Are We Born Evil?

Before you begin, here's a quick summary:

• The age-old question of whether we're fundamentally good or bad has philosophers and religious thinkers locked in heated debate for centuries.

• Different camps argue our intrinsic wiring bends towards virtue or vice - but modern discoveries raise intriguing new perspectives on this classic conundrum.

• Groundbreaking sciences like genetics and neuroscience are pulling back the curtain on how ourDNA scripts interact with life's rich plot twists to craft our character arc.

• So are we born evil? Let's find out.

---

Since the dawn of civilization over 10,000 years ago, humanity has grappled with the question of our inherent nature. Are we born with an innate propensity for evil, or do we inherently tend towards good? This debate has witnessed the rise and fall of empires, the birth of religions, and the development of legal systems, yet it remains unresolved. Through the lens of history, we’ve witnessed countless stories from the most virtuous to the most heinous - but what does it say about our nature?

Ancient Arguments Revisited

The Original Sins 

To address this question, naturally, we’d turn to religions and philosophy for insights. However, depending on the belief, you may get vastly different answers. Christianity, the world’s largest religion, holds that humans are born sinners, as suggested by the doctrine of original sin. We are thought to need redemption through divine belief and forgiveness. Echoing this view of a flawed human nature, British philosopher Thomas Hobbes described life in the state of nature as  “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” in his seminal work, “Leviathan”. 

The Corrupted Nobles 

Confucianism and the views of Jean-Jacques Rousseau represent a more optimistic view of human nature. Confucianism posits that we are inherently good, with a natural tendency towards kindness. Rousseau, in “The Social Contract,” argued that humans are born free and noble, and that it is society that corrupts us. 

The Middle Ground of Greek Philosophy

Greek philosophy, another major school of thought in the realm of philosophy, takes a more nuanced stance. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, did not brand humans as inherently “evil” or “good”, but rather saw moral failures as a result of ignorance, lack of self- control, or imbalance within the soul or psyche. Socrates famously claimed that if people knew what was good, they would do it. Plato suggested that the appetitive and spirited parts of the soul could override the rational part, resulting in injustice and moral failure. Aristotle argued that virtuous habits are not innate but must be cultivated through practices. 

The Unresolved Debate 

The philosophical debates, enriched by various schools of thought, have continued for centuries without consensus. Modern thinkers—such as Immanuel Kant, John Rawls, and Robert Nozick—have shifted the focus away from the inherent nature of humans to the societal structures that can either foster ethical behavior or contribute to moral failures. The crux of their argument is that the behaviors of individuals, which ultimately impact one another, are shaped by societal conditions. This shift in focus renders the question of human beings' inherent nature less central to understanding morality.

Nature vs. Nurture: A New Frontier

Just when everyone was ready to set aside this topic, the latest advancement in neuroscience brings a new dimension and revives the age-old debate. We are now able to examine the genetic makeup of human beings and gain insights into personality formation. We have developed a much better understanding of the various factors that shape decisions and behaviors. Science is bringing us closer to understanding the intricate interplay of Nature vs. Nurture. Are your behaviors predetermined by genetic codes, or do we sculpt our personality through experiences? For the sake of arguments, let’s extract three key concepts from neuroscience to examine: Genes, Epigenetics, and the Bayesian Brain.

The Genetic Blueprint 

In recent decades, genetics has emerged as a pivotal field of study. Initially sparked by the quest to understand hereditary diseases, the discipline has expanded to explore how our genes influence virtually every facet of our being. Genes serve as an instructional manual for producing biochemicals - enzymes, hormones, proteins, neurotransmitters - that dictate our thoughts, decisions, and behaviors through intricate biochemical pathways. 

Consider the SLC6A4 gene, commonly known as the Serotonin Transporter gene. It encodes a protein that facilitates the reabsorption of serotonin, one of the happy hormones, between neurons. This process helps to regulate serotonin levels. Individuals with a shorter variant of this gene tend to produce less of this transporter protein, resulting in a reduced serotonin reuptake, and potentially causing mood swings, anxiety, depression, and a heightened sensitivity to stress. The genetic component has made this person appear to be moody, paranoid, and neurotic.

Beyond Genetics: The Power of Nurture

Our genetic code is generally stable throughout our lives—with the notable exception of extraordinary events, such as the fanciful scenario of a radioactive spider bite. However, before you lose hope, you may want to know that the "interpretation" of our genetic instructions can indeed change over time through a phenomenon known as epigenetics. This field studies alterations in gene expression influenced by environmental factors, including diet, exposure to toxins, and stress. Such changes can modify the production of biological materials and, consequently, affect the biochemical pathways that underpin our behaviors.

Taking the SLC6A4 gene as an example once more, its expression—the level of serotonin transporter production—can be affected by a range of environmental factors. These include age, stress levels, traumatic events, and nutritional status. A nurturing environment during childhood, characterized by adequate nutrition and protective parenting, may promote an optimal expression of this gene. This, in turn, could lead to enhanced resilience, optimism, and a general sense of calmness in an individual.

From Genetics to Cognition: The Bayesian Brain Hypothesis

The dynamic interplay between our genes and our environment doesn't end with the production of proteins and the regulation of neurotransmitters—it extends into the very way our brains process and interpret information. The Bayesian brain hypothesis suggests that our brains continuously update our understanding of the world through a process akin to statistical inference. This model posits that the brain weighs incoming sensory information against our prior beliefs and experiences to generate perceptions, decisions, and behaviors.

Just as epigenetics reflects the versatility of gene expression in response to environmental inputs, the Bayesian brain framework illustrates how our cognitive processes are similarly flexible and adaptive. In the context of genetics and epigenetics, our neurochemistry sets the stage for certain predispositions in our behavior and temperament. However, the Bayesian brain hypothesis takes this a step further, proposing that our brains are prediction machines that not only adapt to but also preempt changes in our internal and external environments, based on past experiences.

From Past Experience to Expectations and Personality Formation

This understanding of the brain as an inference engine has profound implications for appreciating the malleability of human cognition. Consider, for example, the different developmental trajectories of two children: one grows up celebrated as a wonder kid in school, while the other endures a childhood marred by abuse or bullying. The former is likely to develop a confident and optimistic demeanor, as their brain has been conditioned to anticipate success based on a history of positive reinforcement. The latter, conversely, may develop a more cautious or distrusting personality, having learned to expect hurt and rejection from their more frequent negative experiences. These patterns of expectation are not fixed; they can evolve with new experiences, underscoring the importance of creating supportive environments that can rewrite negative scripts into more positive narratives.

In essence, the Bayesian brain hypothesis offers a powerful lens through which to view the continuum of human experience and its impact on our cognitive landscape. It is a reminder that our mental models are not static; they are shaped and reshaped by every new piece of information, every experience, and every interaction. By recognizing that our brains are designed to be adaptable and that they learn to predict and respond to the world in a way that reflects our unique life stories, we appreciate the profound role that our environment plays in shaping our perceptions and behaviors.

Conclusion: The Synthesis of Nature, Nurture, and Our Collective Future

With the Bayesian brain hypothesis providing insight into the adaptability of our cognitive processes, and the interplay of nature and nurture shaping the very fabric of our being, we stand at the precipice of a new understanding of human development. Our genes lay the foundation, but it is the richness of our experiences and the quality of our environments that sculpt our potential into tangible realities.

The philosophical musings of ancient and modern thinkers alike have long suggested that we are not mere prisoners of our biology. Instead, we are active participants in the creation of ourselves. From Aristotle's virtues developed through habituation to Kant's ideals of autonomy and rationality, the message is clear: we have the power to influence our destiny. As we have seen, our brains are not just passive receivers of information but dynamic organs, ever-changing and evolving in response to the world around us.

In recognizing this, our task becomes one of intentional cultivation. We must strive to create and sustain environments that are conducive to positive growth and ethical development. By fostering educational systems that encourage critical thinking, by cultivating social structures that promote compassion and cooperation, and by advocating for policies that support mental health and well-being, we can guide the evolutionary path of our species towards a more enlightened state.

This is not merely an academic exercise but a call to action. The insights gleaned from our exploration compel us to move beyond the confines of the nature versus nurture debate. As we embark on this journey, let us carry forward the understanding that we are, at once, products of our biology and architects of our environment. It is within this duality that our greatest potential lies, not predetermined, but waiting to be realized through the choices we make and the environments we shape.