0
It is a common Christian lore that humans are inherently evil, which then leads to claims that we can only be protected from our evil natures by being Christian. However, humans are not inherently evil, and those individuals who do evil things are just as likely to be Christian as not.
Nature is neutral between good and evil. However, animals other than humans can be evil. For example, a savage dog can attack and kill, not for food or protection but simply because that dog wants to do so.
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
Wiki User
∙ 14y agoI would say humans are evil and should quit messing with nature. Otherwise we will make it very angry, and I don't think we want that.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is your view of human nature Thomas?
Humans are capable of such love and compassion that it could only be equaled by the utter evil that we do.
What is the difference between moral evil and natural evil?
moral evil is evil caused by humans Natural evil is caused by nature.
Does Medusa bring good or evil to humans?
Only evil.
What Christian doctrine holds that humans are by nature inclined to evil and disobedience to God?
Predestination
Confucianism encouraged the idea of?
the evil nature of humans.
How did hobbes think differently about human nature from Locke?
Hobbes believed that humans are inherently self-interested and driven by a desire for power and survival. He thought humans were naturally in a state of conflict and chaos, leading to the need for a strong central authority to maintain order. Locke, on the other hand, believed that humans are born as blank slates, with the potential for reason and cooperation, and that they have natural rights to life, liberty, and property.
Which bird does not have the knowledge of Good and evil according to bible?
In the Bible story, only humans ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, so only humans had this knowledge.
What is The idea that humans are capable of both good and evil is called?
Other stories show humanity's double nature, meaning they are capable of both good an evil
What did the scholar hanfeizi belevie about human nature was different from both confucious and laozi?
Unlike Confucius or Laozi, Hanfeizi taught that humans were naturally evil. He believed that they needed harsh laws and stiff punishments to force them to do their duty. Hope this helps. :)
Which animals are likely to be considered evil?
There is no scientifically proven concept of "evil" in animals. Animals typically act based on survival instincts and do not have a sense of morality like humans. However, animals that are considered dangerous to humans or that exhibit aggressive behavior may be perceived as "evil" by some people.
What was Locke's view of human nature?
Humans are neither good nor evil, but share a set of natural rights and needs.
What did the scholar hanfeizi believe about humans nature that was different from both Confucius and laozi?
Hanfeizi believed that humans were naturally bad, while Laozi believed that humans were naturally good.
