Log In · Register

 

Debate Rules

Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.

Debate.

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The Nature of Man, good or bad?
lbjshaq2345
post Sep 17 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #26


Lil JC
*****

Group: Member
Posts: 868
Joined: May 2005
Member No: 145,741



i believe a person's surroundings can greatly change them but not determine the course of their life like others have said humans are born pure beings and life and the world influence them and the main influence in this world is evil and corrupt
 
Spirited Away
post Sep 18 2005, 09:04 AM
Post #27


Quand j'étais jeune...
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,826
Joined: Jan 2004
Member No: 1,272



QUOTE(sheridan_whiteside @ Sep 17 2005, 10:30 PM)
Good and evil are completely subjective. End of story.
*


true, but in the same sense you're also saying that evil is a kind of pseudo-problem or something that has no solution. so then if we cannot battle evil since it's all in our perceived thoughts and not something factual or tangible, what is the purpose of overcoming evil? what is the purpose of valuing good?

anyway, the whole point of this debate is to prove that one's subjective views on the nature of man is right, or at least better than others'. thus, the story goes on.
 
sheridan_whitesi...
post Sep 18 2005, 06:34 PM
Post #28


no u
****

Group: Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Sep 2005
Member No: 237,372



QUOTE(uninspiredfae @ Sep 18 2005, 8:04 AM)
anyway, the whole point of this debate is to prove that one's subjective views on the nature of man is right, or at least better than others'. thus, the story goes on.
*


which goes on and on until all sides run out of breath. So in a way, end of story.
 
*mipadi*
post Sep 18 2005, 06:43 PM
Post #29





Guest






QUOTE(sheridan_whiteside @ Sep 18 2005, 7:34 PM)
which goes on and on until all sides run out of breath. So in a way, end of story.
*

Not necessarily. There can be a point where one person can admit that the other person's views make more sense. Sure, it doesn't happen much here in the debate forum, because most people are busier trying to "prove" how smart they are and would never stoop so low as to admit they might have erred in their thinking, but in theory, a debate could potentially come to an end at some point.
 
Ington
post Sep 18 2005, 06:55 PM
Post #30


Senior Member
******

Group: Member
Posts: 2,746
Joined: May 2004
Member No: 17,125



QUOTE(gigiopolis @ Sep 10 2005, 7:45 PM)
Innocence, as defined by the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, means "free from moral-wrong; sinless." I don't know about you, but I think PLENTY of babies are not innocent. They scream and cry at night and wake everyone up from peaceful sleep for no reason at all, they poop and pee in their diapers and force others to clean it up; why, I'd say that babies are truly evil.
*


I love you.


This topic isn't about the nature of babies though. Its the nature of mankind. Man, as well as any animal, wants to survive. That is its nature. Mankind is naturally selfish, wanting more assurance it will survive.

I don't see this as evil. Wanting for yourself before others is a natural, reasonable trait. Its religion that defames this characteristic. Honestly, I don't buy it. God would not have built selfishness into us so that we ignore it. I believe this is just another defamation of the earlier Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church is widely known for determining good and evil. Who tells them what's good and what's evil? God, supposedly. But we don't know that. Its a fact that the Catholic Church defamed many things for the sole purpose of religious control. For example, the Catholic Church defamed Judaism in Spain and 'sponsored' the Spanish Inquisition. It defamed Satanism as well, and made it what many think of it today (If you didn't know, Satanists do not actually worship the devil. They are normal people, like you an me, but they somewhat worship human nature in its entirety.) Another example is the outlawing of sexual desires of priests and nuns.

I'm not trying to offend any Catholics here. I know you didn't do anything, and I know the modern day Church didn't either. I'm just stating how whats good and evil is carved in stone, although many evils are just human natures that cannot be controlled.

Yeah.

QUOTE(caytexo @ Sep 17 2005, 10:43 PM)
evil, because we all are the ones responsbile for slowly destroying our planet day by day.
*

We're talking about human nature. Meaning, if there was no outside influence, what would we be like?

And anyway, I don't remember the last time I started a forest fire or doused a lake in oil. We're talking about humans in general, not capitalist leaders. And anyway, who declared it evil? Why is wanting personal satisfication over wanting to save the world evil? Some people just have different values. Does that make them evil?

