Are people inherently evil?

[palou]

Aeolus451 said:

palou said:

Ah yes, selfishness and selflessness are intersting principles, that I have considered myself. The problem I see with it is, however, that for all purposes everything we do ends up being inherintly, purely selfish in some way or form. We form bonds, which inspire desire to keep OUR people safe, because it makes us happier. 

 

Take the classic train dilemma, the train is heading towards someone you car, tied to the track, but you can choose to pull a lever to make it crush several other people instead

 

http://www.allthetests.com/quiz31/picture/pic_1416409939_5.jpg?1436189258

 

Many people would be tempted to do so - for reasons which can only be described as selfish. We hold desires benefitting others, following those desires doesn't make you selfless. No one is selfless, we just follow our desires, which have various residual impact upon others, to varying degrees of success.

 

I'll get back to you on all of this tommorow, it's a topic I've thought about quite a bit myself, but it's getting a bit late now...

I think moderate levels of selfishness is normal or rather it's okay but extreme levels of it, one could say easily that it's evil. I agree that every is selfish to some degree. On selflessness, I agree that no one is selfless or is able to maintain that state of mind but I think people can have moments of selflessness or commit acts of it such as saving a child from a speeding car and getting hurt from it or dying. 

The most interesting part of this is related to that train example but in a different context. For example, having to choose between saving one Albert Einstein (or someone of equal accomplishments) or 10,000 regular blue collar people from death? The gray area. Objectively, doing something really bad for good reasons or having to choose between bad choices. 

I do not believe that people that commit murders, rape, etc... act MORE selfishly than any other person, since for all purposes every action YOU make is just as selfish. You DON'T rape someone because you don't see benefit in their death, because you know that ulterior consequences would be negative, because natural and culturally infused feelings of guilt would make your life worse, overall, NOT because you are able to put aside your personal interests in favor of the interests of another. 

 

I used the train example to bring up the idea that having selfish interests which are strongly intermingled with the interests of others does NOT necessarily make you a good person, either. In intention, Hitler was acting about as selfless as a human ever get, outside of impulses (a second-degree selfish desire, consisting of wanting to see the german people/nation in prosperity/power, to protect the german nation from the jews/colonisation/etc...), yet he was still acting immoraly.

 

It is for me thus necessary to define morality/evil by the desires we have (leading to actions which are in the interest or against the interst of others), since selfishness alone does not allow us to distinguish between people.

 

In practice, as in, how I believe a government should act/judge, I am utilitarian - so an action (I judge actions and people seperately) is good if it improves our average utility (which could be defined as "total happiness - unhapiness", thoug it's more complex, and, to me, not a linear function.) 

Problem is, a desire to maximize utility isn't something that exists in it s purest form, in mankind, so you can't judge a person by that. What we DO however have, to varying degrees, is a ***Sensibility towards the vulnerabilities of others***. We are able to feel compassion towards others in a situation where their vulnerabilities are exposed, and feel a strong desire to protect these vulnerabilities 

 

(have to go, will be back...)