Are people innately good?

The humanistic viewpoint of psychology states that people are innately good and it is a very positive viewpoint. I used to agree with it but now every day on the news you hear about child molesters and murderers and the like. What do you think? Are all people good at heart?

That me clue you in on something:

Humanism is a joke within the psychology community. No dissertation will ever make it at a decent university if they defend humanism - it's not psychology, it's philosophy. Post it there.

Philosophy includes psychology too.

The psychology community is a joke in every other community. There is no cure in psychology, merely pill prescription and I fail to see why brain picking ever became a science except to give people legal drugs to keep them calm as sheep.

Don't worry about the fact that it is humanistic...Do you think people are innately good? I just want to know what other people think. I've been pondering it.

Liz wrote:

Don't worry about the fact that it is humanistic...Do you think people are innately good? I just want to know what other people think. I've been pondering it.

For the first 50 years of my life, I truly believed that people are innately good. It's not true, and you will have terrible problems in your life if you proceed believing that people are good. They want you to believe they are good so that they can take advantage of you.

hi
first post here.
you know the news is filled with "bad" stories because they get our attention and sell papers but....
I mean I like crime t.v. and watch the first 10 min, of wgn chicago news just for the entertainment value.
it is all bad crime, fires, murders WOW.
But get this even though I,m dpressed right now because of illness and life really giving me a beating
I think people ARE good at heart and also when really confronted are chicken and very conforming easily swayed to be nice not confrontational.
proof... I was never amazed at the okla. city bombings and am still amazed there is not more like him . just think of all the truly good stuff people are doing without getting the news coverage,
Rick

I think all people are born good willing. I just think people have a different perseption on what good really is. What may be good to one person isnt good to another. If abuse and molestation have been portraid okay or good to infant all their adolensents. I think the child will more then likely think that abuse and molestation is normal and okay to do. Now that another topic by itself. My point is i think whatever you saw as a child and whatever you were told was good then, you think its good because its been portraid to you that way. So all in all, everyone one is born good in my opinion.

I would get shot down if I posted what I really thought here, as I am a christian!

Zoompad, how does being a Christian help you know if humans are good or evil????

I disagree with impulsive statements such as 'humanism is a joke' but also cannot fully endorse the view. Humanist make one huge assumption; all living things are growing towards a a state of comfort and equilibrium, which is in its own right an attempt to be good or contented. To say that humans are inherently good, is to say that all life forms are inherently good. Under the light of evolution, humans are not special, rather they were able to get lucky. The environment facilitated our ability to develop to a sophisticated social level. To say people are inherently good or bad is an old question like the nature-nurture contraversy, and quite simply a waste of our intellectual focus. If you look deeply, youll see that any question regarding the positive or negative element of human nature is inescapibly tied to the question of life meaning, spirituality and so on. Good for whom? good for what? these are the questions which lead us in circles. Its best to disregard these extremist humanistic notions and thier psychoanalytic counterpoints and focus on how the brain, thought, cognition, memory, emotion etc. work.

With regards to the christian guy, the only reason why you didnt say anything is because 'you' have nothing to say. You rely on a 2000 year old (probably 500!) year old politically driven manuscript, which has robbed your ability to think for yourself. Anything you say on the matter is simply regergitation of material which has been eatin up, and spit out, and eatin up, and spit out, and eatin up, and spit out, until its just a ball of un-nourishing useless mush.

Man is born selfish. Psychology would not let us deny this.- just look at the way a baby would grab at a toy that another baby has. It will work on instinct, and try to get what it wants.
We learn a moral framework, which we build our ethics around.
BUT, if you assume, and accept, like Rousseau says, that man is born with 'compassion', a sort of sense of unity amongst our species,(read in the context of man helping man to contruct a more fruitful society), then you could easily argue that 'good' or however we define it, is in our nature to adhere to.
The way I see it (in psychological terms) is; there are only so many emotions that seem to stand-alone, and seem natural to our existence.
Anger (or aggression), a few others, and 'compassion'.- meaning any act of good is a result of an innate feeling to alleviate suffering and/or bring about more happiness.

- you can now easily branch into thoughts about buddhism (suffering), utilitarianism (greater good), but it's easy to get bogged down in word definitions etc here. I'm trying not to.

