• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Are Humans inherently Evil?

maybe evil was a broad term, i am trying to say that no matter where you go you see wrong doing by humans to other humans or our environment, in terms of environment that is humans being selfish (using the earth and it's resources for our benefit and forgetting to realise the earth was here first) however when you see people being murdered or imprisoned for their beliefs, this is different, maybe we are very territorial and see any change in the status quo as a threat therefore a different belief is threatening the status quo this is true for dictators as they see it as a threat to their power, their terrotory, their status quo, maybe deep down we can't accept change.

and yes pyt, thanks for clearing up my OP
 
*I think the more accurate word would be asshole. Humans are inherently assholes. That' a lot different though, because assholes periodically evacuate their smelly crap and are ready for another day. Evil is a rotting demon in the corner.*

Man... [this isn't meant to be condescending, and I hope it isn't to you] : how old are you? Because basically everyone thinks like that before the age of 21 or so. It sounds like you just see things black and white. Once it changes, it gets a lot clearer, but paradoxically, more confusing.

I mean, your words show to me some basic misunderstandings which I'll try to clear up:
-You don't know what animals really think and feel. Unless you're a Beast Master from Dungeons and Dragons or some kind of shaman, which I'm willing to bet you're not. So you can't single out humans as compared to other animals, seeing as how the reference point you're using is hazy at best, if not a "point" at all but a big confused mystery.

-You are confusing your frustration with the current stagnation and decline of the West with something you see as being written in stone: some Biblical dogma that humans are inherently evil. More accurately, I would say the written word, technology and so on have confused society to the point where it currently feels meaningless, at which point we all go downhill, together. Also, life is a big struggle. This isn't because we're evil, though.

-We're all frustrated by the lack of progress and solidarity, all over the world. Frustration leads to more war, more bickering, more divisiveness. These are bad things; but I'm near damn sure "evil" as nothing to do with it.

I don't know. I guess I was just raised to not believe in dogmatic terms like good and evil, heaven and hell and so on. I see things as organic and that we project our humanity into everything, which is not only natural but pretty much beautiful.

Also you're exagerrating the environment thing, as if the planet and humanity were two separate colours on a board game battling for dominance. The Earth is our mother; and mothers can take infinite abuse from their children. We are maybe taking way too much advantage of our Mother. But she can take it. The Earth isn't "God"; it is a holistic entity, and yes, we ARE fucking up the balance, but this is far from proof that humans are inherently evil. If we ARE, then I'd say the Earth is evil too - unless you believe we are aliens from outerspace, and that "everything else" on the globe was there before, and we dont even deserve to be here.
 
No. Humans are not inherently evil. In fact there is no evil. But there are conditions, which might appear as evil, if we look at situations only on the surface level.
If you could clearly see all the reasons behind any action or event, you would never ask this question. You would see everything as ever-changing and interdependent with no inherent evil or its opposite.

Evil and good are just labels, which are the creation of the short-sightedness of the human (thinking) mind.
 
Do all humans inherently contain some attributes that are ascribed to the label "evil?" Probably, almost certainly... does that mean that all humans are actually inherently evil? The difference might be semantical but I think it's important enough. Actions and people are simply actions and people; human labels like "evil" can't be applied objectively.
 
It's got to be more on the environment and society as a whole. But, by going by this logic, everyone has a little bit of everything. I say this because my original thought was people are born evil, but I had no evidence to really back it up.
 
There is a native American story i heard once:
There's this boy watching a man go through some internal anguish. The boys asks the wise man what was going on. The wise man said that the man has two wolves fighting each other inside of him. Each wold represented the yin and yang of good and evil. The boy then asks which dog would win. The wise man replied, "The one he Feeds"

So I think inherently humans are neither good or bad but have the equal potential to manifest both(and all in between those extremems) behaviors.
 
" The wise man replied, "The one he Feeds" "


this was told to me recently by a native friend...


i later had to realize, each does need its feed, or the other will take over, unwittingly and unwillingly.

