Is mankind inherently evil? Do the countless examples of brutality, greed and murder throughout history speak louder than objective good?
Who's to say they speak louder than the countless examples of compassion, selflessness and empathy?
>Is mankind inherently evil?
No
>Do the countless examples of brutality, greed and murder throughout history speak louder than objective good?
Which would you remember more, being given a cookie or having your wallet stolen?
"If it bleeds it leads"
Define evil.
>>446395
>Is mankind inherently evil?
No
>Do the countless examples of brutality, greed and murder throughout history speak louder than objective good?
Nope, you're just focusing on the bad.
>>446398
If mankind is doomed to fail as a result of our not being cooperative than our nature will have been proven as malicious.
>>446410
There is objective evil.
>>446511
Allow me to rephrase the question. Does man's desire for order and control necessitate the suffering of fellow men?
>>446395
>Is mankind inherently evil?
>next to a photo of some rendition of Ecce Homo
Mankind isn't inherently anything, fuck off.
>>446395
Mankind is inherently selfish.
>>446527
Nope
>>446533
Thrown into awareness free of any biological and environmental influence? I don't know about that one.
>>446535
There are different kinds of selfishness. Mother Theresa could be seen as selfish- she helped others to help herself.
>>446541
Oh, word?
>>446395
>Implying there are only two options, good & evil\
>Implying there is a sharp line dividing them
>Implying we are born one or the other
>Etc…
Same as all the other x/y questions (nature/nurture debate anyone?). In reality there is no one answer. It’s all shades of grey.
So no, human nature is neither good nor evil. It’s both.
>>446395
Define evil
>>446524
Define Objective Evil.
Good and evil are too slippery as concepts to make a meaningful answer.
I'd say humanity is inherently constructive, however. That is often though to be essentially a good thing.
mankind isn't inherently evil.
its inherently illogical though
>>446707
I like that. That's a good answer. But it avoids the question. To say that it's both is to imply that everyone is both or is at least capable of either. Evil is acting on the impulse to do the wrong thing. The wrong thing is usually destructive. How does man's capacity to build the world and beautify it compare with his singular ability to destroy and make ugly?
>>446751
Define illogical
>>446716
It exists
>>446814
Saying a giraffe exists does not define it
>>446814
What does?
And don't say objective evil again, because that doesn't tell me anything about it
[fedora]goodness and evilness are subjective[/fedora]
>>446883
>what is the is-ought problem
>>446796
an ignorance of logic or an inability to correctly apply it
