12

A Templeton Conversation: Does evolution explain human nature?

18 Jan 2017 21:24 | Author: User1489361232 | Category: Essay topics on moral justice

A Socratic View of Wrongdoing
Morality is a term that refers to our adherence to rules that govern human behavior on the basis of some idea of right and wrong. Ethics refers to our process of reasoning about moral rules. Whatever your concept of morality, it must address the human capacity to identify and choose between right and wrong and then to act accordingly. Socrates believed that nobody willingly chooses to do wrong [1]. He maintained that doing wrong always harmed the wrongdoer and that nobody seeks to bring harm upon themselves. In this view all wrongdoing is the result of ignorance. This means that it is impossible for a human being to willingly do wrong because their instinct for self interest prevents them from doing so. This is an extraordinary statement that strikes disbelief in many people going all the way back to Aristotle [2]. It seems contrary to experience that nobody knowingly does wrong. Perhaps you have personally witnessed examples of people who did wrong and seemed to know full well that their behavior was wrong. We propose that this belief of Socrates is true in a clear and simple way.

If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

Comments
  1. author
    Suvdka ♒ 18 Jan 2017 03:46

    There are various many tales out there that don t have movies. Literature can explore ideas and concepts without having to stress in regards to a special results budget.

  2. author
    DreamRUS 17 Jan 2017 22:04

    well, i m not sure what to tell you..because it s really all about the way you are raised. You might want to look into those kids that are raised by dogs. I dont think anyone has done any experimentation with this because of obvious reasons. Another place to look would be something like isolated tribes that people have documented. Not sure where to fine either but its some ideas. Hope i was helpfully, and good luck..thats a tricky one.

  3. author
    акси 🖤мультифору 18 Jan 2017 08:10

    They are opposites. One is for the right and the other is for the wrong. One is for what is hard to do most of the time (good) and the other is what is easiest for us to do (evil) Hope that helps a little. :)

  4. author
    redpeacock363 18 Jan 2017 07:56

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that's not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

  5. author
    crazylion255 18 Jan 2017 08:06

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''''''''''''''''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.

    This article addresses one form of that problem that is prominent in recent philosophical discussions--that the conflict that exists between the claims of orthodox theism and the facts about evil and suffering in our world is a logical one. This is the "logical problem of evil."

    The article clarifies the nature of the logical problem of evil and considers various theistic responses to the problem. Special attention is given to the free will defense, which has been the most widely discussed theistic response to the logical problem of evil.

  6. author
    чмошник гера 18 Jan 2017 08:06

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.

  7. author
    smallfrog965 18 Jan 2017 06:57

    In Christian theology, there are two ways of "conceiving human nature". The first is "spiritual, Biblical, and theistic", whereas the second is "natural, cosmical.

  8. author
    ticklishsnake924 18 Jan 2017 07:20

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''''''''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.

  9. author
    whitewolf501 18 Jan 2017 07:11

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.

    This article addresses one form of that problem that is prominent in recent philosophical discussions--that the conflict that exists between the claims of orthodox theism and the facts about evil and suffering in our world is a logical one. This is the "logical problem of evil."

    The article clarifies the nature of the logical problem of evil and considers various theistic responses to the problem. Special attention is given to the free will defense, which has been the most widely discussed theistic response to the logical problem of evil.

    Use this feature to browse through the tens of thousands of essays that have been submitted to This I Believe. Select a theme to see a listing of essays that address the selected theme.

    The work of This I Believe is made possible by individuals like you. Please consider making your tax-deductible contribution today.

  10. author
    User1489018154 17 Jan 2017 23:48

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.

    This article addresses one form of that problem that is prominent in recent philosophical discussions--that the conflict that exists between the claims of orthodox theism and the facts about evil and suffering in our world is a logical one. This is the "logical problem of evil."

    The article clarifies the nature of the logical problem of evil and considers various theistic responses to the problem. Special attention is given to the free will defense, which has been the most widely discussed theistic response to the logical problem of evil.

    Use this feature to browse through the tens of thousands of essays that have been submitted to This I Believe. Select a theme to see a listing of essays that address the selected theme.

    The work of This I Believe is made possible by individuals like you. Please consider making your tax-deductible contribution today.

    None of Mill’s major writings remain independent of his moral, political, and social agenda. Even the most abstract works, such as the System of Logic and his Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy , serve polemical purposes in the fight against the German, or a priori , school otherwise called “intuitionism.” On Mill’s view, intuitionism needed to be defeated in the realms of logic, mathematics, and philosophy of mind if its pernicious effects in social and political discourse were to be mitigated.

    This article provides an overview of Mill’s life and major works, focusing on his key arguments and their relevant historical contexts.

  11. author
    User1488299224 18 Jan 2017 02:11

    Ask Yourself Two Questions:
    1. Do you believe that all humans have an instinct to benefit themselves?
    2. Do you believe that all humans, to the extent that they suffer, instinctually seek to relieve their suffering?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you can accept the idea that nobody chooses to do wrong when they perceive that the wrongdoing in question will bring harm upon them. To the extent that we simply obey our instinct to benefit ourselves and relieve our suffering, we are not willing to harm ourselves. Socrates’ believed that persons who seek what they understand to benefit them are not trying to do wrong. They do not act for the sake of the wrong, but for the sake of obtaining the perceived good with which they are trying to improve their lives.

    Hello, you are using a very old browser that''''s not supported.
    Please, consider updating your browser to a newer version.

    Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking , feeling , and acting —which humans tend to have naturally. [1]

    The questions of whether there truly are fixed characteristics, what these natural characteristics are, and what causes them are among the oldest and most important questions in philosophy and science. The concept of human nature is traditionally contrasted not only with unusual human characteristics, but also with characteristics which are derived from specific cultures , and upbringings. The " nature versus nurture " debate is a well-known modern discussion about human nature in the natural sciences.