I can see where Phil is coming from. In one sense we are selfish but only at a microscopic level, if we pull back the lense we see that we are trying to survive as a species. All the selfish behavior is then seen as benefiting the species as whole, in that if one of us survives; mankind survives (Well two I guess!). With regard to emotion, psychologists know that there are 6 emotions and corresponding facial expressions which are universally present (cross-culturally). Genetics and society are co-constructive, which is what rousseau and locke didnt consider. We are not entireley one or the other, its a continuum (i.e. no dualities just shifts in perceptual attunement, and frequency). In the spirit of the buddhists, there is just this ONE. That is one cause... and it is neither good nor bad...good or bad needs something to be good or bad for, and thats where life comes in...

PS: Dont listen to Juan Carlos he thinks everyting is philosophy, which it is, which is also why its redundant...

I agree, everyone is born selfish, but i also think if we werent selfish we wouldnt survive!!! You have to look out for yourself first and the rest will follow, if you dont look out for yourself no one else will!!!

To Nathan Machan regarding the religous reply, I couldnt have said it better!!! I totaly agree with you, people us religion as an excape route from the complicated problems and thoughts. People don't have REAL religious beliefs unless they have made them up themseleves. When we're born, our parents tell us what religion we are and what to believe. We claime these beliefs as our own when actually they have just been passed down to us. So i think using religion as a weapon in an arguement is BS, if you cant use your own thoughts and opinons dont jump into the subject. Thanks!!!!

hi
I lost track of this a little.
thank you all very much.
I have a true memory prob. and have probs saying what i,m thinking and I think very much like you guys do.
have understood that never ending circle idea most of my life.
also have understood the "religous" idea most of my life even though as stated I was "told"what to believe by parents and others.
I don,t have a problem saying it .
all religion is just a tool to get people to behave a certain way.
and if they are all so very good where do most of these wars start and why is there so many "ways" to practice christianity ???
where are all the incas and aztecs??? I know malaria but the rest??
I have been to the holy lands and stood in the middle of town(jerulselum) from the basic tourist level "what a bunch of jerks" I mean like ny ny but lots worse real jerks.
I do know we can be made mean real fast .
Just take something from us.
something simple .
like today make a decree that we will change the american colors to green ,prple, and black instead of red white and blue . better lock the doors it would be bad.
just rambling ,but really just simple.
no more wheat, period
or coffee ,or tea, just take something it would be interesting.
Rick

zoompad wrote:

I would get shot down if I posted what I really thought here, as I am a christian!

Regardless of whether or not you post your thoughts, He knows what you think. Post away.

I don't think anyone is born innately good or bad. Who defines what is good?

We develop in many different ways and our indivudual life experiences are diverse.This all affects our growth as a person, it's society as a whole that deems what is good or bad.

Clone that Idea and you could make a million..

a million one way or the other...good or bad...which ever you chose..

a clock is only an instrument that measures time.....what you do with time on your hands is the billion dollar question.....

anyway the calender does not have singularity....

gravity is not the weakest of the four...it is only the most balanced...

if Albert would have written that in a line,

all thought is good, of course if it happens to agree with the readers thoughts...

lol

I find a lot true in regards to the answers given in terms of nature vs. nurture. For the two combine to create our views of what is good and bad. Then the question of good vs. bad... what is bad and what is good. I agree with limesy in that life experiences shape us. Now society also has,~I would.. assume, given us most of the individual's view of what is good and what is bad. And that society is always, as far as I can tell, under the influence of cultutre. So the beliefs of good and bad is then separated by cultures. I guess all answers will be relative.
Maybe the clearest answer would come from a culture without religion? But religion is closely tied to everty culture. Is there a culture of theists? But even atheists here in the U.S. have come from a history of religion.


Now then, I guess you could compare religions that believe in a god vs. those who dont believe in a god, and then their different views on what is good vs. bad.

I'm too lazy to look up and read about the major religion's views on human nature. Like wichitarick, I have a memory problem...i bet i could write it down, tho..

So basically what I'm saying is that we can't really tell if humans are born innately good or bad because
1. Nature vs. Nuture
2. We can draw no clear line as to what is good and what is bad, universally.

We each can only define what we each believe to be good or bad. And like Nathan Machan said, it's a "continuum." Like selfishness, a certain degree of it is needed in order to survive (in our culture) so then to a certain degree we would label selfishness as good. But then again, a Zen Buddhist would probably declare that selfishness is not necessary. Niether good OR bad :/ Some see good and bad, others don't.