The better angels of our nurture

Jul 17, 2006 21:11

From author Matt Ridley's Nature Via Nurture:

"To base any moral position on natural fact, whether that fact is derived from nature or from nurture, is asking for trouble. In my morality, and I hope in yours, some things are bad but natural, like dishonesty and violence; others are good but less natural, like generosity and fidelity."I've been ( Read more... )

personal, random, philosophical, reading, writing, contemplation

Leave a comment

Comments 16

saighin July 18 2006, 01:47:52 UTC
I tend to think of it as not so much being "born into sin", but that like all creatures of the animal kingdom, we are more "born into instinct".
And instinct, while not "evil" (in my mind, evil is more a concious act against those other than the self, rather than an act to preserve the self), is - like it or not - not based in morality. Like any other animal, we are born ruled by the id, our primary needs being food, rest, and human contact/comfort. Our inate drives are to obtain and preserve the thing which meet those needs.
I do not consider that at our base we are not moral (after all, morality can be highly subjective based on a number of factors; it varies from culture to culture) to be "wrong", simply a reminder that we are natural creatures like all others. But I think it's our ability to make choices beyond - and sometimes counter to - our instinctive drives for the benefit of others that make us more*smile* And I think that seeing that ability as God's/Gods' gift to us of Free Will is a good way of interpretting that ( ... )

Reply


toothlesshag July 18 2006, 03:36:27 UTC
Yeah, I tend to agree with you!

Evil is just selfishness and stupidity I think. People go to jail because they're stupid and they don't think about the consequences to their actions. There's quite a bit of self centered thought to get to that point though.
I believe in God. But not the devil as a person.

Reply

Shortsightedness boztopia July 18 2006, 13:24:51 UTC
To me, the biggest evil can come from not taking the time to think through the consequences of your actions. A spouse kills another in a jealous rage. A CEO cooks the books on the company's earnings just to show profit for the next quarter. We invade a country in the vague hope we can find weapons of mass destruction.

All of these scenarios result from the parties involved not pausing to ask themselves if they really were good ideas or not. :)

Reply

Re: Shortsightedness jiffysquid July 18 2006, 21:04:17 UTC
From working with people who've experienced traumatic brain injury, stroke, brain tumors and so forth, there are some people who are _incapable_ of rational thought and proper emotional control. When certain parts of the brain are destroyed, there is no choice to pause to ask themselves if these are really good ideas ( ... )

Reply

Chemical imbalance boztopia July 19 2006, 00:35:51 UTC
You raise an interesting point that I hadn't considered. If we start "fixing" people's brains to prevent criminal or sociopathic tendencies, how long will it be before some fundie with a trust fund decides to bankroll efforts to genetically cure homosexuality? Or changes in skin pigmentation?

It's a slippery slope. I believe that a person should have the right to alter or modify their own bodies to their hearts' content, but that others should not have the right to make that choice for them.

Reply


secret_stuff July 18 2006, 12:30:41 UTC
I'd say I pretty much agree with you. To me the concept of Original Sin is best viewed as simple recognition of the imperfection of people. As you say, you have to make a deliberate choice to do good, so it isn't an innate state, but a conscious decision to rise above "natural law."

But I would say that the triumph of good is not just thinking... the real proof is ultimately in the decisions and outcomes reached. Lots of amoral and unethical people are very smart, and certainly capable of comprehending ethics, and choose a different route.

Reply

Indeed boztopia July 18 2006, 13:22:35 UTC
See, for me, thought equals action :), so I didn't feel like I had to split hairs by spelling it out. Your point is correct, nonetheless. It's all about deeds, not words.

Reply


motherwell July 18 2006, 13:14:59 UTC
I wouldn't say we're "evil" by "nature;" I'd say we're born with hard-wired instincts that have yet to catch up with the demands our artificial culture places on us. This leads, among other things, to violent impulses being triggered at inappropriate times (which then leads to the idea that we're "violent by nature").

As for where evil comes from, my own theory is that there are four factors that can lead to evil actions: ignorance, insanity, rigidity, and disregard for others.

Reply


mirage897 July 18 2006, 13:53:49 UTC
Putting aside all strictly moral issues such as orginial sin, I people are innately good. Not necesarily from a "sin" prospective but more from a psychological persective.

Reply

You're a rare exception boztopia July 19 2006, 00:37:12 UTC
What makes you think that? :)

Reply

Re: You're a rare exception mirage897 July 19 2006, 01:16:43 UTC
I'll tell you in person when we have lunch

Reply

If you're willing boztopia July 19 2006, 01:19:06 UTC
to wait until Friday for lunch, it's a deal.

You want to meet up at L'Enfant Plaza again? :)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up