Human, good or Evil,what about other animals?

[WaterD]

I've discussed several times without any conclussion if by nature animals and/or humans are GOOD or EVIL.
I mean, i personally care for other people, I feel bad when i see other people bad. I think i'm good by nature, but other people argued that my social environment, make me fell like that.
Some people feel evil, like to hurt other lives beeings, other good, like to help.
I see people caring a lot about cows , other just eat them with no problem.
So asking again.
Animals/humans, care for the well of others by nature or is only socially learned.

[CP489]

I don't think it's cut and dry.

Animals care for others when it's evolutionarily advantageous, for either themselves or the species.



It generally takes some sort of psychologically damaging event to make a person capable and willing to commit evil deeds. Those with a "normal" upbringing are basically good people. So I'd say that it's natural.

I don't think whether one is a vegetarian or not is a proper way to judge someone as good or evil. That's nature as well, our evolution is such that we became omnivorous. Though we are now at such a stage at which we have the luxury of choosing, it goes against our human nature to be vegetarian.

[Darat]

One of the problems ;) of looking too closely at the animal world is that we see behaviour which is indistinguishable to human behaviour. If we label those behaviours in humans as "good" or "evil" how can we say that those behaviours are not also "good" or "evil"?

For example we see examples of altruistic behaviour in humans, most people seem to consider altruism as "good"; we also see examples of altruistic behaviour in other animals, therefore...... ?

[WaterD]

"Animals care for others when it's evolutionarily advantageous, for either themselves or the species."

Animals/humans also helps other animals/humans from other species. And the only advantage they get about the other beeing good is feeling themselves good.

IF i see a dog in the street suffering, i care, i feel bad. And definitly that dog can't help me in anyway other that make me feel good if it gets better. This phenomen happens in several humans , and i dare to say animals.

Now that's A "good" feeling.
I've seen people just burning a cat in flames for fun. That's "bad" or "evil" and other people just don't caring what the hell happens with the other, i could call it neutral. How do you think animals and humans are by "nature"

[Darat]

I don't think it's cut and dry.

Animals care for others when it's evolutionarily advantageous, for either themselves or the species.


I may be reading more into your comment then you meant but it seems as if you are saying that humans behave as we do for some other reason?


It generally takes some sort of psychologically damaging event to make a person capable and willing to commit evil deeds. Those with a "normal" upbringing are basically good people. So I'd say that it's natural.

...snip...


I disagree; the evidence is that people's behaviour is influenced by the environment they are in and given the "wrong" environment people that are considered "ordinary" will behave in a way that we would tend to label "evil". An experiment that seems to support my view would be the Stanford Prison Experiment (http://www.prisonexp.org/).

(I'm not saying that a "psychologically damaging event" is not the reason for some "evil" behaviour however I would say it does not explain the majority of evil behaviour.)

[CP489]

"Animals care for others when it's evolutionarily advantageous, for either themselves or the species."

Animals/humans also helps other animals/humans from other species. And the only advantage they get about the other beeing good is feeling themselves good.

IF i see a dog in the street suffering, i care, i feel bad. And definitly that dog can't help me in anyway other that make me feel good if it gets better. This phenomen happens in several humans , and i dare to say animals.

Now that's A "good" feeling.
I've seen people just burning a cat in flames for fun. That's "bad" or "evil" and other people just don't caring what the hell happens with the other, i could call it neutral. How do you think animals and humans are by "nature"


You dare say animals, but give no example. In what scenario would an animal help an animal of a different species for only the benefit of "feeling good"?

Where is it set that all humans/animals have to have the same nature? Could I not have been born good and Hitler (to use the cliche example) evil?

[CP489]

I may be reading more into your comment then you meant but it seems as if you are saying that humans behave as we do for some other reason?

I think that there are times when humans act benevolently out of a non-Darwinian motivation. Helping a friend feel better when they are down provides no benefit (unless they are on the brink of suicide), but I'd still do it for a variety of reasons.



I disagree; the evidence is that people's behaviour is influenced by the environment they are in and given the "wrong" environment people that are considered "ordinary" will behave in a way that we would tend to label "evil". An experiment that seems to support my view would be the Stanford Prison Experiment (http://www.prisonexp.org/).

(I'm not saying that a "psychologically damaging event" is not the reason for some "evil" behaviour however I would say it does not explain the majority of evil behaviour.)

Perhaps the circumstances in which the "good" people were placed was the psychologically damaging event.

[WaterD]

"Where is it set that all humans/animals have to have the same nature? Could I not have been born good and Hitler (to use the cliche example) evil?"

This is one possibility, there are several, i don't know i'm asking to be honest and i have little information only that my own experience.

