erika said:
All due respect, I totally disagree with you here. And I also admire Nietzsche despite his theological missteps. You'll have to show me the evidence that we are "born good."
by being born "good" i mean humans arent prone to evil when theyre born, it's the conditions they come from which shape them. i would personally say that humans have an inbred sense of right or wrong, and that's something that we fight when we do evil acts.
there's only preliminary research on this but this is a pretty good argument here:
Wilson's
the Moral Sense
he relies heavily on darwin, and essentially says that there are certain codes and rules that have become universal b/c they fit our own "selfish" interests. ie, we have an innate sense to protect our children and not murder, in order to propogate our genes.
what i was getting at, w/ the loaded phrase "innately good" was that there seems (from my POV) to be more good acts than evil. i dont see ppl commiting evil acts b/c theyre actually evil or just want to do bad things, but b/c of a host of environmental conditions.
(also, these guys here also do a fairly good job of summarizing the research:
http://www.bostonreview.net/BR30.5/saxe.html )
i think youre right in that the word "good" is somewhat useless, the better term would be "innocent", as in they have a clean slate.
i dont believe in original sin. i dont believe we're prone to evil and that we need a savior to die for us in order to enter paradise.
that's also something nietzsche and rand believe in.
If you have children, you should know that babies are not born caring about anyone else. They come out of the womb completely self-obsessed and desiring nothing more than having the world cater to their needs. Empathy, IMO, is learned over time, not inborn. There is also some medical evidence to suggest this as well. (development of mirror neurons)
that's not "evil" or "sinful". youre positioning selfish survival instincts against a sense of right or wrong. that doesnt really work.
we can say that by and large, a mother is automatically protective and loving of her child even if she originally did not want him/her. that is not something that is learned, but innate.
we can say that the vast majority of humans, even when living in horrible abusive conditions, still somehow exhibit empathy. for example, an abused child might be antisocial, but be loving and caring with a pet dog.
there are a few exceptions to this, of course, some1 that's become a pathological sociopath is a good example.
Realize that Lord of the Flies is one of my all-time favorite books, so you see how I lean. But really, we are not basically good. And I think when we start thinking that way, we run the greatest danger of catering to our perceived "goodness." Technically, we should see ourselves as neither good or bad, but in fact see the self for what it is, a creature of our own design. (That sounded freaking new-agey and I hate that.)
i actually never read of LOF. i know i should.
but from what im reading here is that youre willing to say that we are essentially "innocent" and that we become what we become b/c of ourselves (and ill add environment).
if that's your position, its totally reasonable.
my main argument and my main belief has always been against the concept of original sin/a predisposition towards evil.
great discussion though. you def. got me thinking. id say more, but i gotta run for now.