EMPOWER Addiction Recovery

Home » Psychology » Abnormal Psychology » Propensity to Evil

Propensity to Evil

Advertisements

By Veronica Emilia Nuzzolo,  Ph.D., CADC

good versus evilThe sixteenth century Puritan belief of original sin, the ideology that children are born evil and need to be civilized through harsh punishment and authoritative parental control,,

“Tabula Rasa” “blank slates,” Philosopher John Locke’s opposition to authoritarianism, the concept that human characteristics are attained through learning,,

Jean Jacques Rousseau, innate goodness, the rejection of Puritan belief, the rejection of Locke’s theories, the concept of inherent goodness. 

Innate goodness, the existence of evil, neither can be denied,, biblical concepts provide explanation for the existence of good and evil, but what secular concept can explain the existence of good and evil personalities.

Freudian theory, the unconscious, sex and aggression, attempts to explain but is not a predictor of behavior. Freud believed that all people are innately bad, the unconscious mind governs behavior and ones behavior is determined by the id, the ego, and the superego. The id (the pleasure principle), is dominant when we are born and the suppression by society of the animalistic instinct causes frustration and creates the  destructive, cruel, and selfish personality.

Refuting psychoanalytical theory, behavioral theorists suggest that innately good or bad is a learned characteristic. People are described in terms of the basic way they behave, behaviorists such as Watson and Skinner theorize that the first learned experiences in life are those that will shape the individual regardless of the unconscious mind or biological components. Behavioral theorists concur with the blank slate theory of development, and believe that one can be taught, molded, learn whatever one is introduced to, indicating that being innately good or bad is an outcome, a learned behavior.

The humanistic perspective, the “Third Force” unwilling to embrace Freudian or Behavioral theory, reject the theories of determinism, the unconscious instinctive forces, behaviorism, good behavior must be learned,  and believe in the innate goodness of humanity. In response to previous theories, humanistic theorists such as Rogers and Maslow contend that people are capable of and can increase self-understanding, good or bad, through the individual perception and interpretation of experience.The major premise of the Third Force is that people are basically good, people have an innate need to better themselves and the world, the premise of individual self-worth, the ability to overcome the negative aspects of life, and self-actualization.

Good versus Evil

Do we have a propensity to evil, are we born evil, or are we born inherently good?   Are personal beliefs of good versus evil just myths, or are we simply products of Darwinian theory and billions of years of evolution.

Humanistic theories reject the Christian belief that people are born evil.  Maslow stated “as far as I know we just don’t have any intrinsic instincts for evil.” (i) Carl Rogers stated, “For myself, though I am very well aware of the incredible amount of destructive, cruel, malevolent behavior in today’s world, from the threats of war to the senseless violence in the streets, I do not find that this evil is inherent in human nature (1982) (ii).”

The humanistic perspective continues to focus on the belief that development and innate good consist of elements comprised from the environment, the relationship between nature and nurture. Rogers (1982) “I see members of the human species, like members of other species, as essentially constructive in their fundamental nature, but damaged by their experience.” (i) This external factor, the environment, the world outside of the individual and all it entails.  This experience, this belief that social influence is a major contributing factor in development, the component that allows choice. The “Belief of Perfectibility of the Race” as Godwin suggested, that there are no innate principles, and therefore no original propensity to evil, he considered that “our virtues and our vices may be traced to the incidents which make the history of our lives, and if these incidents could be divested of every improper tendency, vice would be extirpated from the world.” (iii).

The theory of  choice the ability to possess free will.

And in the end… developmentalists will reject all religious, secular, and philosophic views of development, including the theory of free will.

Beginning with Baldwin the study of development is now pursued through new scientific methods. Baldwin suggested that traits are determinants of personality limiting one’s ability to have free will. This theory of determinism suggests that a person’s behavior is biological and that one genetically inherits traits, and that these biological traits will determine specific characteristic responses, personality.

