Sigmund Freud and Charles Darwin brought many changes to the world of science. Darwin brought forth a paradigm shift in our way of thinking with his theory of evolution, going against the views of the bible, which at that time was viewed as concrete knowledge. Freud would make many modern advancements in the world of psychology, psychoanalysis and biology. Both of these men would controversially alter many views and theories, this in turn would therefor alter the views of human nature. Many past Philoshipers would touch on the subject of human nature including Marcus Aurelius who wondered in humans were inherently good, bad or somewhere in the middle. The new Philoshipers would come to challenge and complicate Aurelius and previous great thinkers and ideas and change everything we though we knew about human nature.
Marcus Aurelius is known as the father of Stoicism, a philosophical school of thought that that focused on “retiring within yourself”, and focusing only on matters in which you can have an impact on. All this as well as simply accepting your place in life. This would mean that Aurelius would …show more content…
In this essay we have solely looked at a group of great thinkers who believed that human nature were coherently bad, with the exception of Darwin who believed that humans lie somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. Interestingly all these men had different reasons to justify their views. Aurelius believe that humans were bad because they simply did not know better. Darwin who’s view of human nature was strangely compassionate considering that his theory of evolution meant that humans were no different, nor any more special than any other species, he seemingly views humans in the general middle of the scale. Freud arguing we are bad because of our unconscious instincts caused them to be destructive, cruel and selfish unless
Marcus Aurelius is known as the father of Stoicism, a philosophical school of thought that that focused on “retiring within yourself”, and focusing only on matters in which you can have an impact on. All this as well as simply accepting your place in life. This would mean that Aurelius would …show more content…
In this essay we have solely looked at a group of great thinkers who believed that human nature were coherently bad, with the exception of Darwin who believed that humans lie somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. Interestingly all these men had different reasons to justify their views. Aurelius believe that humans were bad because they simply did not know better. Darwin who’s view of human nature was strangely compassionate considering that his theory of evolution meant that humans were no different, nor any more special than any other species, he seemingly views humans in the general middle of the scale. Freud arguing we are bad because of our unconscious instincts caused them to be destructive, cruel and selfish unless