Human Nature - Harry O'Sullivan, Sean Williams, Quentin Perrot
The source of morality as human nature is one that is well contested. The different views diverge depending on different philosophers.
To label human nature as generally "good" or "bad" is quite the generalization. However, in an increasingly competitive environment, where human nature is constantly evolving to satisfy the needs of a new society, humans would be considered as "bad". What composes this conception of "bad"? Here are a few factors that would contribute to this concept: selfishness, greediness, manipulating and lying. On the other hand, what makes human nature "good"? Perhaps generosity, friendliness, and trsut compose what we beleive to be a "good" human nature.
Why do we think human nature is "bad"? Although this is a complex question, it is one we could most likely answer. People in a modern society don't stop until their desires are fulfilled selfishly; their need to control a situation until the outcome is favorable to them is what drives "bad" human nature. Humans are also naturally greedy in the same way they are elfish. A need to obtain something rises above all else.
Because our human nature is composed of body and soul, with powers of intellect, will, and feelings, and because it is our nature to love the good but also to be tempted by evil, this is why it is necessary for us to cultivate such virtues as self-control, wisdom, courage, and honesty.Catholic morality follows theclassical Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle inderiving the essential principles of morality from unchanging human nature and its real, objective needs rather than from the changing subjective feelings and desires of individuals. Thus its essential principles are 1) universal (the same for everyone), 2) objective (discovered, not invented; real, not just mental), and 3) unchangeable.
We do not know what our nature permits us to be. – Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile
This quote truly denotes the complexity of human nature. Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and acting, that humans tend to have naturally.
The questions of what these characteristics are, what causes them and how this causation works, and how fixed human nature is, are amongst the oldest and most important questions in western philosophy. These questions have particularly important implications in ethics, politics and theology. This is partly because human nature can be regarded as both a source of norms of conduct or ways of life, as well as presenting obstacles or constraints on living a good life.
-The Sources of Morality-
1) the object
2) the intention
3) the circumstances
In order to evaluate whether an act is morally good or bad, all three elements must be considered.
The object is the matter of a human act or the action itself. Simply put, it is the "what" we do. The object determines the morality of an act. The human act receives its goodness or malice primarily from the morality of the act itself. For example, adultery is always evil by its object, independently of the purpose of the one who does it.
The intention is the motive for which a person commits a good or evil act. Rooted in an act of the will, the intention is one's purpose or motive for acting. It answers the question 'why' one does a particular act. One's intention can be involved in a series of actions or several motives can be involved in the same act. If an act has both an evil object and an evil intention, then the malice of the act increases.
Circumstances are the factors that occur with the act and that contribute to the morality of the act. They are secondary elements of moral act - the how, who, when, where of the act. They contribute to the goodness or the evil of an act. Circumstances can also lessen or heighten a person's blameworthiness for a particular act. However, they cannot change an evil act into a good one.
In order for an act to be morally good, the object, intention, and circumstances must all be good.
1. An act is morally good if the object of the act itself, the intention, and the circumstances are good. 2. If an act itself is intrinsically evil (evil by its very nature), the act is never morally allowable regardless of intention or circumstances. 3. If the object of the act is itself morally good (or at least neutral), its morality will be judged by the purpose or the circumstances. 4. Circumstances may create, mitigate, or aggravate sin. 5. If all three moral elements (the object of the act itself, the intention, and the circumstances) are good, the act is good. If any one element is evil, the act is evil. If a reservoir is fed by three streams, and one of them is polluted, the reservoir is polluted.
The source of morality as human nature is one that is well contested. The different views diverge depending on different philosophers.
To label human nature as generally "good" or "bad" is quite the generalization. However, in an increasingly competitive environment, where human nature is constantly evolving to satisfy the needs of a new society, humans would be considered as "bad". What composes this conception of "bad"? Here are a few factors that would contribute to this concept: selfishness, greediness, manipulating and lying. On the other hand, what makes human nature "good"? Perhaps generosity, friendliness, and trsut compose what we beleive to be a "good" human nature.
Why do we think human nature is "bad"? Although this is a complex question, it is one we could most likely answer. People in a modern society don't stop until their desires are fulfilled selfishly; their need to control a situation until the outcome is favorable to them is what drives "bad" human nature. Humans are also naturally greedy in the same way they are elfish. A need to obtain something rises above all else.
Because our human nature is composed of body and soul, with powers of intellect, will, and feelings, and because it is our nature to love the good but also to be tempted by evil, this is why it is necessary for us to cultivate such virtues as self-control, wisdom, courage, and honesty.Catholic morality follows theclassical Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle inderiving the essential principles of morality from unchanging human nature and its real, objective needs rather than from the changing subjective feelings and desires of individuals. Thus its essential principles are 1) universal (the same for everyone), 2) objective (discovered, not invented; real, not just mental), and 3) unchangeable.
We do not know what our nature permits us to be. – Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile
This quote truly denotes the complexity of human nature. Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and acting, that humans tend to have naturally.
The questions of what these characteristics are, what causes them and how this causation works, and how fixed human nature is, are amongst the oldest and most important questions in western philosophy. These questions have particularly important implications in ethics, politics and theology. This is partly because human nature can be regarded as both a source of norms of conduct or ways of life, as well as presenting obstacles or constraints on living a good life.
-The Sources of Morality-
1) the object
2) the intention
3) the circumstances
In order to evaluate whether an act is morally good or bad, all three elements must be considered.
The object is the matter of a human act or the action itself. Simply put, it is the "what" we do. The object determines the morality of an act. The human act receives its goodness or malice primarily from the morality of the act itself. For example, adultery is always evil by its object, independently of the purpose of the one who does it.
The intention is the motive for which a person commits a good or evil act. Rooted in an act of the will, the intention is one's purpose or motive for acting. It answers the question 'why' one does a particular act. One's intention can be involved in a series of actions or several motives can be involved in the same act. If an act has both an evil object and an evil intention, then the malice of the act increases.
Circumstances are the factors that occur with the act and that contribute to the morality of the act. They are secondary elements of moral act - the how, who, when, where of the act. They contribute to the goodness or the evil of an act. Circumstances can also lessen or heighten a person's blameworthiness for a particular act. However, they cannot change an evil act into a good one.
In order for an act to be morally good, the object, intention, and circumstances must all be good.
1. An act is morally good if the object of the act itself, the intention, and the circumstances are good.
2. If an act itself is intrinsically evil (evil by its very nature), the act is never morally allowable regardless of intention or circumstances.
3. If the object of the act is itself morally good (or at least neutral), its morality will be judged by the purpose or the circumstances.
4. Circumstances may create, mitigate, or aggravate sin.
5. If all three moral elements (the object of the act itself, the intention, and the circumstances) are good, the act is good. If any one element is evil, the act is evil. If a reservoir is fed by three streams, and one of them is polluted, the reservoir is polluted.