& in accordance with Gnostic theory, you must find the truths in each, and feed either with your most honest portions of established soul, which has been prepared or proven ready to be released into nature, with-out fear or hesitation.

you may soon trust your instincts more -
when you find where you stand between, with a more respectful heed to nature.
 
the dark and light, dualistic principles of self.
to understand them in any situation, then how they apply to oneself, and how with an understanding of the "positives and negatives" a more "neutral" true-of-self state of being might be acquired.
or it can be a very effective tool with psychology, addiction, isolation, or grocery shopping even with enough practice.

was having the same discussion earlier, so i have a visual aid handy:-D

NSFW:


 
willow11 said:
I also disagree that good and evil are bound together. They are not inverse images of each other. The thing that keeps them together is human imagination.

....humans aren't inherently anything, whilst also being 'potential everything'. Each individual is made up of complete capacity for every form of action.
Click to expand...

willow11 said:
I don't tend to see evil as a truth- nor is good. They are stark descriptions of something non-existent. They tend to imply that absolutes exist, ignoring the crucial grey areas.
Click to expand...

Something is only evil if it is seen as evil; all value judgements are manifested through language and are made in comparison to what they're not. Even if a consensus is reached to regard a "thing" as 'good' or 'evil', how large a consensus is needed for a group to accept said "thing" in its decided form? And what of those people that disagree? Are they to be shunned from society?

If we were to look at the question from a sociological/anthropological perspective we would find numerous examples of "things" that are perceived as being the opposite (and any possible [infinite] degree of diferance - the "crucial grey areas" that Willow mentions) when they are viewed from a different cultural perspective.

Would you like to be tortured during sex? I'd prefer not to be tortured, but I know people that adore being treated this way. If I were to place a value judgement on their acts/desires, say that they were "evil" (or "gorgeous" for that matter) for example, does that make me "good natured" (or hideous)? No, it just means that their "pleasure" differs to my own.

To what degree?

There are infinite possibilities.

There are no dualities, there are not only two sides to any story - life is far more complex than that. The number of ways something can be interpreted is only limited by the number of minds that engage with that something.
 
panic in paradise said:
the dark and light, dualistic principles of self.
to understand them in any situation, then how they apply to oneself, and how with an understanding of the "positives and negatives" a more "neutral" true-of-self state of being might be acquired.
or it can be a very effective tool with psychology, addiction, isolation, or grocery shopping even with enough practice.

was having the same discussion earlier, so i have a visual aid handy:-D
Click to expand...

Okay, I see what you mean now. I would say that you are closer to explicating Manichean dualism rather than Gnostic principles, particularly as by convention the 'Capitalisation' of the term restricts it to the heterodox Christian cult(s) of the early Church (ie - the subject of Irenaeus' 'Contra Haeresies', often categorised as Sethian and Valentinian Gnostics) whose corpus of scripture was discovered in the Nag Hammadi codices.

The simple noun: 'gnosticism' is a very far-reaching term, etymologically derived from the ancient Greek meaning of γνῶσις as a certain category of knowledge.

As such there is Christian Gnostic 'theory' based on the beliefs and dogma of the early Christian Church. But there is no gnostic theory per se, as far as my understanding of the terminology is concerned.
 
gray is very important, it is the creation is many senses.
im leaving blue*, on the Key to gray, of recognition in some cultures...

there are stark dualities in many aspects of nature, just the branches and roots of a tree could be seen this way - but to understand how or why a tree does branch out and reach in; then what it gains by doing so naturally; or in another sense - a strong foundation builds from there, allowing creation to happen more thoughtfully with a greater understanding of the initial 'fronts'.

perhaps.
;)


<3

Edit:
"Okay, I see what you mean now. I would say that you are closer to explicating Manichean dualism rather than Gnostic principles, particularly as by convention the 'Capitalisation'"

ohhh,,, so this what the states might call what they are doing with capitalism, Masonry and the Illuminati(booga booga).


um, interesting... indeed.
 
Last edited:
Humans are not evil, only completely selfish. Every decision and action a human performs roots in this selfishness. I guess all of it could be explained by evolution.
 
I think people who are really evil would not be asking this kind of questions. My moral reasoning says that there has to be good and evil, because the motivation to all behavior is trying to be good instead of evil. I know there are some people who are psychopaths(antisocial personality disorder) and have no morality, but those people are a minority.
 
A human being a system, which exists within a system of other similar beings. Both the individual have the potential to be both good and bad. To some degree the larger system exudes pressure on the individual to be good or evil, but the individual has the choice as to which way to act.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top