This is almost the same point I made before. Society has carved what is good and evil in stone, although if you think about it, there is no good and evil. There is only perspective on life.
 
Spirited Away
post Sep 18 2005, 09:43 PM
Post #31


Quand j'étais jeune...
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,826
Joined: Jan 2004
Member No: 1,272



QUOTE(ermfermoo @ Sep 18 2005, 6:55 PM)
I love you.
This topic isn't about the nature of babies though. Its the nature of mankind. Man, as well as any animal, wants to survive. That is its nature. Mankind is naturally selfish, wanting more assurance it will survive.
I don't see this as evil. Wanting for yourself before others is a natural, reasonable trait. Its religion that defames this characteristic. Honestly, I don't buy it. God would not have built selfishness into us so that we ignore it. I believe this is just another defamation of the earlier Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is widely known for determining good and evil. Who tells them what's good and what's evil? God, supposedly. But we don't know that. Its a fact that the Catholic Church defamed many things for the sole purpose of religious control. For example, the Catholic Church defamed Judaism in Spain and 'sponsored' the Spanish Inquisition. It defamed Satanism as well, and made it what many think of it today (If you didn't know, Satanists do not actually worship the devil. They are normal people, like you an me, but they somewhat worship human nature in its entirety.) Another example is the outlawing of sexual desires of priests and nuns.
I'm not trying to offend any Catholics here. I know you didn't do anything, and I know the modern day Church didn't either. I'm just stating how whats good and evil is carved in stone, although many evils are just human natures that cannot be controlled.
*

so if wanting to survive is not selfish and selfish is evil, why would the nature of man be evil, or are you defending otherwise?
*nods about the Church*.

QUOTE
Yeah.
We're talking about human nature. Meaning, if there was no outside influence, what would we be like?
And anyway, I don't remember the last time I started a forest fire or doused a lake in oil. We're talking about humans in general, not capitalist leaders. And anyway, who declared it evil? Why is wanting personal satisfication over wanting to save the world evil? Some people just have different values. Does that make them evil?
This is almost the same point I made before. Society has carved what is good and evil in stone, although if you think about it, there is no good and evil. There is only perspective on life.

What would be considered as "outside influence"?

QUOTE(sheridan_whiteside @ Sep 18 2005, 6:34 PM)
which goes on and on until all sides run out of breath. So in a way, end of story.
*

Um, the respond to that is still a "no", by a long shot. according to that logic, we shouldn't question anything nor try to work out disagreements because it's all subjective. what's true to you may not be true to me so we should all shut our mouths and never start out a sentence with "I think" or "in my opinion". there is no point to the this debate forum. there is no point in black and white. what's white to you may be black to me.

QUOTE(mipadi @ Sep 18 2005, 6:43 PM)
Not necessarily. There can be a point where one person can admit that the other person's views make more sense. Sure, it doesn't happen much here in the debate forum, because most people are busier trying to "prove" how smart they are and would never stoop so low as to admit they might have erred in their thinking, but in theory, a debate could potentially come to an end at some point.
*

agreed. however sheridan, even if a debate between two people comes to an end by mutual agreement or by one yielding to another, the story goes on. opinions are like imaginations in that they are endless in capacity and limitless in variety.
 
Ington
post Sep 19 2005, 07:57 PM
Post #32


Senior Member
******

Group: Member
Posts: 2,746
Joined: May 2004
Member No: 17,125



QUOTE(Spirited Away @ Sep 18 2005, 9:43 PM)
so if wanting to survive is not selfish and selfish is evil, why would the nature of man be evil, or are you defending otherwise?
*nods about the Church*.
*


Oh, I was just describing how it shouldn't be considered evil. It is a natural feeling.

Like horniness. That's also looked down on. But hell, its human nature.

Also, about outside influence, I meant if we had nothing that we have today, lived like animals, how would we act? Basically, our actions would be, or be similar to our natural actions in any situation.
 
demolished
post Sep 23 2005, 11:11 PM
Post #33


Senior Member
*******

Group:
Posts: 8,274
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 8,001



Astrology gives us basic characters and personality so with that, we’re able to influence others that can shape up someone’s life. Influence is both evil and good depending on your point of view.
 

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: