Pick one of the following prompts to answer:
*Are people inherently good or bad? Based on your answer how should government protect us from evil people?
*What are the characteristics to the ideal government? What barriers exist in the real world to the actualization of this ideal government?
20 comments:
Instead of saying 'people are either born good or bad', I believe people are born neutral. Depending on how they grow up and who influences them may make it seem like a child is 'bad' or a child is 'good'. If a child is born, and their whole life are told how to be right (or in other words, good) then that child will seem to be born good. The opposite also applies, if a child is raised in a bad environment, and their parents are criminals, what they believe is good, is really bad.
Then again the definition of good and bad does change between the two children. The good and bad I'm talking about is the general social view of good and bad.
I believe that sadly people are generally bad. Not necessarily bad, but they are only out for themselves. If someone will self another down the river to better themselves, i am sure 90% of people would take that chance. The government should protect us from this by setting laws in place, as they have, to keep self rights and make sure no one is swindled by another.
People are inherently bad because they have to learn there morals over time and most people would probably have no morals if they didn't have any human experience. The government can't protect us from evil people because all the people who are not smart enough to do any real evil go into the government, except for the few really evil people through history who went into the government.
I think humans are inherently good. I believe this because this is what I would like to believe. I can't prove this scientifically but it is what I would like to believe humans are. There is evidence in history with just basic formations of society and activist groups that strive towards making the world a better place. There are definitely more people trying to create good than bad. Good and bad is relative to each culture so it can be interpreted differently. I think government should try to use its influence and power to protect us from outside attacks and also inside threats such as gun violence and crime. They can do this with police enforcement and education.
I would say that most people are inherently good. It is more common that people argue that what is moral is what is right. But there are some people that are not inherently good, maybe because of the way they grew up or it's just their personality, which is what makes the existence of a moral argument possible in the first place. Governments need laws that punish people for making serious bad actions. Like killing, raping, stealing, etc.
The characteristics of the ideal government to me would be one that takes down what the people want and need and applys them in the actions that they do.They consider the decisions by how effective they will be and also sometimes take to considerations if its necessary to do and the morality of the situation.The barriers that exist in the real word are Utilitarianism.The government uses Utilitarianism For example war,The act of war itself can be considered unjust but the outcome of war is usually positive.
People are inherently evil. Fundamentally we are, however, good. Years of evolution and instinct have caused us to become walking hypocrites. At some level we hate ourselves for what allowed us to come to the point that we are. This is why we fight, enjoy killing, and have no extreme dislike for violence at young ages. In reality all of us are attempting to domesticate a wild beast that has had eons to work defenses against domestication.
The government cannot protect us from evil people because 'evil' does not exist. Not only that but the views of evil have been obscured and turned slowly into mistrust on all sides. For example, the invention of the back porch played a major role in our lives. No longer do we sit facing our neighbors, instead we turn away from them. Creating fences dictated that we did not trust things, be it at first animals eventually it turned towards humans. Creating boundaries showed our mistrust until eventually we have grown to hate the government as well as the 'evil' criminals that they attempt to prosecute.
I think people are naturally born with evil and good intentions. I think its all about how you were raised, someone people were raised in an environment were they didn't see people with morals thus they are a product of their environment. I think that the government should try to make every neighborhood one were kids can grow up with morals.
It is in my personal opinion that people are inherently good. I believe that everyone starts out good in the beginning, and that whether they turn out good or bad as they get older depends on their environment, experiences, and influences. Even if someone were to turn bad over the course of time, I still think that they would be capable of changing their view on society, the world, or etc. and becoming good again with the proper persuasion.
I don't think that people are ever completely evil, so I'm not going to refer to anyone as such. But I do believe that people make horrible choices and some make more than others. In order to protect us from these "evil" people, the government should enforce the laws they've set out for their citizens to abide by and punish the people who break them with punishments that are fit for the crimes those people committed.
I believe people are inherently good. One of the main reasons is that most people are born with a conscience, the ability to understand morals and act morally according to their societies rules. It is rare to find a 'moral monster' or someone who knows that their actions are bad, but does not care either way. The majority of people go through life with little to no trouble, they have family and friends, they grow old, then they die. Some on the other hand are affected by these so called "moral monsters" and may have a loved one die, or be raped, or assaulted. The best way for our government to protect us then would be not to try and convince these select few whose conscience was lost in the birthing process that they need to be moral, but rather remove them from our society. There problems are not rooted in their brain, they are EMBEDDED their, making them nigh impossible to remove. Complete seperation from these people from the majority would be the most ideal answer. I believe medicine, or even surgery should be used to maybe give back a little morality to those who are not blessed with it at birth.