Biological and trait theorists support the scientific process and contend that biology, genetics, hereditary traits, determine an individual’s development. From this perspective growth and development and your personality is genetically hard wired and determined for you. Biological and trait theorists continue to defend that innate good is a biological, inherent trait. Innate Good, predetermined, a biological trait that one may or may not possess.

Is this an affirmation that a propensity to evil exists within human nature?

References:
(i) Welch, D., Tate, G.A., & Richards F. (1978). Humanistic Psychology (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1978), 11.
(ii) Rogers, C., (1982) “Notes on Rollo May,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology (Summer 1982): 8.
(iii) Godwin, W., (1793). Enquiry concerning political justice and its influence on modern morals and manners. London.

How to cite this article:
Nuzzolo, V. E. (2016).  Propensity to Evil.  Retrieved from, https://risetoshinetoday.org/2016/03/01/tabula-rasa/

Advertisements

81 Comments

  1. sanunez27 says:

    I agree because I know that when a baby is born they don’t know much. A lot of our behavior is learned from the family we were born in and the environment we are in. Environment has a lot to do with the good/evil simply because depending on what you grow up witnessing it can effect your behavior or the way you think. Also the family you are born into teaches you what they believe is “right” and “wrong”, they teach you their morals, values and expectations. They teach you their perspective on life, etc. But I do believe that it is impossible to actually tell what makes a person “evil” or “good” because everyone grows up differently. Take siblings for example, they grow up in the same household, go through the same ups and downs and one sibling may grow up to continue to struggle the way they did growing up while the other decides to study because they don’t want to struggle the way they did growing up. I feel like its mostly based on the individual and how they handle life. Not everyone handles things the same, some take life harder than others.

    Like

  2. aymarasoto says:

    “Tabula Rasa” “blank slates,” Philosopher John Locke’s opposition to authoritarianism, the concept that human characteristics are attained through learning. To think that babies were born evil for me is just nonsense.

    I do definitely agree with this because I feel that babies are born innocent and evil free, as they grow, they start developing who they are and will be thru the parent’s guidance, good and evil are shown in our circle (family, friends or even religion) Many factors can make a person be good or bad or even have both in them, I can see how nature and nurture can make someone incline toward good behavior or evil behavior. Also reading about the Biological and traits makes me understand how some traits are hereditary and how those can determine how a child will develop but also that wont define them as a person.

    Like

  3. willjoseph21 says:

    The term ‘Idea’ as defined by Locke does not have its usual sense. We think of Ideas as very close to ‘concept’. Locke, however, defined Idea as whatever is the object of understanding when a man thinks. Ideas are treated as sensory images. Locke pursues to demonstrate that all human knowledge is based on experience. As a Christian, this position is in sharp contrast to my religious beliefs and also with other major philosophers of his time, namely René Descartes, Lord Herbert of Cherbury, Henry More and Leibniz. If Locke does not deny that humans are born with innate faculties or natural tendencies, such as perception and reason; however, he denies that God imprinted specific ideas and principals in our mind at birth.Arguing from the base of his own experience Locke challenges religious and political standards with his everyday language, illustrated with classic and biblical allusions easy to read and understand.

    Like

  4. Hiba says:

    There could be many reasons why someone behavioral and views are set. Two words that I felt summed up the entire article were, Nature and Nurture. Based on my own experience, I believe the environment that a person lives in and the type of nurture was received would determine the majority of the behavioral and cognitive thinking. For instance, my first child spent his first four years being very friendly, quiet, and generous to all around him. He was very selfless.

    My son’s nature and nurture immediately had changed after his sister was born. She began to take away some of the attention and shared some of his space and as she grew, she began to share also his toys and have some of her own. My son began to show a sign of jealousness and selfishness. My son’s behavioral and attitude change did not occur because of any evilness he had when he was born nor to any genetical or biological genes he possessed or didn’t. His behavioral and cognitive thinking had changed because of his experienced a change and he did not like it compared to what it was before. He lost some of the attention and nurture, and that is why I agree with Carl Rogers’ Humanistic perspective “that development and innate good consist of elements comprised from the environment, the relationship between nature and nurture.”

