This Quote Paraphrases Jean-Jacques Rousseau

I'm sure many of us have though about the question of, "Are humans inherently good?" I'm sure there are answers to this across the spectrum and there really isn't an way to provide a definitive answer. So I'll merely be giving my take on things (yes, I'm an optimist) and would be curious to hear yours.

Let's Break this Down a Bit

First there is a personal judgement call on whether people now are seen as overall being good. My definition of good is simply somebody who feels enjoyment by seeing and/or helping others succeed, grow, be happy, etc. The converse applies (to me) for 'bad' people who feel enjoyment by seeing and/or contributing to the failures, belittlement, sadness, etc of others.

If somebody was purely alone, no other people around, the concept of good vs bad becomes rather irrelevant in my eyes.

So what's really being asked here is how people act with regard to others. Is it in our core nature to impose our will on others through brute strength or manipulation to get what we want for ourselves? Or are do we seek ways for consent and buy-in for a shared cause?

There is no denying that there has been acts of violence, theft, rape, etc throughout history, but is that a reflection on the entire population or just the minority who performed them? Why did they perform them? Was it their social norm to do so as a means of providing for their group?

While these sorts of acts definitely still occur today, in many places they are looked down upon if not punishable (whether from the state authorities or retribution from the offended group itself.) But this really is the root of the question...

At their essence;

-Are people good and been corrupted?

-Are people bad and learned to be good?

-or are we what we've always been?

My Thoughts on Human Nature

Pre-civilization Days

First let me say I'm no expert...this is purely my thoughts on the matter.

In the really early days people tended to be a part of smaller groups comprised of just enough families for genetic diversity. Having little to no ability for food preservation, the supply had to be regularly replenished, with only so much available per in a travel-able area. They had to return to the group often if not daily to bring back these resources. When the needed resources became scarce in that location, they moved to find a new one to sustain them. Even with there being a likely power structure between them (as there is with all animals) the focus was the maintaining the group as a whole.

I do think that we are social animals, being able to share thoughts and experiences more effectively as our language progressed. Since we aren't faster, stronger, bigger, or more agile than many other animals, it was our intelligence and ability to find, adapt and create useful tools that has brought us such great success. We'd never of been able to hunt large game without a spear, let alone a gun. Being social allowed the ideas of such tools to be given to the rest of the group as well as ideas to find better ones over time.

While there was the possibility of groups coming across one another, it was relatively rare and for shorter periods of time. They couldn't merge, because it made the groups too large, relative to the food and water available per square mile.

MY POINT out of all of this is that to me this was a matter of the individual groups doing what benefited the group. They were concerned with others succeeding/surviving along with themselves, **Which I view as GOOD NATURED."

More Modern Day

Over time larger populations have been driven together and often survival isn't so much of the issue. As we've moved away from the tight knit groups of people we know and constantly interact with (think of small town mentality) we've begun to have greater distance from those we are actually around everyday. We still have our groups (friends, family, etc) but they are spread out among the larger population.

We only have time and capacity to carry on so many relationships with people, yet we live in towns way bigger than we can socially handle. So this leads to two things;

• being exposed to people 'not in my group' way more often
• the enhanced belief that we can get away with things without retribution because they don't know who I am.

Imagine a small town where everyone knows each other. What would happen if a resident stole the purse of a woman who lives there? She'd know who they were, where they lived, and likely ensue with people going to confront the thief. I remember a psychology study (I can't find it right now, by Kohler, Kotler, something like that I think) where they found people knowing whether something was right or wrong (i.e. knowing morals) mattered way less then the belief of being caught and hence punished in some way.

This to me is a major piece of how society leads to moving people away from their 'good nature.' No longer being in our small, tight-knit, meaningful groups, we are now more around 'outsiders' and sometimes believe in our anonymity. It's sad to say, but it has less to do with a persons inner nature and more on the likelihood of being caught.

Final Thoughts

I know everything so far has been rather general, but I wanted to give you an idea of how I came to my current 'best ideas.' (I don't like using the word beliefs in this case.)

I believe that by nature people are overall good, even though it tends to be applied towards what they view as their own group. There are some of us who define their group as friends and families, others as a nationality, others as humans, others as life or energy. This largely is a matter of individual perspective.

However, I think that nobody wakes up and is consciously deciding to actually TRY to make someone one else's life WORSE. There are things that precede to trigger these types of actions. Some are short lived such as just having a bad day, that may lead to a frustrated 'verbal lashing'. Some are built over time, where long term imprinting has jaded somebody to the point of gaining enjoyment by viewing or triggering negative experiences of other people. (How many of us have watched Jerry Springer, gaining satisfaction in thinking "At least my life isn't that bad.)

[TL;DR]
Having a bad nature tends to drive others away from us, ending with the likelihood of being, or at least feeling, alone. And this goes against my fundamental best idea the humans are 'social animals.' I truly think in essence people are in their heart good natured with pieces and experiences of our society driving us away from that at times.

What are you're thoughts on human nature? Are people inherently good? What drives people to do good or bad things? Can they always come from a well meaning place?

Don't Miss the Show! Follow the Steemit Talk Podcast (STP) Account

New STP Website!!

Are you new to Steemit and Looking for Answers? - Try https://www.steemithelp.net.

Image Sources:
Rousseau Quote
Early Humans
Blurred People
Hugging Family