True Human Nature.

[°Leprechaun]

True Human Nature is all good. It is all right. Human beings are animals. Our animal nature (some call this human nature) is less than our human nature (some would call this our divine nature, UUs call it inherent worth. Quakers call it the inner light).

I like the idea that it is foolish to do inhuman things and use the excuse that "I'm only human".
Human Nature is good, but humans are animals. That is not to say that all animals are inherently evil and some animals might even be good. I think that true human nature involves rising above our desires, seeking wisdom and truth. Some people speak about love as if to not fully grasp it's meaning. It must include a love of wisdom or what you might call a fearless search for wisdom. Letting go of desire could be seen as a Christian, Muslim, or Buddhist concept (and perhaps other belief systems, also). Think of the Jewish and Christian idea "I shall not want".. Isn't that like saying "I shall not desire"? Letting go of desire (or however you want to say it) may be difficult at times. If I have a strong desire to overcome desire am I not going to find it easy to overcome desire. Perhaps desire is good, but if it controls you it can become addictive.

[brucejoel99]

The terms "good" & "bad" are constructs invented by humans, most of whom have a vague understanding of them & often disagree with each other. As such, it's impossible for humans to be born inherently possessing some vague, disagreed upon labels that we simply made up.

[John Dule]

The terms "good" & "bad" are constructs invented by humans, most of whom have a vague understanding of them & often disagree with each other. As such, it's impossible for humans to be born inherently possessing some vague, disagreed upon labels that we simply made up.

Sagest post of the year so far. "Goodness" doesn't exist.

[°Leprechaun]

The terms "good" & "bad" are constructs invented by humans, most of whom have a vague understanding of them & often disagree with each other. As such, it's impossible for humans to be born inherently possessing some vague, disagreed upon labels that we simply made up.

Yes, this is an old idea going back at least to the time of Shakespeare. Hamlet said that nothing is either good or bad, but our thinking makes something good or bad.


Many people use the terms in reference to their feelings. It feels good it feels bad.
Many would say that making another feel bad is bad. Many make the mistake of thinking a sweet gift is a good thing, but sugar at least in excess, can kill you. Obviously "carbs" have "carbon" and "carbon" (except in moderation) can be seen as something bad.

Low carb or no carb diets are popular and I think effective. I would call them good. Although all of what I have said is obviously a gross oversimplification and one cliché sums all of this up very very well. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." ("nice" is not always "good").
Ignorance is bliss. Those who don't pay attention tend not to be angry, but is ignorance really strengh, if, in the long run it can come up and bite you?

[Kleine Scheiße]

"Human nature" is speculative and a retroactive designation. Humans may have nature, but not for bioessentialist reasons. "Human nature" is a set of general principles of behavior that are consistent in >85% or so of human beings. "Goodness," to the extent that it exists, is whatever sociocultural coding has decided that it is, and archetypally "good" things are typically associated with comfort, security, "clean" economic productivity, and authority. "Bad" things are typically associated with disorder, "pain," more sidebar forms of productivity, fear, and uncertainty. This "bad" is as divine a path as "good."

The closest thing to a true "human nature" is our collective instinct to deny facts and try to rationalize them to fit our current worldview before just marking down the whole thing as personal failure.