You’re evil.
(here’s why…)
The debate is eternal: are humans born evil, or good? Are we essentially flawed from birth, or do we acquire them from a cruel society’s conditioning? No matter how definitive a proof is offered, no matter if they find a responsible gene, I’m certain someone will contest it, and keep contesting it, until the arguments are buried by a new, apathetic generation.
Even writing about it seems a taboo cliche, destined to try too hard at being deep and meaningful, or as a long essay that says nothing at all. But I suppose it takes a third party to notice such flaws within a work, and, as I do now, perhaps the original authors were convinced of their work’s credibility. Either way, I suppose I might as well write on.
I was re-reading an article in Smithsonian that addresses the same question, from a genetic standpoint. As usual with such topics, the article drove hard towards a definitive conclusion, only to pull up in the last paragraph that with a statement that they don’t know and an answer is a decade off. Regardless, there must be an answer somewhere, even if it subjective. After the disappointment in the articles ending, I started considering where to look for our true nature.
I thought about the hundreds of role models I’ve had, and all the millions humanity has looked up to over the years. Of course, a role model is someone we aspire to, someone who has the characteristics we which we ourselves would like to have. But human role models are a poor example, as they too have flaws, sometimes even more tragic than their admirers. The realm of literature, however, (namely its protagonists) paints a reverse picture of true human nature.
Look at the heroes of ancient literature, look at the heroes today. They are, as a whole, loyal, brave, ambitious and capable. Then compare that to the modern man, who is, by the same generalization, betraying, cowardly, lazy, and incompetent. Perhaps I’m being extreme, but the examples presented in literature (especially ancient epics) are pristine models of whatever the creator’s culture esteemed. Combine the similarities of every culture’s literary icons, and you are presented with a clear picture of the ideal human.
If we weren’t essentially flawed, we would have no need of role models, and perhaps our protagonists would be anti-heroes, and “looking down upon” a character is in place of, “looking up to.” But they aren’t: they reflect what we want to be, and we never want what we already have.
If we are born pure, then what of temptation? Every child, often before they can even talk, knows what they want, and, should their desire be forbidden, the consequence and steps related to getting it. Since this temptation, this integral part of human nature, leads to violence, anger, mistakes and lies, for all intents and purposes humanity is flawed before it can walk with the damning burden of unwise desire. So often our characters resist the easy route, don’t give up and die, restrain themselves from a prospect too tantalizing for us imperfect beings to refuse, and we cheer. The optimistic holders of the, “good at birth” belief are inputting our scoiety’s heroes in place of the newborn in his mother’s arms and calling it true man.
I’m not saying babies are evil, and I’m not denying there are good people in the world. Collectively, however, us humans are selective with our morals, keeping them constant is impossible in an ever changing society that is, perhaps, the only significant factor in restraining that Hyde within all of us. This is the unfortunate reality: to find true human nature, merely look opposite our heroe’s virtues.
Email me when John Porter publishes or recommends stories