Humans are Born Evil

Humans are Born Evil

 

Fundamentally speaking, are humans good or bad? Whether humans are born good or evil has been debated by philosophers for centuries. Aristotle argued that morality is learned, and that we’re born as “amoral creatures” while Sigmund Freud considered new-borns a moral blank slate. Maybe the two most famous opposing views on this debate are those of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. In 1651, Thomas Hobbes famously wrote that life in the state of nature – that is, our natural condition outside the authority of a political state – is ‘solitary, poor, nasty brutish, and short.’ Just over a century later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau countered that human nature is essentially good, and that we could have lived peaceful and happy lives well before the development of anything like the modern state.

Let’s think of a moral dilemma: if you find a wallet with money, do you keep the cash?

Plato once said, “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.” To put this assumption to test, a team of scientists conducted a large scale experiment. They planted 17,000 lost wallets in 40 countries. The results of the study published in Science busted long-standing economic model. Experts expected people to keep the wallets with money. They were all caught by surprise. Regardless of country, the majority of people returned the wallets. And they were more likely to do so when the wallets had more money. Researchers posed as people who had found wallets, dropping them in public places. Some wallets were empty. Others had US$15 or US$100 in local currency. 72% of people returned the wallets that contain a large sum of money.

The wallet experiment can be just a simple example to show that humans are good. However, it cannot be the sole proof. There could be other examples that counter the assumption that humans are good. How can we explain constant wars, internet bullies and so on? I hope we can have a fruitful debate about this classic not cliché topic.

 

# What is an issue?

-Do you agree or disagree regarding that humans are born evil?

# References

https://www.bbcearth.com/news/are-we-born-good-or-evil-naughty-or-nice

https://www.fearlessculture.design/blog-posts/is-the-human-nature-good-or-evil

 

 

 

 

 

Are we born good or evil? (naughty or nice)

Are we born with an innate moral compass or is it something we develop as we grow?

 

Whether humans are born good or evil has been debated by philosophers for centuries. Aristotle argued that morality is learned, and that we’re born as “amoral creatures” while Sigmund Freud considered new-borns a moral blank slate. Anyone who has read “Lord of the Flies” will expect children to be fully-fledged sociopaths just waiting to be freed from their adult-imposed shackles to (spoiler alert) start a cult and brutally attempt to kill each other.

 

Maybe the two most famous opposing views on this debate are those of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Hobbes describes humans as ‘nasty’ and ‘brutish’, needing society and rules to reign in their instincts in order to thrive; later Rousseau openly criticised him, arguing instead that man would be gentle and pure without the corruption of greed and inequality caused by the class system imposed by our society.

 

However, developmental psychology studies show there may be some natural “good” in humanity (or, to be more technical, that at least kids are capable of passing moral judgements at an earlier age than previously thought).

 

To do this, babies less than a year old were made to watch a puppet show where different coloured shapes acted in ways that were clearly recognisable as morally right or wrong. A red circle is shown struggling to climb a hill while an “evil” blue square tries to push it back down. Meanwhile, “good” yellow triangle attempts to help the red circle by pushing it up.

 

After the play, the babies were asked which shape they wanted to play with: evil blue square or good yellow triangle. As you may have guessed, they all picked the latter, the triangle that exhibited ‘helpful’ and ‘selfless’ behaviour. This applied even for babies as young as seven months.

 

The scene replicates the findings of a 2010 study from the Infant Cognition Center at Yale University, which went further to prove that babies were choosing the puppets because of their actions rather than other variables (for example, an innate preference or familiarity with a certain colour or shape). When the show was replayed with the shapes taking on the opposite role, the infants still mostly chose the shape that had taken on the role of the ‘helper’.

 

 

 

Is the Human Nature Good or Evil?

Are we inherently good or bad? This morality debate has the world divided into two camps. Recent studies shed a light.

 

What babies and lost wallets can teach us about this never-ending moral debate

“Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.” — Mahatma Gandhi

Are we inherently good or bad?

The world has historically been divided into two camps on the morality debate. Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau represent the most famous, opposing views.

 

Hobbes described humans as nasty and brutish. He believed society and rules improve our bad nature. Rousseau argued instead that we are gentle and pure. He blamed society for corrupting our innate good nature.

 

So, are we born with a moral compass? Or do we develop it as we grow?

 

Aristotle argued that morality is something we learn. And that we are born as ‘amoral’ creatures. Sigmund Freud considered new-borns a moral blank slate.

 

Scientists also believed that babies don’t have any moral standing — until recently.

 

The Morality We Are Born With

Babies have innate goodness.

 

Research by Yale University shows that they are born with a sense of morality. While parents and society help develop a belief system, they don’t start from a blank slate.

 

One-year-olds are capable of passing moral judgment.

 

Paul Bloom, author of Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil, explains that babies can judge good and bad — even before they learn to walk or speak.

 

As part of the experiment, kids watched a short play where one shape tried to climb a hill. A second shape wanted to help the climber, while a third one tried to prevent it from succeeding.

 

What happened next reveals the essence of human nature.

 

After the show, babies were asked to choose one figure. Infants were much more likely to select the ‘helper’ over the ‘pusher.’ They preferred the good over the evil.

 

The study revealed our basic instinct to prefer friendly behaviors over malicious ones. That doesn’t mean babies are flawless. As Boom explains, their sense of justice is limited. Parents and society must further develop the innate moral beliefs.

 

So, what happens with our moral compass when we grow up?

 

Lost And Found

Everyone believes they are more virtuous and moral than anyone else.

 

Consider this moral dilemma: if you find a wallet with money, do you keep the cash?

 

Most people say they would return it to the original owner. But assume others wouldn’t. They believe people are not as honest as them.

 

“Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.” — Plato

 

To put this assumption to test, a team of scientists conducted a large scale experiment. They planted 17,000 lost wallets in 40 countries.

 

The results of the study published in Science busted long-standing economic model. Experts expected people to keep the wallets with money. They were all caught by surprise.

 

Regardless of country, the majority of people returned the wallets. And they were more likely to do so when the wallets had more money.

 

As Alain Cohn author of the study, explains, “We mistakenly assume that our fellow human beings are selfish. In reality, their self-image as an honest person is more important to them than a short-term monetary gain.”

 

Researchers posed as people who had found wallets, dropping them in public places. Some wallets were empty. Others had US$15 or US$100 in local currency.

 

72% of people returned the wallets that contain a large sum of money.

 

The wallet experiment confirms our instinct to do good. And that we care about our image too. The primary motivation to return the wallet was the aversion to be seen as a thief.

 

Our First Impulses Are Selfless

What’s our first, natural instinct? To act selfishly or to cooperate? To answer this question, a group of scientists conducted a series of ten studies. They were all based on economic games.

 

The experts explored the basis of cooperative decision-making. They applied a dual-process framework — self-control and intuition.

 

They wanted to see if we control our instincts to act selfishly. Or if we use rational thinking to override our natural impulse to cooperate.

 

Participants made financial decisions to maximize their gain at the group expense. Or the other way around. They have to choose between acting selfishly or cooperatively.

 

The results were striking.

 

Faster, more intuitive decisions created higher levels of cooperation. Slower, more reflective decisions made people act more selfishly.

 

As Gilbert Keith Chesterton wrote, “Evil comes at leisure like the disease. Good comes in a hurry like the doctor.”

 

To bulletproof their research, scientists manipulated people.

 

They forced them to either make decisions faster or to take extra time. Those who were forced to use intuition gave much more money to the common good than those who relied on reflection.

 

The findings confirmed that our first impulse is selfless. It makes sense as we live in a world where it pays to cooperate.