Do YOU believe that goodness/kindness/morality is an inherent and innate
behavior regardless of whether one is religious or non-religious?
This is a tricky one. Some old school psychologists would say that we're born in a neutral state as far as our morality/goodness/kindness is concerned and that we learn to be good or bad by association with those adult figures who are closest to us. And I'm certainly not denying that our largely subconscious modelling of ourselves after our parents, brothers and sisters and those around us when we're children doesn't affect the way we look at the world. It has a tremendous impact. But is it the deciding factor?
We know that there are families where one child grows up to be an outright villain whilst his brother or sister grows up to be almost saintly despite their upbringing being almost identical.
I tend to believe in the concept of Reincarnation - of multiple lives - and that when we evolve into and are born into planet earth in our earlier lives, we learn some terrible lessons on how and how not to behave. These lessons, or the essence of them, are carried forward and as we take on subsequent lives we gradually change into wiser, more loving, caring humans. We grow up, so to speak. We don't run after the baubles and beads of materialism so much.
I am not saying Reincarnation is true. But take a good look around you. Do you note the subtle differences between people? Do some seem 'more advanced in wisdom' despite their ages. Do some people seem primitive - even look primitive compared with others?
Is morality innate? It is more innate in some than in others.
Though these qualities can be considered to be inherent and innate, they can be developed in a person who gets a good training from childhood onwards. It's not necessary that a person from a good family should be good. The surroundings and circumstances with which a person deals have a lot to do with his personal development.
Neither of these characteristics are inherent or innate. The Bible, God's Word, says that all men are born sinners, thus making sin our inherent or innate character. (Rom. 5:12, Rom. 3:23) Those characteristics can be learned.
Not 2 B argumentative, or disrespectful, but what U quote R man's words. God has never spoken, written, or otherwise given us any instruction booklet. Man provided that in his name - but in their own interpretations of what they believe to be true.
I'm sorry you feel that way. Of course, you have the right to believe what you want and to express it. I wouldn't have it any other way.
I agree d.william. I can't believe people honestly believe a new infant is a "born sinner" nonsense, infants are pure and then shaped by the influences they grow up around. Their purity is what attracts people to them.
YES - everyone is born with exactly the correct measure of goodness. Infants do not display opposite actions - they learn those opposite actions from the primary adults within their environment. Goodness, Kindness, and Morality are basic instincts just like fight or flight.
We are all born with a sense of what is right and what is wrong. No one is born a sinner or evil. (that is of course assuming that we are talking about what we consider a 'normally" developed fetus).
Those things we consider evil, and others, that are opposite of goodness/kindness/morality are products of events that happen to the 'normal' child during the formative years.
The age of reasoning sets in around 7 y.o. (or younger - these days it seems children develop faster than they used to) and children know the difference and the consequences of their actions and they will act according to what they have seen or heard from their parents and others around them. It is not long before they realize what they can get away with or not.
The old saying "you can catch more flies with honey, than vinegar" is a concept that they also learn. Whether their sweetness is pretend or legitimate only the child (and the adult they become) know for sure. Which then leads to the concept: "beware of Greeks bearing gifts". (referencing the Trojan horse event of course).
We will never know exactly what emotions are inherent at birth. There are always exceptions to that of course. People born with a personality disorder such as autism, mental retardation, psycho, or sociopath personalities are exceptions to the "norm".
I don't believe morality comes from religion. Morality comes from learning right from wrong. I was raised in a deeply religious family, where some of the most religious people in it were very spiteful people. Others I know who have never been religious at all are some of the most upstanding, genuinely caring people - those whose actions show that they are compassionate humans. I have also seen deeply religious people who are the same. After a rash of terrible storms last month, it was a church group that came by and helped us to clear trees and stuff before they could fall into our house. Side by side we agnostics and religious folks worked as good neighbors to one another - all coming from different backgrounds, upbringings and beliefs. All of us acting as very moral and compassionate people - imagine that .
I think kindness, leadership, compassion, love etc are taught through example and I think we have a deeper innate drive to be loving people. We are social creatures by nature. Most people with social skills are not axe murderers usually , so I would say that we are more inclined to goodness - but we also are what we learn.
yes and no. I believe certain people are born with certain tendencies, but I also believe a person can program themselves to be however they want to be. If you find that you are too aggressive, it can be programmed out. For example, when I was very young, like between 4 and 7, I lost my temper with my friends all the time. Severely lost my temper, raised my hand to show them what's what - then one day I saw myself and realized that wasn't who I wanted to be. I worked on my temper and letting things go - at age 7. I have a friend who didn't drift away as many childhood friends do, and she remembers what I was like and comments on how drastically I changed.
