Humans Are inherently Evil. (Philosophy)

[Asta Kask]

Humans are in an inner struggle between many different impulses, some of which can be labeled "good", some of which can be labeled "evil" and some of which probably can't be classified as neither. And they are organized in hierarchies - after the question "should I eat?" is answered in the affirmative, there's a whole lot of work remaining before the delicious whipped cream appears.

[Lheticus]

As others in this thread have suggested, I would argue that humans are inherently neutral since humans are inherently - and at the most basic level - animals.

Everything beyond this is what society - and growing up in a society - adds to it. Good and Evil are just parts of our behavior which we as a whole find more or less desirable and thus try to emphasize or discourage. There's no kind of human action toward another human being to which you couldn't find an analogous action in the animal kingdom. Murder, nurturing, theft, support, maiming, caretaking - it's all there already and in the big picture it cancels out to neutral. The problem is that "canceling out to neutral" still means that there's a rather large chance of something bad happening to you personally, and this isn't a desirable state for a society to live in. So we pick the more desirable aspects, label them as good and encourage them, while we label what's less desirable as evil and discourage it.

This of course varies from society to society, which is why something that you or me would find extremly evil might be perfectly acceptable someplace else. Essentially, it's the same argument that could be had for right and wrong, except at the extreme ends of the spectrum, since evil generally equates to extremely wrong and good to very right (although obviously not necessarily in terms of law).

I agree--in fact, we humans invented both the concepts of evil AND good. Prehistoric man, the homo habilis, neandethal, cro-magnon and etc had no concept of them beyond "what helps me survive is good, what makes it so I don't survive is evil." It wasn't until we overcomplicated our world that such concepts as good and evil were even relevant.

[hamishspence]

I wonder. Could there have been thugs and bullies back in the Cro-Magnon days - with the others eventually banding together to fight them, and creating cultural taboos against thuggish, bullying behaviour, and calling such behaviour something that translates, approximately, to the word "evil"?

I recall reading a Machiavelli theory that "ingratitude" was the first thing to be recognized as bad by humans, and the ungrateful - those who harmed their own benefactors - penalized by their tribes.

[Asta Kask]

I agree--in fact, we humans invented both the concepts of evil AND good. Prehistoric man, the homo habilis, neandethal, cro-magnon and etc had no concept of them beyond "what helps me survive is good, what makes it so I don't survive is evil." It wasn't until we overcomplicated our world that such concepts as good and evil were even relevant.

How do you know this?

[Mystic Muse]

Anarchy, chaos and entropy do not mean the same thing, order and law do not mean the same thing. Law doesn't even mean the same thing as itself and neither really does chaos or anarchy.

Just throwing around confusing terms does not help. Of all those terms, only entropy really has a meaning because its a scientific term defined in scientific laws.

I see them all used interchangeably quite often in my every day life, with the exception of entropy, though I've seen it used in ways synonymous with chaos a few times.

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/chaos?s=t Not sure how trustworthy this necessarily is, but it lists entropy and anarchy as synonyms of chaos.

Also, it was late, and I rather stupidly said chaos and law are synonyms, when I meant to say either entropy and chaos are synonyms, or order and law are synonyms, though according to that site, the latter are not, so I was definitely wrong there.

[Aliquid]

I agree--in fact, we humans invented both the concepts of evil AND good. Prehistoric man, the homo habilis, neandethal, cro-magnon and etc had no concept of them beyond "what helps me survive is good, what makes it so I don't survive is evil." It wasn't until we overcomplicated our world that such concepts as good and evil were even relevant.

Not true at all.

I will stay away from the word evil, but our concepts of morality are not based on selfish thoughts like that. We are a social species and there are moral concepts hard-wired into our brains that are designed to make us behave in a way that ensures the survival of the tribe, not just the individual.

You can override this hardwiring and act selfishly if you want, but your brain will punish you with guilt (unless you are a sociopath).

[BaronOfHell]

Evil is not not good.

There are stuff which is incapable of intend, hence it cannot be good or evil, like a rock.

The idea of the quote in the OP is that there exists evil, and if no good opposes it, then evil will triumph.

Good simply means with the best intentions, evil means with the worst intentions, there exists intentions which are neither the best, nor the worst towards anyone in particular. E.g. I may not consider my neighbor when I do my dishes (why should I?), so I don't do my dishes with the best, nor the worst intentions towards my neighbor.

[Roland St. Jude]

Aaaaaaand let's stop this line of discussion right here, shall we?

Sheriff: Agreed. The OP offers as assertion too bound up in real world religion and politics to be conducted here.