Are humans inherently good or evil?

[Scrat-]

"If man is left to his own notions and conduct, he would certainly turn out the most preposterous of human beings. The influence of prejudice, authority would stifle nature in him and substitute nothing.”

~ Jean-Jacques Rousseau [1712 - 1778]

Rousseau is well-known for his belief that man is born good, but corrupted by society. He claims that a man who is guided to nothing but his own nature will turn out as a pure, kind human being. His theory is not much his own. Mencius [372 - 289 BC] made the very famous claim that man is born fundamentally good. It's a topic often discussed when confronted by criminality, children, and parenthood.

His philosophy is famously challenged by Xun Zi [312 - 230 BC], who claimed that humans are born evil. He points out that desire lies in the core of humanity.
"A person is born with feelings of envy and hate. If he gives way to them, they will lead him to violence and crime, and any sense of loyalty and good faith will be abandoned."
He says that any good action is a conscious, deliberate activity. A person has to make effort to be good, a person 'fakes' to be good, so to say.

So what do you think? Are people born inherently good, or inherently evil? No answer can be right or wrong, just voice your opinion.

[ChaffyExpert]

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Messaggio originale di Dr. Rocket:

But by not doing it you mark them as atheists :P
I disagree it's easy to get out of it. Lots of people doubt.
Generally the society is hostile to religion anyway.

By not baptising them, you do not mark them as anything. It should be simple logic.
And your victimism is laughable. Are you seriously suggesting that society is hostile to religion?
Of 7 billions people only 1 is nonreligious. You're in the majority, and I can't see how a small minority could possibly bully the rest. Theocracies are the places where atheists and other minorities have a bad time, but I know no "atheocracy" where religious people are subject to discrimination.

Actually, there is an atheocracy.

It's called a Dictatorship. Religious people have, in the modern world, been killed in the name of non-religion, just like they have in the name of religion. Some athiests are just as bad as religious people.

Also, that 6 billion people that are religious are not unified, so when the nonreligious gang up with other religions to persecute a specific religion, such as Christianity, they outnumber them and can bully them.

Politics 101, find the common enemy.

[Gen X]

Messaggio originale di ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍:

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Evil, obviously.

Otherwise, Liberals wouldn't exist.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, don't start

lol

*Ed Mcmahon voice* HEREEEES TRADDDY

[Zubenelgenubi]

Messaggio originale di ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍:

And yet you miss the point of your own statement. Those children shape their ideals based off experience. Their social experience help shapes it more than their environment.

Your Arguement is entirely based off your moral decision of good versus evil. To which, for you there is a standard, which is lie, as a person who was raised differently has a different view of good versus evil,

You don't seem to understand i'm not arguing everything you say, just some part of it. So don't try to use things we agree on as evidence i don't know what i'm saying.

And it's not some abstract moral thing for me. I do agree that they both have their place in the world, but to say they don't exist at all is insanity.

[Ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍]

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Messaggio originale di Marco:

By not baptising them, you do not mark them as anything. It should be simple logic.
And your victimism is laughable. Are you seriously suggesting that society is hostile to religion?
Of 7 billions people only 1 is nonreligious. You're in the majority, and I can't see how a small minority could possibly bully the rest. Theocracies are the places where atheists and other minorities have a bad time, but I know no "atheocracy" where religious people are subject to discrimination.

Actually, there is an atheocracy.

It's called a Dictatorship. Religious people have, in the modern world, been killed in the name of non-religion, just like they have in the name of religion. Athiests are just as bad as religious people.

An atheocracy or lack of religion does not dictate a a moral culture. especially in regards to a less religious society that makes moral decisions. If you can, outside of moral dogma, discover a trope to follow outside of weaponised moral belief, I would welcome it.

[Ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍]

[quote=Zubenelgenubi;1474221865193193627}

You don't seem to understand i'm not arguing everything you say, just some part of it.
And it's not some abstract moral thing for me. [/quote]
So...

Sujective

[Marco]

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Messaggio originale di Marco:

By not baptising them, you do not mark them as anything. It should be simple logic.
And your victimism is laughable. Are you seriously suggesting that society is hostile to religion?
Of 7 billions people only 1 is nonreligious. You're in the majority, and I can't see how a small minority could possibly bully the rest. Theocracies are the places where atheists and other minorities have a bad time, but I know no "atheocracy" where religious people are subject to discrimination.

Actually, there is an atheocracy.

It's called a Dictatorship. Religious people have, in the modern world, been killed in the name of non-religion, just like they have in the name of religion. Some athiests are just as bad as religious people.

Also, that 6 billion people that are religious are not unified, so when the nonreligious gang up with other religions to persecute a specific religion, such as Christianity, they outnumber them and can bully them.

Politics 101, find the common enemy.

Name one "atheocracy" where the law actively persecute religion to accommodate the atheist majority.

In the meantime, take a look at this:
https://www.google.it/amp/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/29/which-countries-still-outlaw-apostasy-and-blasphemy/%3famp=1
And have a gander at this:
https://www.google.it/amp/www.independent.co.uk/life-style/the-13-countries-where-being-an-atheist-is-punishable-by-death-a6960561.html%3famp

[ChaffyExpert]

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Actually, there is an atheocracy.

