Almost everyone is born naturally good. Unfortunately it seems that some are born as sociopaths. A genetic roll of the dice. It is few, but I believe it happens.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

But if you think about it if a person was born where there was no society whatsoever Wouldn't that person be savage-like? We only behave in the civilized manner that we do because we were trained too. What would humans be like if we didn't train one another at all?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Good point. But I still think a few unfortunate people are born without the ability to learn right from wrong. I found this book to be enlightening http://www.textbooks.com/BooksDescription.php?BKN=1235408&network=GoogleShopping&tracking_id=9781594485756U&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=9781594485756U&utm_source=googleshopping&kenshu=0dd983e0-42ae-0048-a309-00002bdb3b48&adtype=pla&kw={keyword}&gclid=CMiPzpHjibYCFdOHMgod4lIA5Q

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It isn't training. Humans are social creatures like most other primates and without the socialization aspect that isn't being "savage" that's being someone who was unfortunate and missed out on a key part of their development. Cats are not social creatures, with or without the social aspect they will be just about the same mentally. Socialization is as important to a human's psyche as breathing is to living. Saying we only behave the way we do because we're trained is like saying we only breath because we're trained.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Can't have good without bad though

by Anonymous 11 years ago

First of all, savage is not the same as morally 'bad'. Second, just as Vic said, just under one percent of the population is a psychopath or sociopath, which means they were genetically born moralless and without a conscience. Environment was irrelelevant. For the rest of us it's largely recognized that our ethical stand point is a heavy mix of nature and nurture, and no one aspect is more important.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't understand how just under 1% of the population being socio/psychopath leads you to say they were genetically born that way and environment had nothing to do with it?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't believe it's all environment. Nature vs. Nurture. I believe it's a mix of both. Just like someone may have been born with autism, I think someone could be born a sociopath.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Classic nature vs. nurture. If you know a family where all of the children were raised similarly yet, one winds up being an scumbag, you know a majority of it is nature – some people are born scum.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Define naturally good or naturally bad. You just have to consider each individual and their different situations. Like for instance, if you look at Hitler's life. What made him that way? You'd have to trace it back to his childhood and his infancy. If he were evil from birth, which is kind of hard to study, then maybe he was born that way. But if it were clear that he had some sort of influence on his views from other people, then it was his environment.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I do believe that humans are born with an inherent sense of right and wrong. But I also believe that the same person's environment can shape their attitude towards that moral compass. For example, I'm willing to bet most murderers and rapists know that they're doing something bad, but simply don't care.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

"There is no good and evil. Only power and those too weak to seek it." J. K. Rowling

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's debatable. It all comes down to nature vs. nurture.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There have been studies on babies that show they naturally are against evil or mean characters.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I think that the fact of good and bad is simular to the issue of gay,bi, straight. I think that you are born with it and its up to the person to show it more or les prominantly

by Anonymous 10 years ago