Human Are Born Evil?

Hereafter is the question by my friend and my opinion.

“Human are born evil?”

It depends how do you define “good” and “evil.”
Selfishness is not necessarily good or evil.

What I mean is that we have no objective and valuable ways to define “good” or “evil.” Some definitions may be accepted by some groups of people, but it does not mean they are correct. If we carefully exam each definition, we will easily notice that all of them, no matter from philosophy, ethics, or religions, are nothing but only preferences among the people, especially in different peoples.

On the other hand, the concept of ethics is only a costless way for us to make some convenient decisions, especially when a person want to live in a specific society. However, it doesn’t guarantee the rules we apply.

Take selfishness as an example. People who provide high-quality goods or services to us are not based on their love for us but their love for money. We all know it. Selfishness performs in a good way, if we define that everyone get benefits from a trade is good. Selfishness can also be evil. If we define that someone kills thousands or million people for keeping his presidency or power is evil, then Mao and Kim Jong-il are apparently evil.

However, some standards are not that prevailed. In most societies, a son cannot marry his mother-in-law; but the same behavior is allowed in some societies, like the Mongolian in the Yuan Dynasty. Some economists believe that it is due to the limited resources in Mongolia. It is apparently difficult to tell whether this behavior is good or evil. Chinese in that time took this as a barbarian behavior.

Conclusively, as we are unable to have an exactly correct standard to make a judgement of being good or evil, we just cannot tell whether the infant is born in good or not.

PS: I wrote here.

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
元毓haoyuansteinalanLi Recent comment authors

這個網站採用 Akismet 服務減少垃圾留言。進一步瞭解 Akismet 如何處理網站訪客的留言資料

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
haoyuanstein
Guest
haoyuanstein

“some standards are not that prevailed. ”
“If we carefully exam each definition, we will easily notice that all of them, no matter from philosophy, ethics, or religions, are nothing but only preferences among the people, especially in different peoples.”
在下贊同這論點。

另外想請教,「平等」、「自由」、「正義」成為目前社會「共識」的原因,如何解釋會較合理?
個人以為是因為推行相關制度的經濟效益,讓採納這些「價值」的組織,在競爭中擊敗不採納的。不採納的組織因而被消滅或改革,採納這些「價值」及以此作為根本的制度。

Li
Guest
Li

😀

alan
Guest
alan

我認為你的前提:【「平等」、「自由」、「正義」成為目前社會「共識」】這句話大有問題

因為如我本文中所談的:「誰來定義平等、自由或正義?」事實上認真考察各種關於這些東西的論述,你就會發現每個人不過在發表自己的喜好厭惡,根本沒有共識可言。

更甚者,我們更該關心的是人做了什麼,而非說了什麼。很多把上面幾個東西說得很好聽的人,做的完全不是那回事。

haoyuanstein
Guest
haoyuanstein

感謝回覆,
對我的表達錯誤和模糊不清感到抱歉,
我想問的是,人類社會世界的發展,為什麼「民主」會取代「獨裁」、「寡头政治」、「神權政治」等制度?
為什麼「法治」會取代「人治」?
為什麼部份「人權」會受到許多國家的憲法保障?

這樣的發展,是因為一國內多數人的「喜好」,還是有其他的原因?