Is Human Nature Inherently Evil?

1899 Words 8 Pages
Characters and Positions (Announcer): A debate between two philosophers on whether the nature of man is good or bad overall will occur in this evening as if it were a basic and simple debate on a university campus. So, as a result, nothing will be off the table. Taking the place that humanity is evil is Eric, who will point to the past about humanities failures. On the opposite side of the debate is John, who will use evidence of humanities highest achievements to argue his place. This will be done in the form of a Platonic Dialogue with John (making the positive claim) will go first, and will have 3 sentences before the other person must respond. Before the debate can truly begin will state his opening arguments to the audience. The floor is now John’s.

John: My place is that human nature is good overall because of man’s ability to overcome the obstacles set forth against them to reach the point where they are in civilization. The very fact that societies care to even address the issue of being good to other people would separate us from mythical creatures like demons in that we have self-reflection, which is the hallmark of a good person as just the wish to be moral makes one 's internal nature good. If religion and
…show more content…
It is in the very nature of the animal that predators and prey and thus by that function the stronger animals reproduce and the week get preyed upon by others and humanity being like the animals is not that much different in this regard. The first moralities and later societies were founded on the premise that the strong or smart would subdue the weak and those who lack either were ostracized and/or killed for “holding the rest of society back” from a certain

Related Documents