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.
No comments:
Post a Comment