Debate 1: The Nature of Man

Hello lovely readers,

While today is not a Tuesday or a Sunday, I thought that we might have a couple of extra posts this week in celebration of the birth of the blog.
Today, instead of providing just my personal opinion on a subject and asking for your concurrence, I will have a debate post. I will present both sides of the issue, and then present my personal opinion. Perhaps its all this Lord of the Flies reading I've been doing lately, but the subject that is most vitally interesting to me is the good vs. evil idea. So, let us begin with one of the most philosophically fascinating and yet most uncomfortable topics of debate: the nature of man.

Is man good or evil? Countless philosophers have attempted to answer the question, with no definite and unbiased answer. Many, such as the infamous Jean Jacques Rousseau, say that humans are born naturally good and altruistic, but are corrupted by society. I see where that comes from. Who wouldn't want to think of themselves as a natural martyr? But what interests me is the application of that idea in life today. Look at the legendary missionary figures of today like Gandhi and Mother Teresa. Looking at the examples of love, selflessness and kindness that we see today, it is natural to assume that humans are good and virtuous, but with those qualities hidden underneath the dirty surface of egotism and ignorance that is bred in society. This belief that humans are naturally good, and that there is hope for mankind, is an overwhelmingly alluring idea. It has a good psychological effect on people, helping them to believe that there is light and goodness within them, and that they have the choice to discard the mask of society and embrace that inner goodness. But lets look at this practically. While there are countless people who exemplify this ideal, there are as many people and events that prove it wrong. What about people like Hitler? What about the World Wars?

That's where Thomas Hobbes' opinion starts to become important. Hobbes established his view of human nature in such a way as to turn most of the human race against him. He believed that humans are naturally evil leviathans, and must be controlled in a dictatorial manner through absolute monarchy. Obviously, we have established in our modern society that dictatorial government and monarchy isn't our thing. But Hobbes makes a point that cannot be ignored. While I don't agree with him entirely, (Leviathans, really? I'm not flattered.) he makes a valid case for the many cases of human brutality that we know. Cannibalism, genocide, rape, murder- do humans have an inborn instinct for violence? This concept is explored through the book Lord of the Flies by William Golding as well. Many incidents in human history have provided unquestionable evidence that humans have a natural violent instinct- why else has our optimal method of conflict resolution been war since the Roman empire?

What do I believe? I believe that we have a choice. Mind over matter. It is unquestionable that at times, humans do experience the desire to be violent and release pent-up energy: it is an instinct which has borne through generations. But that doesn't mean that we use the excuse of 'ingrained natural evil' to make the wrong choices. It takes great strength and purity of mind to overcome instinct and exert self-control. It takes some innate goodness to overcome instinct and choose which path to walk on. So are humans innately evil? Maybe. But they are also innately good, in my opinion. It's our choice which to be.

So that is the philosophical musing of the day. Feel free to spark any long-lasting, heated debates with fiesty comments. Intellectual drool, gotta love it- can't take credit for that one, it comes from a very inspirational teacher of mine. Have a wonderful day.

Your wonderful Antisocial Heartbreaker.