You might have a look at the Ring of Gyges tale in Book II of the Republic.

i did read it. but the story in itself asks a question at end which plato then answers in the rest of the book. But i dont have time to read the whole book :cry: :cry:

When we say to ourselves that we know right from wrong, and then we still do what is wrong, if that is bad, then yes, we are all bad people.

When we say to ourselves that we know right from wrong, and then we still do what is wrong, if that is bad, then yes, we are all bad people. — Fire Ologist

He didn't require you do bad, just that you'd hypothetically do bad if you could get away with it. So, if you never committed a bad act, and in fact lived a super moral life, helping others in all instances, but you did it for the fame and failed to do bad because you knew you'd get caught, are you a bad person?

I'd also argue that even if you did commit a bad act now and then, you're not a bad person necessarily. You can do bad and still be overall good

I'd also argue that even if you did commit a bad act now and then, you're not a bad person necessarily. You can do bad and still be overall good — Hanover

So basically you are saying that even if a person decides to do bad act when there is 0 chances of him getting caught he still overall is a good person. I kind of get where you are coming from but I think you are taking acts that are not too evil. What if he commits rape. Would you still say he is overall a good person (i used rape as one example of serious crime you might argue all people wouldn't rape people even if given the chance but they can do other serious evil acts. And i think most people eventually do a serious evil act if given a chance. Especially in this era when people are reading and watching fiction which romanticizes rape and stuff)

The roots of mistakes are the lack of education, genes, and uncertainty about what the very far future brings. We can only fix education.

So, if you never committed a bad act, and in fact lived a super moral life, helping others in all instances, but you did it for the fame and failed to do bad because you knew you'd get caught… — Hanover

If we are basing the question of the OP on a hypothetical, experimental world, then I’m sure we can find that not all of us are bad.

But actually, we all do things we have already decided are bad - we do them anyway. I think that is objectively bad. So we are all bad.

So we are all bad. — Fire Ologist

I'd still maintain that all that can be concluded is that we all do bad things, not that we're holistically bad. Like if a murderer, rapist, liar, cheater, etc. helps an old lady across the street, he's not a good person. He's a bad person who did a good thing. The opposite holds true for good people who do bad things from time to time. If you didn't allow any bad acts, there'd be no good people, but clearly there are people we consider good.

So we are all bad. — Fire Ologist

I don't think so. The main reasons we make mistakes are a lack of education, genetics, and uncertainty about the future. We can only fix the education. Once that is done, there is nothing bad at all. I also don't think we're bad at all right now. We mainly lack education.

I'll go on record as calling rapists bad in all instances. The question is complicted by whether the person did the act or not. If there is a person who would rape if he could rape and not find himself in prison for a very long period of time, I can't say he's a terribly good person, but he's not done anything (yet at least). I think we need the intent and the act before we pass real judgment. Like if I said I'd give $1,000,000 to the poor if I had $10,000,000. Does that make me a good person even if I don't have $10,000,000 so the poor get nothing from me? So, is a guy bad if he would rape if he could rape without consequence? It's pretty hard to do that in our society, much like it's pretty hard to have $10,000,000.

But, sure, I'd like to know that it's not the prisons that keep people honest, but it's the people's honesty that keeps them honest.

No. There's no such thing, in this context. We're all people doing shit. That's all really. THe rest is window dressing (window dressing I enjoy, to be sure).

But, sure, I'd like to know that it's not the prisons that keep people honest, but it's the people's honesty that keeps them honest. — Hanover

I don't think that will is true or will be true in the future. I think it is the punishment that keeps people honest and act good. Some people might fear worldly punishments and religious ones fear the punishment that god will give them in afterlife so thats why they are all acting goodly. Even if we reach a point where people's honesty will keep them honest and not a fear I think that era wont last long because It will take one guy to abuse power and mess up everything

Like if I said I'd give $1,000,000 to the poor if I had $10,000,000. Does that make me a good person even if I don't have $10,000,000 so the poor get nothing from me? So, is a guy bad if he would rape if he could rape without consequence? It's pretty hard to do that in our society, much like it's pretty hard to have $10,000,000. — Hanover

But don't you think we that we usually don't consider a person who says if he had 1 million he would give it to poor a good person because we don't know if it is his real intent or he is just trying to do so. So comparing these 2 things is invalid. Let me give a new comparison. If a person gets 1 million right now hypothetically and he decides to give it to the poor doesn't that make him a good person? similarly a guy who would do rape if there are no consequences he would be a bad guy in that case.

Question by me: i dont understand why people here are kind of saying that the person wouldn't be bad. Like how isn't he a bad guy

By definition, no. If almost everyone does something, that makes them "average", not "bad" on a spectrum from "good" to "bad".

Are We all Really Bad People deep down

I'm reflecting on why people in an impossible thought experiment would be more real and deep than moms and dads and kids in this world.

And I've decided that they are not real or deep at all, but imaginary beings with no connections or relations to one another. But other people here seem to prefer to think that good and bad and human relations are imaginary.

things society and general are considered "bad" or "evil" — QuirkyZen

A "bad" or "evil" society considers things that are virtuous and just as the opposite. Similar to how kindness is equated with weakness or honesty is equated with treachery (ie. snitching). Oddly parallels many modern societies, interestingly enough. So, by that strictly verbose interpretation at least, muddies the larger issue quite well in my opinion.

most would likely take it(correct me if i am wrong) — QuirkyZen

How, with a beating? :grin:

It's not so much you're wrong, it's more you've made a claim, a very large and broad one at that, without even attempting to prove it in any way. We call that "bad form" or "in poor taste" where I come from.

Different people might choose different "evils" some might commit serious crimes like rape, while others would say no to that but still engage in something like a major theft to become a billionaire. Does that make them a bad person? — QuirkyZen

Well, hypothetically speaking of course, it depends who you rape or who you rob. Maybe you decide to rape a serial rapist. That'd be kind of funny, come to think of it. Or maybe you rob someone who only has his wealth due to him or someone before him committing acts or robbery and murder. It's all relative, friend.

Bad and good are so subjective these days. Let's invoke something more absolute and universal. A hypocrite (which is in fact considered bad), someone who does something to another yet would get upset if it were done to them. That's a good starting point to determine if something is "bad" or "good" and to what degree.

doesn’t that mean we’re all bad people deep down? — QuirkyZen

Generally speaking, intelligent beings are creatures of opportunity. You wouldn't be alive today, likely, if you believe solely on evolutionary theory, if someone before you didn't embrace, at least partially, the characteristics required to continue one's genetics in a physical world of hardship and chaos. As to what that actually means, when it comes to morality and beyond, varies from person to person.

I suppose to vindicate the human condition, one might wish to subscribe to something along the lines of "all men are capable of great good and great evil, as to which we choose and even our ability to have a choice and knowledge of the two, depends greatly on the society and set of circumstances one is born in."

Yeah then all of us will be average in that scenario according to standard of that time but aren't we all still bad according to todays standards

I didn't quite get it. My apologies. Are you trying to say these hypothetical scenarios have nothing to do with reality or Did i misunderstood. could you please clarify

Now that I read your response I am realizing various thinks and possibilities that i hadn't thought of. I appreciate you for taking some time to respond to my question. by the way you have good sense of humour

How, with a beating? :grin: — Outlander

This was very funny I laughed a lot on this

Are you trying to say these hypothetical scenarios have nothing to do with reality or Did i misunderstood. — QuirkyZen

Yes. Your question removes all the give and take of social interaction and mutual dependence, and then suggests that humans in that condition would be immoral, and that this is "deep". I'm saying it is very very shallow unrealistic and a mere thought. What makes us human is not independence but dependence; it is our shared language and customs that give rise morality, because for instance, if we did not by and large tell the truth, then talk itself would have no meaning. So to strip away all that and then ask what is our morality is like asking what we would breathe in a vacuum. It is a wrong question, and any answer would mislead.

I get where you are coming from and what you are trying to convey. But don't you think the scenario I presented, In this world there are instances when some people are in condition like that. Where they have for example a lot of power and can make the possibility of getting caught during evil acts very little and doesn't this work there(Yeah i agree that reality wont be fully like my hypothetical situation but it can be similar to some extend as the given example). So it is in fact kind of deep and important. Because it kind of rises questions over various things happening in society like centralization of power. Disproportional wealth and stuff.

