Human Nature in studies of philosophers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Human Nature in studies of philosophers - Essay Example This research aims to evaluate and present the issue of human nature using studies of different philosophers. Distinguished Chinese philosopher of ancient era Mencius (372-289 BCE) strongly believes in the innate goodness of human nature, which humans inherit from their ancestors. It is therefore he vehemently advocates in favor of following the life patterns of the ancestors in order to achieve perfection in their character and personality ultimately. Moreover, according to him, if humans are provided with adequate education and training, their qualities could further be polished and improved. However, Hsà ¼n Tzu (298-238 BCE) does not find righteousness in human nature. On the contrary, he is of t.he view that human nature is evil and can be improved through socialization. Another eminent philosopher of ancient times, named Kao Tzu (420-350 BCE), aptly acknowledged to be one of the most talented thinkers in the history of China, refutes both the above-mentioned doctrines, and decl ares human nature as clean slate, which studies and follows only what it observes being practiced by others in its social and natural environment. Thus, human nature is neither good nor bad altogether, according to Kao Tzu, and follows the same which is taught to it. Eminent 19th century German philosopher Georg Hegel (1770—1831) has also made a comparative analysis of the doctrines presented by Hsun Tzu and Mencius while elucidating the concepts of innate evil and innate goodness respectively. Somehow, Hegel seeks further wisdom in both these theses, where both these doctrines serve as thesis and antithesis to each other. Hegel declares goodness and evil as occasional in nature and scope due to the very reality that absolute righteousness or complete wrong-doings do not prevail in any part of the globe. In other words, no one can be stated as completely sublime and righteous or absolutely monstrous and obnoxious. For instance, a robber could be harmful and destructive for so ciety, though would be a kind and benevolent person in his domestic life, and may treat his children with great love and affection. Similarly, a pious person may commit genocide out of sheer feelings of revenge or abhorrence for his opponent or rival. Moreover, Otto von Bismarck (1815--1898) is regarded as a great German nationalist, though his name brings displeasure on the countenances of the French public at large. Since absolute goodness and evil do not exist in any part of the globe, declaring anyone as the representative of good or evil does not carry weight in the eyes of the philosophers, thinkers and intellectuals. Hegel alludes to the gallant deeds displayed by the soldiers while saving the boundaries of their country. (Austin, 624-25) Since they are also