Zach 8urke

Are people naLurally good or naLurally evll?

lor cenLurles now people have sald over and over agaln LhaL Lhe Puman
mlnd ls Lhe besL weapon LhaL we as Lhe human race can have 8uL whaL abouL our
mlnd ls so dangerous"? l mean leL's sLop and Lhlnk of some of Lhe greaLesL mlnds
LhaL Lhe human race has ever known LlnsLeln laLo ArlsLoLle08.,7908 even
Lhe llkes of SLeve !obs and 8lll CaLes uld Lhey ever do anyLhlng LhaL was
dangerous Lo us as humans? 1haL's slmple no All of Lhese greaL mlnds along wlLh
many oLhers have only helped beLLer our llves as humans and have helped make
llfe easler for us (lL 1echnology)
8uL Lhe blgger quesLlon ln my mlnd ls are we as people naLurally good wlLh
a few evll Lendencles or are we as people naLurally evll wlLh a few good
Lendencles? 1here are many dlfferenL ways Lo examlne how one would go abouL
answerlng Lhls quesLlon ?ou have Lo focus on Lhe Lheory of SubsLance uuallsm
whlch ls Lhe Lheory LhaL sLaLes LhaL Lhere ls Lwo subsLances boLh physlcal and
nonphyslcal componenLs (Philosophy of Mind) 1here ls also SubsLance Monlsm
whlch ls Lhe Lheory LhaL Lhere ls no dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe physlcal and non
physlcal (Philosophy of Mind) Along wlLh roperLy uuallsm whlch ls Lhe Lheory
LhaL Lhe nonphyslcal properLles of Lhe human mlnd cannoL be fully explalned
(Philosophy of Mind)
For the Iirst attempt at answering the question oI, are people naturally good
or naturally evil? We will examine the theory oI Substance Dualism. The
Substance Dualism theory was thought oI by French philosopher Rene Descartes,
who had this idea to prove the thought oI I think thereIore I am. He Iocused on the
idea that the human mind itselI was a separate Iorm oI physical existence Irom the
human body itselI. 0nn09)
Which when examining the question above it seems like he may not even be
close to Iinding the answer we are looking Ior. Why am I saying that so quickly
without even really looking into the theory? Well because iI we are saying that our
mind helps decide what we do and that we think about every action we make
beIore making, Ior example pre-meditated murder, then our mind would have to be
a part oI our body telling our brain to tell our body to take action. I`m not saying
that every person who thinks about doing something is a murderer but what I am
saying is every action you take in liIe you think about it beIore you do it. Even Ior
a nanosecond you still had that thought oI what consequences may come with each
action we take.
So back to Descartes theory oI Substance dualism, Descartes Iocused in his
studies oI separating the mind Irom conIusing images oI the senses towards what
he believed to the indubitable truths contained within the mind that we don`t
realize that are already there. 0nn09)
So with these indubitable truths oI right and wrong one can assume are the
moral values we hold so highly today already in our mind according to Descartes
then that would lean more towards the argument that we as people are naturally
good, while we still have evil qualities. II we agree with the theory oI Substance
Dualism then you have to be on the side oI the argument that people are naturally
good. (I.E. The Pope, Martin Luther King Jr. etc.)
1he second Lheory we are golng Lo examlne ls Lhe Lheory of SubsLance
Monlsm SubsLance Monlsm ls Lhe bellef LhaL Lhere ls only one enLlLy ln Lhe
unlverse LhaL Lhere ls no dlfference beLween Lhe physlcal and Lhe nonphyslcal
MosL of Lhose who belleve Lhls Lheory belleve ln Lhe Lheory of maLerlallsm where
everyLhlng ln Lhe unlverse ls made up of a physlcal naLure buL lL geLs even deeper
Lhan LhaL wlLh Lhe sub caLegorles of behavlorlsm whlch Lrles Lo explaln whaL
behavlors ls relaLed Lo cerLaln menLal sLaLes (lbllosopby of MloJ) luncLlonallsm
whlch ls Lhe Lheory LhaL menLal sLaLes are deflned by Lhe effecL Lhey have on our
