it is cultivation that creates the difference in our natures.
These points are logical conclusions, if one believes as Xunzi, that human nature is innately bad. If we lack an innate moral compass then it makes sense that we would need heavenly and biblical authority as well as wise counsel to instill morality in our natures. Education and self-knowledge is the key that transforms our natures and without this we are "unable to make the choice to improve" because we lack the ability to discern that we are uncultivated.
Secondl y, although we may desire the good, we are unable to act good without the proper instruction of rituals and morality. He contends that since we all have the nature to follow certain instincts like eating, finding warmth and resting; we may not always pursue these desires with the best possible actions. Thus, education and ritual is crucial in order for desires and feeling to become disciplined aspects of our natures.
Finally, since all natures are the same at the start, then self-cultivation is what separates the brute from the human who has found the Way/Dao. For Xunzi, the three stages of study: scholar, gentleman and sage indicate the transformation of the individual. Yet even at the highest level of cultivation (sage), lifelong learning is necessary because the process of rising above our evil natures is hard and requires diligence, practice and perseverance. He further maintains that humanity has not yet achieved this because "we cannot be forced to [be good]"and although it is difficult, it does not mean that it is impossible. It is difficult because it requires unceasing self-cultivation and vast accumulations of learning, but if one attunes him or herself to the process of transforming and transcending their evil ways, they become noble creatures capable of benevolence or goodness. Thus, development does not bring about cultivation only reformation or transformation
These tools are necessary to bring about the good product that is a possibility in human nature. Without them, we remain morally blind, in a state of disorder, and unable to reform our natures. Even though Xunxi's concept of an original corrupt nature is marginalized, his strongest and most probable strengths lie in his argument that human nature is bad when it lacks life long ritual, education and self-knowledge.
Refer ence
Goldin, Paul Rakita, and Xunzi. The Philosophy of Xunzi. Chicago: Open Court Pub. Co., 1999. Questia. 13 Mar. 2007 .
Learn more about this author, Marsha Russell-Devaney.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Personal Morals & Values
- Can you trust an ex-con?
- Should parents make moral judgments for their children based on their own beliefs?
- Does admitting faults make you a weaker person?
- Is it possible to live a cruelty free life?
- Have you ever made a promise to yourself and never kept it?
- Is wearing fur immoral?
