To Izzy4 and pink-sakura: This is not a loaded question (that it assumes already that humanity is evil/bad). An example of a loaded question is "How can we correct the evil in human beings?" [this already assumes and says humanity is evil, mine does not]. The question should be at the least answerable with "yes, no, I think it's neutral." Are assumptions bad? People have to assume most if not all the time. Izzy you assume that human nature is neutral or if there even is a "nature"; see the thing is we see/think what "they" (the other) think is wrong and don't apply to yourself. (Referring to the "we-they dichotomy")

"Humans are also driven by animal instincts and as products of nature nothing is prefect mutations do occur." - I would have to disagree, though you can argue we do have some basic instincts they do not pertain to who we are. We are social/rational and in some sense intellectual beings.

"Evil.. is a word created by humans." - Of course... We are intellectual and we need to associate meaning in the terms we use or we would not be able to communicate. If you want to argue what a term means that's a different matter. Here I'm just asking your opinion in the matter of evil in the most general sense.

"Evil is not an absoltue negative nor is Good an absolute positive. When compared together humans are both evil and good, therefore they are both, neither and neutral." - Again if you want to argue out the terms that's a different matter, it's all relative from where you define the word itself.

What I'm guessing is that both of you didn't read my first post or maybe even my second because I'm having an open mind on this discussion. I'm not concerned with the argument of evil in humanity.

Can't seem to post in the same post...
And if you're wanting to argue about evil or on anything on that matter it all depends on if you're humanist (naturalist) or a supernaturalist. If either of them argue against the other it is a pointless dispute.

Do you think the base nature of humans is evil/bad?

no sir
we're pure white

No, for the majority of people I would say not. It is just that all you hear of is the loud minority that this is not true for.

I think that people are born neutral.However we do make choices in our life and that decides our attribute (evil/good) which i believe is also ever changing as the decisions you make changes.I also believe that it is inevitable that evil and good must coexist so a a balance is established.Yes it means that evil cannot be wiped out

I think that there is no human in the world that is born to be evil, but that as life goes on and we grow up and experience a lot of staff, we build our character that way... we learn from our mistakes, and from the good staff that we do. When we are born, our lives are like books with no content, we don't even know if we exist, what we are doing, what we have to do, so how can it be possible that the base of human nature is evil?

As we grow up and experience events, we start to evolve different skills, and we learn from everything and everybody, which means, the way you are now, your character, is a result of everything you have experienced, at home, school, society... everything. It's not something you have chosen, but since not everything is good, we have learned to do bad things too, but we also learn that it is wrong, a mistake which we are not supposed to repeat (unless we are in some kind of desperate situation with no better solution... to not hurt somebody we love etc).

But just like everything else, I think that we have two sides, good and bad, but that doesn't mean that we are evil, only that we aren't perfect, that is why we make mistakes and learn from them, a gem cannot be polished without friction, nor a man perfected without trials, we have to experience and make mistakes in order to learn, to evolve, we are not born with skills and we can't discern what is good and bad unless we experience it on our own and see the consequences.

To be honest, I believe the very concept of good and evil to be a device created by man, particularly the kind of men who must deal in absolutes. I personally believe that every action should be judged, not on some archaic scale that has been predefined by relatively primitive people, but rather by the actions inherint merits and demerits, not just for the person performing the action, but for the community at large. This provides a much more accurate means of grading actions and people, not hindered by what people were opposed to at times of darkness and ignorance.

Too much "if's" surrounds the question to be honest.

Longbow

I would say yes. If you left a baby alone in the street, no parents, no guidance, nothing, he won't be leading a "good" life. A baby will steal and whine, kick and destroy stuff all around. It's a class discussion we had a couple years ago in high school and I remember it well. At first I thought "hell no, most people in this world are good people, so no I doubt humans are inherently bad" but after the discussion I realized that the reason most of society is sane is because we had some sort of education, protection and guidance on what's good and what's not. If you take all that away and tell a child to survive on their own, it won't turn out really well, from our perspective at least.

Thats only an instance. If I rephrase what you said to "If you left a baby together with his/her parents all his life, full of guidance and abundance of goodness, will he lead a good life?

Also, unless you have actually conducted a proper experiment (of that scenario with the kid being left alone), you don't even know yourself whether the kid will do all those bad things. Likewise, i wouldnt know the answer to my scenario myself.

emsden

To be fair, i would say its evil no one on this planet can say they have never done anything bad, no matter how small it was, yes, of course the things classed as evil may vary between, stealing sweets when you were young, to murder for example. both are evil, just different extremes of evil, so overall i would say human nature is evil, just my thoughts Emsden

So if someone did 100 minor bad deeds, but did 101 very good deeds, you would say that his base nature is evil?

What are your standards for evil? Your subjective morals (debatable)? The law? Of what country?

There are other factors and instances that needs to be specified in that argument, if that is ever going to be a decent backup for your statement. Take the environment for one, as that takes a considerable part in what would determine the future of an invidual (that statement is debatable). Any new born person has no control to what environment they will end up in. What "if" they grew up in a place where anarchy and vice rule. Then what "if", in order to survive, they had to embrace anarchy and vice...would their base nature be evil? They only wanted to surivive. And whos judging them?

tofuguy

I personally think yes... but would say that it varies in degree from person to person.

following up from pink-sakura
Yeah... evil/good is subjective. By your opinion, then one can be evil, but to the other he may not be.

Giving an example for your statement is only an "instance" and would only add more "if's"
~~~

Anyway, my answer is...I don't know

I haven't even met 10% of the population to even begin to think of the answer. Besides, who am i to judge?

To BlackVice: It can be argued in a subjective stance, but I would say that it can be argued in an objective sense also. From bringing in methods of deduction and not from inductive reasoning. Because if people reason from inductive reasons; it is not stable/concrete and relies too much on probability.

Well, the term evil was thought up by humans

evil doesnt exist in the wild, we only see it as existing. so who are we to say what is truely evil and what is not, we say murder is evil where in the wild some animals kill other animals, even of the same species for "fun" and dont eat them

also, i dont see evil and good as a balance, i.e if you do 1 bad thing and 2 good things your be classed as good. because again, its soemthing we have thought up, the whole balance of good and evil

I think it depends on what you consider bad, but mainly I'd say we are more neutral than one side or the other.

To emsden: Well you can argue in a metaphorical scenario but the thing is people do exist. I'm a realist, I don't like figurative analysis/imagery/analogy because it's not fully relevant. And there is what is considered evil in the wild, natural disasters are categorized as such. And just because we don't have a concept to describe such does not mean the action itself does not exist because it does. And moral issues don't apply to animals as it does to humans because we are intelligent beings.

I think that the nature of human is selfish, but not necessarily bad. I mean, most of what a person does will be for themselves, or at the most for a very close person. Even when someone does something nice for someone else, it always has a reason to benefit them, even if its the promise of going to heaven. Heaven always seemed to me like a bit of a bribe...

Well from our birth we are all innocence as we grow we are influence by the things that surrounds. I don't believe that OUR base nature is evil/bad. Because if there is no good/love in us then the evil/bad nature in us will never exist. So my answer is a big No. It's just many evil/bad people are being broadcast than good people. Hmm...

I think that every human in the world is born with absolutely good nature

but why does alot change to evil?

that is because of wrong doing in society and missguiding from parents

and that will change the nature of a human because humans are weak, passinote and flexible