acLlons (lbllosopby of MloJ) LasL ls Lhe mlndbraln ldenLlLy Lheory whlch ls Lhe
Lheory LhaL Lhe mlnd and Lhe braln are ln lLself one physlcal Lhlng and Lhere ls no
dlfference beLween a menLal sLaLe and a braln sLaLe (lbllosopby of MloJ)
So afLer examlnlng Lhe Lheory of SubsLance Monlsm Lhe answer we are
looklng for seems Lo be even furLher away WlLh Lhe baslc bellef belng LhaL Lhere
ls no dlfference beLween Lhe braln and mlnd whlch would mean LhaL everyLhlng
we Lhlnk of dolng we do Whlch we all know lsn'L Lrue We have all LhoughL some
off Lhe wall crazy LhoughL buL LhaL does noL mean LhaL we have gone Lhrough
wlLh Lhe acLlon LhaL came wlLh Lhe LhoughL Whlch means whlle we all have had
evll LhoughLs we never fulfllled Lhose LhoughLs wlLh Lhe acLlons needed Lo Lake
place
1he flnal Lheory we are golng Lo examlne ls Lhe Lheory of roperLy uuallsm
whlch ls Lheory LhaL whlle Lhe physlcal and Lhe nonphyslcal are made of dlfferenL
elemenLs Lhey are found ln Lhe same ob[ecLs MosL of Lhe people who belleve ln
Lhls Lheory belleve LhaL Lhe menLal sLaLe and Lhe physlcal sLaLe whlle found ln Lhe
same ob[ecLs are compleLely dlfferenL from each oLher (MooJlk)
1hls one ls Lrlcky when looklng for an answer Lo our quesLlon lf lL ls Lrue
LhaL whlle Lhe menLal and physlcal come from Lhe same ob[ecL buL yeL are
composed of dlfferenL elemenLs how Lhen does LhaL LranslaLe lnLo our LhoughLs
becomlng acLlons? ln a way lL's slmply Lhe mlnd ls found wlLhln Lhe braln and Lhe
braln conLrols our acLlons whlle our mlnd conLrols our LhoughLs 1herefore we see
Lhe Lheory ln full effecL whlle boLh subsLances are found wlLhln Lhe same place
Lhe elemenLs LhaL make Lhem are compleLely dlfferenL So ln a way whlle our
mlnd Lhlnks lL our braln does lL
So afLer all of Lhls whaL ls Lhe correcL answer? 1haL's [usL lL maybe Lhere
lsn'L one rlghL or wrong answer Maybe lL ls all a maLLer of personal oplnon l
belleve LhaL people are naLurally evll wlLh a few good Lendencles Llke uescarLes
who was a man a falLh l am Lo and l belleve ln Lhe Cospel of !esus whlch Lells us
we are all evll All we have Lo do ls look all around us Lvery day we see on Lhe
news people belng shoL people robblng banks kldnapplng klds and even more
recenLly Lhe whole lncldenL aL enn SLaLe unlverslLy Where a person who
everyone around hlm LhoughL was a good person ended up belng accused of
counLless numbers of chlld molesLaLlon lncldenLs l mean lf people assume we are
good Lhen do someLhlng evll" Lhen yes LhaL could be an argumenL of people
belng naLurally good buL whaL was golng Lhrough hls head hls mlnd Pe had Lo
have LhoughL ouL hls acLlons and puL Lhem lnLo acLlon
So afLer examlnlng Lhe Lhree ma[or Lheorles of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe mlnd
ln SubsLance uuallsm SubsLance Monlsm and roperLy uuallsm and searchlng
for an answer Lo Lhe quesLlon of wheLher or noL people are naLurally good wlLh
evll Lendencles or naLurally evll wlLh good Lendencles l feel we have come Lo Lhe
concluslon LhaL Lhe answer Lo Lhe quesLlon ls as of rlghL now all of personal
oplnon l feel sadly LhaL we may never know Lhe answer buL wlLh Lhe greaL mlnds
LhaL conLlnue Lo emerge wlLhln Lhe world Lhere ls hope LhaL one day a human
mlnd wlll flnally be able Lo undersLand Lhe human mlnd














Work ClLaLlons

O Philosophy oI Mind. Philosophy of Mind. 2005. Web. 1 Nov. 2011.
http://www.philosophyoImind.inIo/~.

O Dennet, Daniel. Philosophy oI Mind - Dualism - Substance Dualism.
99p.//www.philosophyonlin0.co.uk. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
http://www.philosophyonline.co.uk/pom/pomdennettintroduction.htm~.

O Mandlk eLe ulcLlonary of hllosophy of Mlnd roperLy uuallsm pottmot
of lbllosopby uolvtslty of wottloo 11 May 2004 Web 13 CcL 2011
hLLp//phllosophyuwaLerlooca/MlndulcL/properLyduallsmhLml