From my perspective, you're making an error by declaring that performing a (single) "bad" action makes someone a "bad" person. In my experience, all humans perform bad actions, thus the difference between folks is the quantity and quality of those bad choices.

Where they have for example a lot of power and can make the possibility of getting caught during evil acts very little and doesn't this work there — QuirkyZen

For sure, people can be evil, and sometimes they can be very powerful too, and 'get away with it'. But this is not a basis for generalising that every person in power and every person that might be in power will become evil. Most people, most of the time are polite, considerate, and kind to each other without any coercion, and without any fear, but just because it is a more pleasant way to be together.

I think it is the punishment that keeps people honest and act good — QuirkyZen

There are people who continue to commit crimes after they are caught and punished. most people don't commit crimes, so do not experience punishment.

It would appear that something else affects behavior beside punishment / no punishment.

I think that properly raised children who grow up with a sense that their efforts will improve life for themselves are unlikely to commit most kinds of crime most of the time. In other words, we call them good people.

Some people do not benefit from good parenting, good schools, and a good environment and they grow up with low expectations that their efforts will benefit themselves. Not all of these people will commit crimes, but quite a few people in this group will. Growing up with bad parenting, crappy schools, and low expectations makes people unfortunate rather than bad.

People tend to maintain cognitive harmony. They try to act in conformity with who they think they are. Behaving in ways contrary-to-my-real-self creates cognitive dissonance, and people tend to avoid dissonance.

We're all people doing shit. That's all really. THe rest is window dressing (window dressing I enjoy, to be sure) — AmadeusD

Sort of like "We're All Bozos on This Bus".

Yes. We're all just people doing stuff. Goodness and badness are not our primary characteristics. We might be good. We might also be stupid; or handsome; or have bad breath; be very smart but very impractical; be a ballet star or a klutz; or maybe be a complete asshole.

Don't you think in my given scenario. most people will perform big evils and a lot of them. Like if a person could do anything he wants without getting caught and nobody knowing then he would definitely do a lot of bad things. for example if somebody collided with him and he is in a bad mood he might kill him or maybe something less serious and these things will get more and more. Obviously most will become egoistical and then wont even tolerate simple mistakes by others thus increasing the quantity and quality of bad things

Most people, most of the time are polite, considerate, and kind to each other without any coercion, and without any fear,

Most people are polite, considerate and kind to each other because they don't have better option than that. As you said in one of you previous texts that humans beings are dependent on each other(in most cases, when they dont have a lot of power). So for their own benefit they are pleasant and kind. I strongly disagree with you saying that they are pleasant kind without any fear. They are definitely kind and pleasant in general because of fear(form of fear varies from person to person) surely there are some cases where they are kind without fear but i disagree with you using "Most people". — unenlightened

but just because it is a more pleasant way to be together. — unenlightened

yeah surely it is more pleasant way if you DON'T HAVE POWER. People tend to live together like this to be strong as whole and they act kind because they are dependent on each other. When they are not dependent then the situation changes a lot

I'm wondering -- were I to have the ring of gyges I very much doubt I'd post on a philosophy website about that possibility, unless we aren't all really bad people deep down.

So, if you make a thread on the thought then you are not a really bad person deep down.

If at least one person is not a really bad person deep down then not all people are all really bad people deep down.

QED.

most people don't commit crimes, so do not experience punishment.

It would appear that something else affects behavior beside punishment / no punishment. — BC

Such a illogical thing to say. you are justifying your claim by saying most people haven't done crimes, so they haven't experienced punishment thus they are not restraining them because of fear of punishment.
Fear is not something that you will have only after experiencing the real thing. you can have it even by seeing other guy face the consequence. It is like saying i wont get scared watching a horror movies cuz i am not in the movie. And yeah take religious people as and example they haven't experienced hell but they do fear it. (Either your argument is dumb or i misunderstood it, the second being more likely)

Interesting perspective but I dont think making a thread on this thought makes a person good. maybe it makes the person "Self Aware bad person"

Interesting perspective but I dont think making a thread on this thought makes a person good. maybe it makes the person "Self Aware bad person" — QuirkyZen

By the argument that I provided that that person is self aware as being a bad person means they're not bad deep down -- they may never become good, but that recognition is enough.

And if even that knave with a heart of gold isn't bad deep down, then surely there's more than the knave?