1. When people are born, i don't think they are good or bad, they are more like innocent. All they think about is surviving and they grow up to be good or bad depending on their environment. The only thing that the government can do is punish the evil people for what they've done wrong. Like if they steal from someone, give them 30 days in jail or a fine. Punish them according to the type of crime they committed. They can't really do anything before the crime is committed. The one thing they could do is change the environment. Most people become this way because of their encounters or environment. If the government spent time and money improving these things; then maybe the next generation of people will grow up with better values and less crime.
I think that an ideal government protects and provides certain human and civil rights to all of its citizens, and all non-citizens that reside within its boundaries. I think that those human and civil rights should include things like quality health care, a good and rounded education (including post-high school options), food, shelter, freedom of speech, protection from discrimination, and a clean environment. I think that the government does not have to provide these services to people that can provide them to themselves, but I think that they need to provide them to those who cannot. I think that these things are needed in order for all people to have the ability to lead a happy, successful, and fair life. I think that an economic system without a government to keep it in line creates disparities between the poor and rich that end up oppressing those that do not have power within the economic system. Some real-world barriers include; raising money so that the government can provide those services, constituents that believe that a good government does not provide those services, trying to provide services to those who need them without stigmatizing them, striking a balance between the government not doing enough and the government becoming too overbearing.
1. Niether because it is based on how you are taught, raised and your experiences. Like for example, if you witnessed a murder, you probably will become a murderer. They should make laws as guidelines. They should punish those that break the laws and do bad to others like put them in jail. They should make them pay fines if it's a minor offense. They should use the death penalty if they are like a mass murderer/serial killer. They should have security for the people like army or a police force.
I think people are inherently neutral. I believe everyone is born with a natural ability to be good, but also that they can't be born knowing what is good or bad. Their experiences in the early stages of their life would influence that. I also don't believe that people do bad things with the intention of being bad. In other words, they know it's bad because people say it is, but they don't understand what makes it that way. Because of this, I have a hard time believing that truly evil people can exist. I don't really know how the government should protect us from evil people. There are only so many things they can do and the best systems of protection would no doubt conflict with our personal and human rights. I think that the systems that our government has in place, at least for the most part, are pretty good. I think there are some things that should not be in place because of their invasion of privacy. For example, the screening at airports is a very good system, but it is incredibly invasive to many people who haven't done anything.
People are inherently good. While some people do bad things and lack morals, most people at least want to do good as a result of their upbringing and the society we live in. We want justice for others just as much as we want to be treated justly. The reason it might seem that people are inherently bad is that it is much easier to destroy things and create anger and fear than it is to create things and calm people; this makes it much more apparent when people do bad than when they do good. The government should protect us from evil people by doing what it does now - incarcerating criminals and trying to keep us safe. It should not, however, be involved with our personal lives in ways that are irrelevant to keeping people safe from each other.
I believe that people are inherently good. People are generally caring and aware of others, and those who commit crimes or harm others tend to have reasons or are messed up from bad experiences; some do "evil" because of mental issues. Whatever the reason, the government has a duty to protect its people from crime. First, there are preventative measures in the form of laws, which threaten punishment. "Evil people" who are likely to harm people again should be kept away from the public. Whether in prison or some mental institute, the criminal should be in an environment in which he or she can reflect and grow rather than regress. Since people are inherently good, I think there is always a possibility of change. So, the government should make laws to prevent wrongdoing, protect the public from evil people through separation, and try to change the ways of the criminals.
I think that all people are inherently bad but choose to be good. Humans are also selfish, which causes them to do bad things sometimes. We may try to do the right and moral thing but deep down I believe that we don't want to but we do because it is what we were taught to do. If we weren't civilized, for example, and were not taught what is right and what is wrong our society would be chaos. Everyone would do whatever they wanted no matter how it effects others. Since in this hypothetical situation there wouldn't be a discernment between right and wrong, why would we choose to do right when it isn't always what we want to do? The government is doing the best job it can right now to protect us from evil people by punishing those evil acts. This sends a message to the rest of the population that it is something we shouldn't do and it comes with undesirable consequences. By teaching us from a young age what to do, our society knows that humans are inherently bad. We grow up to lear how to live to be good, and our government could only do one thing, in my opinion, to better their protection from ourselves. The government should have less loopholes in the law so that the true bad people can be punished.
We come from a primitive culture. I think humans are naturally bad, because they don't know any better. As we live, we learn. We have certain things to help us learn along the way the way of life; like our brain, and mind. But mostly our conscience drives us toward a more moral based way of living. People need to learn how to be good from experience in society. How can we know what's right and wrong if somebody does show us? What makes the little voice in our head say "this is wrong, this is wrong"? Plenty of the first civilizations have been recorded to do some pretty nasty and immoral things. We can't hold it against them tough, because it was such a long time ago, and they didn't know any better.
Post a Comment