About The question about when animals help animals of other species i can't give proof or anything like that, i can only give my experience, i've seen Dogs helping cats to get warm, or to get them out of a stucked place. I've hear of dogs adopting animals of other species. Of course i cannot prove the reasons behind their actions, the same way nobody can prove the reasons of the actions of any human.
In fact i'm not trying to present any proof of anything, probably if i had it i wouldn't been asking the question, i'm asking what people think about it, why, and if possible all evidence/proof they can throw me in.
If you think animals don't help animals of other species that's fine, just tell me why, and that's enough. it will help.

In the End i doubt someone can claim to have the definitive answer with the definitive evidence, i'm just collecting data to have a better answer (i hope)

About Humans, i personally help animals, just because i feel better doing it, because i like to see other live beings good and "happy" not always, of course is not the only important thing, i'm well capable of killing someone for half a million dollars. Still i consider myself a good person since i care for others, even if there are things more important to me than that feeling.

[CP489]

i'm well capable of killing someone for half a million dollars.


I can't consider you a good person if you would kill someone for 500 grand. That's personal opinion of course, but I don't think I could kill another human being except:

In defense of myself or my family
As part of the oath I took when I joined the USAF

[Z]

Good and evil are human notions, like politics and philosophy. They are social and cultural artifacts of higher brain function. Perhaps a few other species have related notions, but for the most part, all action is based on survival and propitiation of the species. For humans, codifying behavior is an extension of the survival instinct taken to an extreme.

[Beerina]

Animals have evolved behaviors that we consider, in humans, to be evil.

For example, a dog will try to sneak food that "belongs" to someone else, and from the behavior involved, including if caught, it's obvious the dog knows it's sneaking the thing on some primitive, emotional level.

Evilutionarily, the dog "wins", having gotten more food, and thus has increased it's chance of survival over the next few days or week or so.

Humans still have these behaviors ingrained in them, but choose to enforce standards that provide a disincentive to those behaviors because they realize, logically, that things are better without them. For example, technological development thrives best when people can keep the product of their own labor.

[Z]

Has humankind outgrown natural selection?

OK, that's a tangent. Sorry.

[andyandy]

spiders are evil.

[Z]

spiders are evil.

...So speaks the roach.

:D

[I less than three logic]

Reminds me of one of Eddie Izzard’s bits.

But with animals - what, in fact, is an evil giraffe? “I will eat all the leaves on this tree. I will eat more leaves than I should and then other giraffes may die. Ah-ha-ha. I am an evil herbivore.” It's very difficult to be evil. “I will hide berries where no one has seen them. Ha-ha.”

But with dogs, we do have bad dogs. Bad dogs exist. “Bad dog! Bad dog, stole a biscuit, bad dog.”

The dog's saying, “Who are you to judge me? You human beings have had wars against people of different creeds and colors, and I stole a biscuit? Is that a crime? People of the world!”

“Well, if you put that way, I suppose you've got a point. Have another biscuit, sorry.”

[WaterD]

This is really not helping me on the whole :( What i ask is if it's natural for humans and animals to care for the well of others, to be better if the others are better.

[Rufo]

What i ask is if it's natural for humans and animals to care for the well of others, to be better if the others are better.
As far as I know, scientists have different opinion on this matter. Some say that ruthless, evil behavior is natural and that good, altruistic behavoir is forced upon animals or humans by culture. Others are of opposite opinion - that 'good' behavior is natural and that 'evil' behavoir is rare or forced by culture. The vast majority, of course, compromise.
Personally, I'm more with the ones who believe that the good behavior is natural. Not necessarily because I think it is much more natural than some behaviors which border to evil, but because ruthlessness and 'evil' are very often overrated as a natural behavior when it comes to matters such as natural selection and human psychology.

Of course, Eddie Izzard's wisdom should never be underrated. :D

I love how he describes Paul's letters to the Corinthians:
Always treat thy neighbour as someone who lives next to you!

[WaterD]

so There are no strong evideces on either side, well, at least now i know

[DangerousBeliefs]

I can't consider you a good person if you would kill someone for 500 grand. That's personal opinion of course, but I don't think I could kill another human being except:

In defense of myself or my family
As part of the oath I took when I joined the USAF

Wait... is the killing televised? Can it be a republican?

What about tax free?

I need more clarification. :D

[Foster Zygote]

Good:

Puppies
Clydesdales
Roller skating monkeys
Mr. Hankey
Cornelius
Kittens

Evil:

Hitler/Ann Coulter
Charles Mongomery Burns
Cigar smoking monkeys
Bears
Dr. Zaius
Cats

[Dogdoctor]

Evil and good are constructs of the human mind. They only exist within your mind. So called evil in humans is a likely to be the result of a psychosis or other disorder. Other animals have similar problems only probably not so complex as some human problems. Yes it is natural and necessary for humans and other animals to behave in ways which help their species. They evolved to behave this way and their survival may depend on them behaving that way.