    Like

  5. ojune4 says:

    I think that the theory of “Tabula Rasa” by Locke accounts for the majority of learned things from infancy and that we are born neither good nor evil. Before babies are even born they are learning in the womb and able to hear and recognize voices and words. I do not believe that humans have complete free will and instead, that we are faced with conflicting characteristics from genetics and nature vs nurture. From a biological standpoint, there are genetic characteristics that we can inherit that we can not help, such as a mental disorder. But a person has a choice (which can be considered free-will) to get help and medical support for their condition. I believe that the nature vs. nurture theory is related to this because people are affected by their environment and that can help them make good choices or bad ones. If the nurture part, your environmental influences are negative and nobody is trying to help you develop as a child, then it may be more difficult to make good decisions that will move you along towards self-actualization. Though this is not always the case, there have been many times when people have against all odds managed to better themselves and rise above their bad situations, which shows they have strong free-will and intrinsic drive to better themselves. But I do not believe that we are born inherently good or evil because it is too subjective to categorize people that way.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Netra Kumari Bhattarai says:

    I believe that babies are born as blank slates, and start to built who they are, there belief thought life with their experiences. we as human beings, learn what it to be good and to be evil. we learn what we should and shouldn’t doing whether we learn by being taught or just by our own experiences. i consider the family as the primary school of a human being, since they are the people with whom we spend more time and educate us. However, there are acts that clearly in society we all know are bad or negative. some as children they are born as angels with no evil, what parents teaches them that is what they will know and practice. children learn wrong things from friends and practice it, they know it is wrong but they do it to keep their friendship. no one comes out of their mother’s womb hating other races, but as they grow up it’s most definitely a learned mentality, usually one where a child has little room to think for his/herself about they really fell.

    Like

  7. Jessica Loiseau says:

    I have never heard of the term “Tabula Rasa” but I do believe that children were all born this way. No one is born with the notion that they are either good or evil. I agree with Skinner and Watson that “the first learned experiences in life are those that will shape the individual regardless of the unconscious mind or biological components”. I believe that good and evil characteristics are learn behaviors. I also agree with the humanistic theory that “people are capable of and can increase self-understanding, good or bad, through the individual perception and interpretation of experience”. Depending on what you surround your child with they can inherit those traits. I do believe that social influence is a major factor in development. A lot of children want to do what they see others doing. If they feel like an action is “cool” whether it’s good or bad, they mirror these actions. I do not agree with biological and trait theorists that “support scientific process and contend that biology, genetics, hereditary traits, determine an individual’s development. From this perspective growth and development and your personality is genetically hard wired and determined for you.” I have a sibling and we both carry different characteristics. If this theory were true, I believe that all children born in the same family will carry the same personality traits. No one is born good or evil. We all are born with “blank slates” and our environment and the things we learn shape us and that determines if you’re “good” or “evil”.

    Like

  8. cxrojo says:

    personally, I believe in the humanistic perspective,“The humanistic perspective continues to focus on the Believe that developments and innate good consist of elements comprised from the environment, the relationship between nature and nurture. ”As individuals no one born good or evil. everyone as a human being learn from others. Everything that we know and what we do is learned. Being a person good or evil depends of what other people that are around you have been taught you. Also, it depends in what kind of environment are you living because depending on that, you have to react with good or evil. Also, a child is born without any knowledge, even when they born, they do not have an idea what good and evil means. At that time our models are our parents and we always do and are what we see that they do or say. Also by the time pass everything that is learned is though experiences and choices that we have to make, which ones makes us to change our behavior.

    Like

  9. Hamza Benmensour says:

    I find the previous belief that babies were born evil as a very foolish statement. I believe that many adults felt insecure about their evilness and wanted to feel better by blaming children who are innocent to make themselves feel better. Like many I have never been introduced to the term Tabula Rasa however I certainly agree with it. Throughout the years I have seen posts on Facebook or Instagram about how babies are not born racist because they play with children regardless of skin color. However, as they grow up their parents might restrict their playtime with kids of other colors and they will learn to discriminate against anyone with that skin color. This is the same concept we’ve seen in the article we are born pure and innocent and throughout our lifetime we learn a lot of things that might make us “evil” or “good.” And no one is born evil regardless of anything and everything is learned.

