I'm always questioning about human nature. I wonder 'what' causes a man to do what they do? Destroy their own planet, generate inequities, increased crime, corruption and other atrocities.
Whenever this question comes in mind two theories of philosophers who marked their times: the English philosopher Hobbes (1588-1679) a student politician, who worked for the English monarchy, which believed that "... man is evil by nature ", he said the man power needs common to all, if not always in war, and that" ... the man is a wolf to man "(homo homini lupus), so it needs of society and its laws to discipline themselves. He sees society the salvation of man. Already the French philosopher Rousseau (1712-1778), one of the greatest figures of the French Enlightenment, ideological influences of the French Revolution, believed that "... man is born pure, and that corrupts society. "
It is the nature or society that is the big problem for humans? Which of these two realities is what creates the evil man? Or is that not one of them is the root of this evil? Which of the two philosophers are right? He who blames human nature, or one that places the company as causing the problem?
The idea of Rousseau, in which man is born pure, and from the development of society makes the individual is corrupt, because in a society there are always those that lie under and over others (the Hierarchy), and this evil organization society creates injustice and inequality as the fruits of this struggle of interests (for Marx, class struggle) generating cycles of addiction, corrupting the man (see the example of Brasilia). For Rousseau the goal of a corporation should ensure freedom, equality and justice for all, irrespective of the will of the majority.
But the company is made by men, men that theoretically, according to Rousseau, born pure, but they were also somehow corrupted. How did this happen? Maybe the idea of Hobbes is correct, that man is born inherently evil and socidade the shapes and softens its evil (with its laws). But if society shapes them, it enslaves this conduct free and natural man, then it corrupts. Evil against evil, creates more conflict, a negative balance.
If society is composed of men who are born pure, but it also corrupts other, trying to deliver them from the evil enslaving. This is a cycle of evil and not beneficial. Perhaps the theory of Yin - Yang is correct, there are some good and bad in everyone, just wanted to touch on what you choose. But do not forget that what is bad for you so I can be an asset, it is society that dictates the values and labels.
Whenever this question comes in mind two theories of philosophers who marked their times: the English philosopher Hobbes (1588-1679) a student politician, who worked for the English monarchy, which believed that "... man is evil by nature ", he said the man power needs common to all, if not always in war, and that" ... the man is a wolf to man "(homo homini lupus), so it needs of society and its laws to discipline themselves. He sees society the salvation of man. Already the French philosopher Rousseau (1712-1778), one of the greatest figures of the French Enlightenment, ideological influences of the French Revolution, believed that "... man is born pure, and that corrupts society. "
It is the nature or society that is the big problem for humans? Which of these two realities is what creates the evil man? Or is that not one of them is the root of this evil? Which of the two philosophers are right? He who blames human nature, or one that places the company as causing the problem?
The idea of Rousseau, in which man is born pure, and from the development of society makes the individual is corrupt, because in a society there are always those that lie under and over others (the Hierarchy), and this evil organization society creates injustice and inequality as the fruits of this struggle of interests (for Marx, class struggle) generating cycles of addiction, corrupting the man (see the example of Brasilia). For Rousseau the goal of a corporation should ensure freedom, equality and justice for all, irrespective of the will of the majority.
But the company is made by men, men that theoretically, according to Rousseau, born pure, but they were also somehow corrupted. How did this happen? Maybe the idea of Hobbes is correct, that man is born inherently evil and socidade the shapes and softens its evil (with its laws). But if society shapes them, it enslaves this conduct free and natural man, then it corrupts. Evil against evil, creates more conflict, a negative balance.
If society is composed of men who are born pure, but it also corrupts other, trying to deliver them from the evil enslaving. This is a cycle of evil and not beneficial. Perhaps the theory of Yin - Yang is correct, there are some good and bad in everyone, just wanted to touch on what you choose. But do not forget that what is bad for you so I can be an asset, it is society that dictates the values and labels.
.jpg)
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário