Human Nature:Inherently Good or Evil?

In my previous post The Ideal Bureaucracy: Is It Attainable in the Philippines? , one intelligent comment from Brain Stormer caught my attention. It added meaning, depth and substance to the post emphasizing that human nature is inherently bad.

If I may just quote in toto:

The Ideal Bureaucracy: Is It Attainable in the Philippines?

Consider these three premises against that mooted possibility.

Premise number One –
Ideal: A conception of something in its absolute perfection.

Obvious answer: Unattainable

Premise number Two -
Bureaucracy: a concept in sociology and political science referring to the way that the administrative execution and enforcement of legal rules is socially organized

Obvious answer: A bastardised concept offers bastardised results.

Premise number Three -
Man: We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system – with all these exalted powers – Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin. (which in this instance of lowly origin Darwin meant, the Apes)
(by Charles Darwin – The Descent of Man)

and elsewhere,
“Vitiis nemo sine nascitur.”
(Horat)

Translation:
“Man is by nature bad.”

Man is bad can only mean that man is conscious of the moral law, and yet has adopted into his maxim deviation therefrom.
(by Immanuel Kant – Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason and Other Works on the Theory of Ethics)

Obvious answer: Within the context of your Post, BOOreaucracy in whatever form it represents in your country as well as for the rest of the World is inherently flawed.

I have to agree on the three strong premises pointed out by Brain Stormer, that is, basing our thoughts on the issues of philosophy and anthropology. This is in complete contrast to Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s romantic contention that man is essentially good.

However, according to some wisdom literature and Biblical precepts, God created both men and women in His own image and likeness (Genesis 1:27). Therefore, man is inherently good, accorded with the free-will to make the RIGHT and WISE choices.

But since ALL men have sinned (Romans 3:10) despite the perfect environment that God provided (Gen 2:8, 16, 17), we all have fallen short of God’s glory. Man “claim” to be good yet man do evil things. Man blatantly disobeyed God’s commandments.

Man have been blessed with amazing faculties that allow him to behave well or badly. Yet, man chose to corrupt himself and God’s image by adopting the bad habits. Bad alliances also contributed to bad influences making man’s natural goodness threatened not to shine forth.

It is an apparent fact that man have that “conscience” in him, he is capable of feeling guilty thereby making him neither good or bad. It is mere human judgment that stereotyped man as “good” or “evil”.

Yes, it’s true that God endowed man with the unique ability to discern good and bad, which obviously separates man from the animals, but we can’t simply teach morality and expect everyone to follow the rules.

Man don’t usually do what they think is right. They do what they LOVE to do and what makes them feel good.

In Filipino:
Masarap ang bawal!

Within the context of bureaucracy, most public servants are educated. Yet, education didn’t make them all good. It actually made them SMARTER SINNERS!

The main thing that we need to acknowledge is the idea that most people embedded in their hearts and minds: They are inherently good which actually kept them from recognizing God in their lives.

To wrap up, we have to recognize that we all have sinned before God. Only by becoming humble before God can we defeat the “evil” person in us.

I wish you blue skies and all things nice,