    Like

  10. nsujit says:

    This article describes the human characteristics with different perspective of theorist and their different theories of human behavior. I was not familiar about the Puritan belief of original sin and children inherited evil . I think “Tabula Rasa ” the Latin word when translated to english means “clean state ” actually defines the learning behavior as human characteristics .The theorist like Freud and Puritan and their theories on human characteristics doesn’t make any sense to me personally. I believe on the behavioral theory .Some phenotype characteristics can be dominant and expressed as heredity but these cannot be used to prove a theory.
    I think there is nothing good or evil,it is moment of time that makes anything good or evil. Anything good for someone could be evil to another for example if a child learns martial arts it is good for his /her health and for self defense, but can be evil if he/she misuses it.When, we go back to the theory of evolution, we evolved from animals. So, we have some of it instinct as a recessive characteristics which under certain circumstances can be expressed. Thus human behavioral cannot be explained by theorist or any theories. Behavior are characterized by learning and sometimes inherited.

    Like

  11. Alejandra Castillo says:

    I personally, think that is impossible to believe that we are born with evil. What I do believe is that everything evil and good is learned in the course of life. It depends on what kind of environment the children grow up in. they will experience situations that will make them be Good or bad. I don’t believe that evil is biological. The genetic tendencies towards aggressive behaviors do not imply that there is a gene of evil because that would mean that the entire family would be evil. It is not something that can be inherited or carried in the blood as a single gene that causes everything. If it were really true that we are born evil, what is the effort in raising a child or the need to educate someone? … There are evil people and that can not be denied … it is difficult to say whether they were really born evil or was their environment and upbringing that gave them those characteristics.

    Like

  12. Hussein Hussein says:

    I never heard of the term “Tabula Rasa,” but now that I know what it is I agree that people are born with clean slates and that they learn about everything they know because a child is good from when he is born but rottened by the world and people don’t just come out of the womb and are already bad. Evilness is learned behavior passed down from generation to generation. Humans don’t know what good or evil are when they are born they learn it from their surroundings and we keep on learning what is the difference throughout life. Christian beliefs that people are born evil are extremely false because nobody could be born evil and I cannot believe that Christian long ago would believe that their child from god was evil. Additionally, I believe in what Biological and trait theorist think “support the scientific process and contend that biology, genetics, hereditary traits, determine an individual’s development.” This is true because the chromosome passed on from your parents can determine how the child comes out and if they function properly.
    HUSSIEN HUSSIEN

    Like

  13. KENNY LUONG says:

    This is interesting to me because I never knew that there were so many theories to inherent traits that babies have. Previously, I was only aware of the concept of Tabula Rosa and partly the Freudian theory of sex drive and determinism, but I never knew that Puritans believed that children were inherently evil. This is especially alarming to me because how can anyone look at a baby or a child and assume they’re evil! Literally, just look at a baby’s face, and I dare you to tell me that they look evil, it is simply not possible. For me, I believe that humans cannot be reliably predicted based on religious or even scientific knowledge. We really don’t have enough information about each individual to know what their intent is. However, I do agree with Maslow’s principles. Humans are still animals, we need food and we have an increased drive for food and other needs when our bodies are out of balance, thus showing different or altered behaviors. But on the complex side, such as emotions or personal goals, I believe it is truly impossible to predict if someone is evil or good. After all, everyone may have different definitions of “good” or “bad”.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Comments

sanunez27 on Propensity to Evil
sanunez27 on Perfectly Imperfect
Netra Kumari Bhattar… on Perfectly Imperfect
aymarasoto on Perfectly Imperfect
aymarasoto on Propensity to Evil

Categories

%d bloggers like this: