So, I guess in an attempt to drive more discussion on this site, I may try to come up with some interesting topics for us to discuss here. So, I decided that this one was an interesting one to do, as I was already talking about it with others, and wanted to see what you guys thought.

Now, the question can already cause problems Specifically the last two words: inherently, and evil. Now, in this discussion, I'll be using the word to mean that a person is born with evil traits, and these traits are not a result of circumstances or events throughout life that drove someone to have become mentally broken. The word evil is much more difficult to accurately define, because morality changes depending on the person, and whether or not someone is even considered evil can vary drastically depending on who you ask. So, I'll leave it a bit open-ended in order to allow wider discussion.

Now, with this I think that the question of fate comes into play. Others may disagree with me, but to me the two are inseparable, because in asking whether someone's inherently evil, that essentially means you're asking if someone's inevitably going to have evil traits. I don't see how there could be any other way of viewing it, unless someone else could explain it to me.

Also, I guess if an individual could be inherently evil, we'd have to assume that the opposite would also apply: that there are people that are inherently good. So, in saying that, one would conclude I assume that in basic terms, someone is not nice because of their efforts to do so, but because it comes naturally to them, much in the same way that someone who is evil would do it because it comes naturally to them.

Another thing to consider with this, would be nurture vs. nature. Now, it seems to be a contiuum/scale, where most people believe that each has at least some effect on the individual, but it is hotly debated how big the slice of the pie is for each. Socialists very much believe that social interactions have a huge influence on the individual, while those with other political views prefer to take more of a view that encourages nature to take over.

OK, now I guess it's on to my views! I guess I may have already hinted at it before, but being a socialist myself, I very much believe that social interactions have a huge impact on one's life. So, In saying that I cannot accept that there is such thing as an inherently good or evil person. Yes, there may be violent traits, but being as though we have survival instincts, I wouldn't consider that to be necessarily evil. They just have to be suppressed. Unfortunately, problems in one's life can exacerbate issues or make them re-surface, which I believe is the trigger to someone committing atrocious actions. It can either happen through rough times, stress or paranoia. Also talking about fate, I do not believe in it myself, so it's much harder for me to think of a human being that is somehow born malicious.

So, that's my write-up on it, I'm wondering what your takes are on it!

We are inherently selfish. Whether someone equates selfishness with evil is up to the individual, but I don't; so no, I wouldn't say we are inherently evil. Selfishness can go hand-in-hand with the survival instincts you brought up, though.

You are inherently evil.I ca deduce it by the way you type.😂

No. There's always a way to change your decisions or outlook on the hand you were given. It's why we look at movie or game villains who had a troubled past, and feel sympathy for the outcome their environment had on them, but don't think it's justifies their villainy(or it does justify it, but it doesn't make it right if that makes sense).

some are but most aren't.

What gave it away?

Empathy..... most people are inherently good.

Somebody watched community lately.

I don't think so. Most people are good. The media just focuses on the bad people, making it seem like a bigger problem than it is.

This is a true story:  A few years ago after working late one night, I was driving home and I found this little girl on the side of the road who had waved me down.  I won't go into details here, but basically she was lost and needed a ride home.  It was like 3:00 in the morning, she was crying and scared.  So I drove her home, no questions asked.  Where's my news story on that?

I could have taken her to my own house and raped and killed her.  But I didn't.  I took her to her own house, safe and sound, didn't charge her a penny.  Now if I HAD raped her, I'd be all over the news right now.  But by doing the right thing, I get nothing.  And this is exactly what I'm talking about.

And I felt SO good after doing it too.  I didn't care about getting a reward or recognition.  Even though I got nothing out of it, even though it took me out of my way (we actually had to drive around for a while until she remembered exactly where she lived), doing the right thing just felt natural to me.  The act itself was its own reward, and I'd be willing to bet anything it's the same for most people.

Well...good effort OP. Although personally I feel this is kinda pointless since good/evil is defined by us humans and is everchanging, not to mention good/evil is seen differently in different cultures.

Anyway...if we don't look at this issue so tightly and try to discuss at a everyday level then yes some people are inherently evil. This is because how someones brain, hormone etc...function and how they react and act in such a way which is seen as evil. Of course social enviroment plays a role. It's the road you've lived, someone had it "easy" and someone else had to "fight" and adapted hostile behaviour to survive. These things get programmed in sub-conscious level which we have no control at all.

But yea, the discussion of good and evil is straight up human suppremacy bullshit...though it makes for good stories.