Though, separately, I once read in a book entitled Holistic Anatomy (the author escapes me) about how the fetus will develop personality traits while in the womb based on what goes on outside the womb. They said that if the mother is under a lot of stress, then the fetus will learn it's an aggressive world outside, and thus they need to be aggressive too. Likewise, if the mother is starving, then it teaches the fetus that food is scarce, and that their body must hold onto what it can. the child is more likely to grow up with weight problems, or to just naturally be built for added weight.
Behavior is programmed on many levels - at the fetal level, within the self, and socially. When one is to the point to begin to grasp these concepts, I certainly believe personality traits can be reprogrammed.
As an old school psychologist, I would say that we are born in a somewhat neutral state as far as our morality/goodness/kindness is concerned and that we learn to be "good" or "bad" by association with individuals and groups around us, our degree of association with effectively "good" parenting and how our morality is either developed or not developed through Kohlberg's stages. I always refer back to this brilliant psychologist who researched and came up with a most under-rated theory. The man was Dr. Lawrence Kohlberg. It is a shame that he met with a series of most unfortunate events. He would have contributed so much more. His theory is titled Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development and it is indeed important for all to consider...
I believe that through maieutics, goodness can come out of everybody. They must understand morality and the difference between good and evil, and they must understand why they should care.
I don't believe people are born either good or bad. They become one or the other in one of two ways. They can be taught by following the example of the people who have the most influence in their life or they do good or bad things depending on what makes them feel good about themselves. Religious people can do horrendous things (ex: the Spanish Inquisition) and non-religious people can be tremendously good (can't think of a good example).
I believe the initial lean is towards innocence or goodness in humans. Just like a puppy, it can be born innocent but latter can become a vicious attack dog. So too, humans can pick up evil or undesirable traits from unfulfilled desires, anger, abuse, injustice, negative emotions and bad influences.
I don't think that morality, goodness, or kindness are innate traits. I believe that while we do have an innate capacity for these behaviors, we have a propensity to choose otherwise. Even when growing up as little kids, the first behaviors we learn are usually selfish, motivated by greed, or out of jealousy. We have to be taught to act kindly, to share, to seek after what is right. These concepts don't just "come to us" naturally.
But then again, there isn't really a good way of answering this when comparing people who have faith in God and people who don't. This is mostly due to the lack of common ground in defining what is "moral", what is "good", and what is "kind". Non-religious people usually aren't looking to God as the standard of what defines right and wrong, just as people seeking after God don't tend to just "go with what feels right" or "benefits the most people" or "makes people happy".
Someone who doesn't believe in God can be a good person. He/she might be generous, patient, kind, charitable, and gracious. But then again, there isn't any consistent basis for this. Another person who doesn't believe in God might well be a total creep and feel no compulsion to live otherwise. Taking a universal standard of morals out of the picture (ie: God) makes morality one person's opinion against another's. There isn't a definite "right" or "wrong", just relativism.
A nonbeliever's moral standard might occasionally line up with God's, but there isn't anything to anchor it there or provide a reason for why "good" is "good", etc.
On the other hand, those who follow God and hold him up as the standard of what is moral, just, good, etc., and what is not have a concrete basis for saying so. There's no room for a clash of personal opinion. Something either is good, or it isn't. But even people who love God don't always honor God with their words and actions. We're human too. But we know that such sin is wrong. That much isn't arguable. We believe that morality isn't up to man to decide because it comes from using God as the standard, not human opinion (which has, as I stated earlier, has a natural propensity to be self-serving).
Problems crop up when trying to bridge this "gap" in the definition of morals because there is no common, concrete standard of morals between those who believe in God and those who don't.
by Christin Sander 5 years ago
Why do religious people often insist that religion is what creates moral behavior?As an agnostic/atheist who works hard to do the right thing every day I find this insulting and ridiculous. After all, if prayer and religious beliefs equaled morals there would be no controversy with priests...
by Rishad I Habib 8 years ago
Atheists sometimes claim that & they do have some reason for such claims. Whats your views on this? & WHY?Remember, exceptions should not be examples. We are talking about the majority of the group not individuals.
by nightwork4 4 years ago
is it so hard to admit that when you die, it's over.i get a kick out of how scared of death religious people are. they want everyone to believe in heaven and hell so that death is so much nicer .
by Marc Lee 2 years ago
Do you consider yourself spiritual or religious, and what do you see as the difference?
by M. T. Dremer 10 months ago
Do you believe non-religious people, who lead a good life, are still going to hell?One of my biggest frustrations with religion is the idea that, how you live your life is of no consequence if you do not accept god. For example, John Smith is a good christian man who helps people, obeys the law and...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago
the issues of sex and sexuality? Sex and sexuality is a normative part of human life. However, many religionists view sex and sexuality quite negatively, especially women's sexuality. They strongly contend that in order to be religious, one must subvert the sexual...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|