Response to Julia's Question: Does it appear humans are inherently good or inherently evil?

People are neither inherently good nor evil because these words are concepts that people have invented. Most of the acts that we consider good benefit the lives of ourselves or others. If it is bad to kill less people die, if it is bad to do drugs less people overdose, if it bad to steal less people are threatened by losing their necessities or the goods they receive from doing the work that benefits others. If people always lost the things they got from working they would be less inclined to work and people would suffer. If it is good to help others more people survive. I believe a lot of the things people describe as good or bad are helpful in an evolutionary/survival sense for the species.

Another problem with this question is that a lot of what we decide is good or bad is determined by culture and is subject to change. This is probably not the case with concepts like murder which we could safely maintain are bad across cultures, but suicide might be considered wrong in one culture and not the next. One culture might find that it is the taking of a life and is therefore wrong or one may find that one has the right to do what one wishes with their own property including their body. This means someone committing suicide might be bad here but not there and so their goodness or badness is not inherent.

If one were to assume that god did not exist would that mean that people are free to act however they want as there is no ultimate moral accountability or that they have a responsibility to act ethically as reasoning beings and should not need someone to be accountable to?   

Human Nature as an Excuse

Human nature seems to be a term that is often used as an excuse. When someone makes a mistake they will often say that they are only human as a way of justifying their action. People seem to use the term as an excuse for acting on impulses or for instant gratification. One might say, well, I took a sick day when I was feeling fine; it’s human to take a break every once in awhile. This logic may or may not be true, but this leads to equating our nature to laziness or thoughtlessness. I doubt most people would consciously argue that these qualities are what make us human. This way of describing human nature also seems to see it as unchangeable problem that we all inevitably fail to surpass at some point. It creates a very self-defeating mindset. If one believes they have a negative nature and that that nature will cause them to have unavoidable failings than they will not try to rise above these failings and will fail. If one is on a diet and says it is human nature to eat what tastes good regardless of health than they will inevitable cheat on their diet. It is a self fulfilling prophecy. We know that people can stick to a diet or other activity successfully, so it does not make sense for a person to allow these excuses to rule them.

Do people use always human nature as a way to avoid unpleasant tasks in their life or is human nature a justification for certain actions?       

What makes up human nature?

People are often told that we are all individuals whose differences make us unique, but in order to all fit into the category of people we must have things in common. Some of these things are the forces that act upon us. The most obvious is religion, if one is a believer, but there are many others. They include our genes, our societies, our memories and our families. Although these differ among individuals they include many overlapping attributes. These influences also allow us to be different. For example, not even identical twins have the same memories. We are all similar in that we have certain anxieties one of which is the knowledge that we will die. It is questionable that non-human animals have that ability, but it is possible. We are also mostly linked in our ability to reason, use language, and retain information but certain young, special needs or senile individuals may not and certain non-humans may. We may be separate from non-humans in that we have civilization, but one could say the same of ants. There is also the question of whether it is part of human nature to create civilization or whether we repress ourselves in some way by doing so. We also have the ability to write and therefore maintain information across generations. This ability seems unique, but I wonder if most people would place it as central to our nature. 

                Is it natural to defer to a boss or teacher or does it cause people to become angry and unhappy?