People Are 70% Evil, 30% Good
Just last week, I wrote an article about how some people use social media, like Twitter, to bully and be cruel to others (http://bit.ly/usEAjA). Last week, I saw someone tweet “Happy Birthday @Ciara; you’re still a flop, though.” By putting “@Ciara,” this person intended for the R&B singer, Ciara, to see their condescending message. Appalled yet again by intentional malice and hoping to encourage at least one person to be kinder, I responded “That was mean and I hope Ciara doesn’t see this. If someone did that to Beyonce` (the person was a fan of hers), you’d be livid.” Nonchalantly, the person said “You mad? Oh.” I said “YES, because people do the EXACT same thing to her (Beyonce`). Unnecessary negativity is the reason why people abuse drugs and commit suicide.” With yet another unremorseful reply, I said “Clinging on to negativity. You don’t even care that your actions could hurt someone’s feelings.” They then said “I don’t. But you can stay pressed as I block your bitch ass.”
Children don't share & love by default.
This exchange just further fueled a belief that I have. I believe that human beings are 70% selfish/evil and 30% selfless/good. From the beginning, our automatic response as humans is not to be selfless/good; it’s the opposite. Small children: you have to TEACH them to share. They don’t do that on their own. If you believe in the biblical story of Adam & Eve, they could’ve easily just followed the rules and not eat the forbidden fruit, but guess what…they did. And it didn’t take much for the good ole’ serpent to convince Eve to bite, either. People always say that it’s hard to do the right thing all the time. Why is it so hard? If we were more good than we are evil, then doing “the right thing” would be a piece of cake. We spend thousands of dollars trying to regulate and control man’s evil with laws, law enforcement and court systems, but laws don’t cease man’s incessant evil nature and law enforcement systems are corrupt within themselves. Daily I see examples, like the Twitter story, where people go out of their way to mean and negative. My friend, whose homosexual, sees hateful comments on his YouTube wall on a regular basis. It’s one thing for someone to take issue with homosexuality and another to tell someone they should be beaten, castrated and shot by a firing squad; especially when you didn’t have to comment at all.
Why is it a difficult choice, Homer?
One might say “Well, what about all the do-gooders, philanthropists and humanitarians?” These people contribute positively to society in part because of their potential for good (which is 30% in my theory), but their efforts are centrally the result of selfish motives. There is no such thing as altruism. Mother Teresa, a catholic nun famously known for her humanitarian work with the ailing and homeless, ministered to those people because she felt it was her duty as a heaven-seeking servant to God. John Walsh, the host of “America’s Most Wanted,” stated that he became an anti-crime activist after his son was murdered. If not for the loss of his child, would he have been involved with “AMW,” which assisted in the arrest of 1,000 criminals? Both Mother Teresa and John Walsh had something to gain with their “selfless” efforts. Like Walsh, most advocates and activists are motivated by their personal connection to those they support, or there’s something in their background that lead them to their activism. Beyond that, simple good-doing, such as letting someone know they’ve dropped $20, is done because it makes us feel like we’re kind, productive citizens and, in public, it’s more socially acceptable to do nice things. Even my attempt to reform that mean Twitter user was based in selfishness. I hate it when people do similar things to Beyonce` and despise the concept of bullying in general because I was bullied. I might not have cared about mean tweets, otherwise. As for what we give emotionally and tangibly to our loved ones, we only give because we expect reciprocation in exchange-or else we wouldn’t distance ourselves from those who don’t return the favor. There’s also no such thing as unconditional love, but that’s another post for another day. So kids, the moral to my story is that when comes time to choose between right and wrong, we choose wrong. If we choose right, we have an ulterior motive. That’s just my theory. Not gospel. What do you think?
11/3/2011 11:31:38 am
People are innately nothing. We are just a bunch of smart cells that mistakenly figured out consciousness over millions of years. We are not our birth, we are the surroundings and culture we live in. Culture decides what is good and what is evil. Both are 100% subjective, as there is not true evil. In that stance, it shows that either persons decide to conform to the stance of the culture or to rebel to it, in some denomination. People adhere to their surrounding, and have 100% the choice. If they have a mental disposition that makes that choice, it's still only relevant culturally whether it's evil or good.
11/3/2011 11:58:53 am
3/28/2012 01:36:25 am
I like the idea of the whole Jekyl and Hyde thing where the one you feed is the one that grows. It's closer to being selfless when you give secretly or willingly die to protect someone. If you're used to giving, you'll give reflexively because it's the right thing to do. If you're used to being selfish, you'll want your own way in everything regardless of who it hurts.
Leave a Reply.
My personal commentary on politics, race, gender, religion, social class, news media and several other things related to our society and culture.