Comments

Ricky:Human Nature
Mak: Side Effects May (And Will) Vary

Human Nature

The prompt for this blog post was to explain what I believe about human nature. Whether I thought it was good, bad, prone to change, etc. I feel as though I want to believe that human nature is inherently good, and at times I do believe that, but that is not always true. I think that human nature cannot be defined as a certain characteristic. All of our lives, we are taught that everyone is unique, that we are all different, and that those differences are okay, and yet here I am trying to put all humans into a particular category of good or evil.

Suppose humans are, in fact, inherently good. How do we define what "inherently good" means? We often hear the phrase, "The world isn't black and white." Setting aside the concept of "people" for now, if we look at a particular person, they cannot be just one or the other. They may be a kind person, but they have most likely told a lie or two in their life. If a singular person cannot be put into a category of just "good" or "evil," why do we expect an entire population to be put into the same category?

Or am I wrong? Is human nature a separate thing from the nature of humans? Or is human nature set by the majority of actions, and not hindered by the minority? 

I don't want to say what I think human nature is, for the above reasons, but I must for the sake of the prompt handed to me. I suppose that human nature can be seen as good but vulnerable. Vulnerable, and fragile. There is evil in the world, and there are evil people in the world, and evil can work its way through the cracks in good, creating the patchwork of emotions we see.

These beliefs have come to me over a long period of time, over many years of contemplating this exact question. I have seen people so good I consider them to be near saints, and I have seen people so evil I question what made them so. I watch massacres on the news, and I think that human nature makes peace impossible, but I also see charities raise millions of dollars, and I think humans inherently want to help. I also see the little things. I see someone kick a puppy, and I think humans are mean, and I see someone help someone else carry something, and I love this human world. No one taught me to believe this. I figured it all out by watching CNN. And it is a belief that is still developing with every action I see.

Reading Response

I just finished a book entitled The Flip Side. Written by an olympic gold medalist, it is about a girl who hides that she is an aspiring olympic gymnast from everyone, and it eventually is released and it destroys her life. (It's a lot more complex than that, but you don't need to know that for this blog post.)
The author does something that I noticed but I doubt many other people would even care. She alternates between a chapter about her school life, and a chapter about her gymnastics life. Then, when it is released, they become one. It's basically a parallel plot, but only one person. It's kinda cool,to be honest. Other than that, its a pretty stereotypical romance novel, minus the olympic level gymnast part.

comments

Ian: Reading Response
My Wild Weekend featuring Jackson Sate vs. Southern

Free post

It is difficult for me to place

Where things went

 Awry

What did I say

That made a

Response impossible

People 

Can be so

Mean sometimes

I guess

He isn't

Worth it

Anyway

Response to A Very Old Man With Enormous Wings

A Very Old Man With Enormous Wings was very difficult for me to read for a variety of reasons; however, I thought it was a well-written story with a beautiful theme about unacceptance. The only vibe I got was really dark the entire way through, because of word choices anywhere from"killing crabs" to "a cry of pain rather than a cry of fear." No one was kind in the story, and everyone was judging the old man or judging each other or judging the world.
Scenes towards the end when the old man was in pain caused my skin to crawl. I couldn't believe the idea that an angel could be mistaken for something evil or demonic. And when he was ignored because there was a lady that turned into a spider, I was actually done. In its own odd way, this story has outlined most of human nature. Though not all humans are inherently evil, most will do anything for personal gain.

Response

How to Rig an Election: the Legal Way  by The Week Staff.

Gerrymandering is a term that describes the intentional clumping of a certain party's voters to a particular area, causing an easy win for the other party. Eighty of a hundred thousand voters would probably be put in two districts out of six, leaving only twenty thousand for the other four, according to The Week staff.
I don't agree with this at all, but I also don't think that it is ever going to change. My opinion is that politicians are inherently selfish and lie all the time, but that is what makes government work! The corruption of one side balances the corruption of the other. And since it will never happen that both sides will coexist without corruption, this is as close as we will get to equality.
Gerrymandering should be outlawed, yes, but since those corrupted politicians are the ones that would have to make the laws, it will never happen.  Never! It is the same as politicians voting on their own salaries. It isn't right, but it won't change.

Comments

Kaelyn:never let me go-reading response
Sarah:free post