It's called a Dictatorship. Religious people have, in the modern world, been killed in the name of non-religion, just like they have in the name of religion. Some athiests are just as bad as religious people.

Also, that 6 billion people that are religious are not unified, so when the nonreligious gang up with other religions to persecute a specific religion, such as Christianity, they outnumber them and can bully them.

Politics 101, find the common enemy.

Name one "atheocracy" where the law actively persecute religion to accommodate the atheist majority.

U.S.S.R. is the first one to come to mind, it isn't for a atheist majority, but it did persecute Eastern Orthodoxy Christians in order to strengthen the secular state because they wanted people worshipping the state, not god. Nazi Germany and several other dictatorships have done the exact same thing, because religion is a threat to the control a secular government has.

[Marco]

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Name one "atheocracy" where the law actively persecute religion to accommodate the atheist majority.

U.S.S.R. is the first one to come to mind, it isn't for a atheist majority, but it did persecute Eastern Orthodoxy Christians in order to strengthen the secular state because they wanted people worshipping the state, not god.

Cool, one country that *did* persecute one specific religion at one point. If you know a little bit of history though you'll know there were many more places in which apostasy was punished by religion, so it doesn't say much. And you still haven't answered my question: can you name one "atheocracy" that PERSECUTES (not persecuted) religious people?

If you take a look at my last post, I edited it so it now includes a list of countries where apostasy is punished (even by death) NOWADAYS.

[WhispersOfTheWind]

I'd say in this sense that by ''default': (being)' 'natural' makes more sense, and then with distinct "variations" within. It's all a matter of (personal) choice and opinion really, I think.

I think ultimately it all depends on the situation, the judgment and perhaps the qualities/talents of the individual if not for their shortcomings.

This of course apart from individual, or individuals counts for the collective as well (as in it dictates their behavior) although in this sense of the collective people are nowadays most, mostly more charitable then times before. But that aside. I think that helps in a general sense of moving forward, together like.

Charitable in the sense of not just materialism but also of opinion and positive influence in a collective sense.

[Ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍]

Oh good lord. The sheer nature of good and evil is subjective. Every person has a different, based off culture, development, and experience,

To refuse to see so it the height of ignorance. And yet a still valid choice

[ChaffyExpert]

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Messaggio originale di Traror:

U.S.S.R. is the first one to come to mind, it isn't for a atheist majority, but it did persecute Eastern Orthodoxy Christians in order to strengthen the secular state because they wanted people worshipping the state, not god.

Cool, one country that *did* persecute one specific religion at one point. If you know a little bit of history though you'll know there were many more places in which apostasy was punished by religion, so it doesn't say much. And you still haven't answered my question: can you name one "atheocracy" that PERSECUTES (not persecuted) religious people?

If you take a look at my last post, I edited it so it now includes a list of countries where apostasy is punished (even by death) NOWADAYS.

I listed more than one country, and North Korea still persecutes religious people, but it doesn't matter, the original statement is that athiests can't persecute and bully religious people and religion, which is thoroughly disproven.

[Zubenelgenubi]

Messaggio originale di ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍:

Oh good lord. The sheer nature of good and evil is subjective. Every person has a different, based off culture, development, and experience,

To refuse to see so it the height of ignorance. And yet a still valid choice

There's really just moral relativism and objective morality.

[Ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍]

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Cool, one country that *did* persecute one specific religion at one point. If you know a little bit of history though you'll know there were many more places in which apostasy was punished by religion, so it doesn't say much. And you still haven't answered my question: can you name one "atheocracy" that PERSECUTES (not persecuted) religious people?

If you take a look at my last post, I edited it so it now includes a list of countries where apostasy is punished (even by death) NOWADAYS.

I listed more than one country, and North Korea still persecutes religious people, but it doesn't matter, the original statement is that athiests can't persecute and bully religious people and religion, which is thoroughly disproven.

The original statement is are if if that are people selective beyond personal selection in regards to belief. .

[ChaffyExpert]

Messaggio originale di ⓥenom Ⓢnake 🐍:

Messaggio originale di Traror:

I listed more than one country, and North Korea still persecutes religious people, but it doesn't matter, the original statement is that athiests can't persecute and bully religious people and religion, which is thoroughly disproven.

The original statement is are if if that are people selective beyond personal selection in regards to belief. .

what?

[Marco]

Messaggio originale di Traror:

Messaggio originale di Marco:

Cool, one country that *did* persecute one specific religion at one point. If you know a little bit of history though you'll know there were many more places in which apostasy was punished by religion, so it doesn't say much. And you still haven't answered my question: can you name one "atheocracy" that PERSECUTES (not persecuted) religious people?

If you take a look at my last post, I edited it so it now includes a list of countries where apostasy is punished (even by death) NOWADAYS.

I listed more than one country, and North Korea still persecutes religious people, but it doesn't matter, the origional statement is that ahtiests can't persecute and bully religious people and religion, which is thoroughly disproven.

That wasn't the main point. Apparently yeah, North Korea discourages religion, and I was wrong in saying there's no place where this is the case. But still, it's one case against, have you read how many I provided? The point I was trying to make is that religious people should stop playing victim, when the numbers are clearly in their favour.