# data[].attributes.body
1. The question is rudementary but the answer is no where to be found. This can be compared to the chicken and the egg dilemma. Are people born bad or are they raised in a negative environment. The deeper question is why certain people do certain things at certain times. A stimulus causes a reaction, but can a human brain create a stimulus for itself and choose the reaction? The question is not as simple as good or evil but good and evil do exist. With the exception of psychological disorders, newborns are meant to be molded by what they see, touch, hear, taste, and smell. These experiences lead to personality which leads to action.

2. We as humans are defined what we do and don't do. For example, a man goes to jail for robbing a bank and another man does not because he did not rob a bank. These 2 men are not good or bad but their actions have given them a neutral and bad connotation or reputation. Actions speak louder than words.

3. I agree with the author when he says that there is much more good than bad. However, just a little bad can do a lot of damage. Similar to a spark of fire, Cain writes that it doesn't matter if it is one or one hundred it is just a fraction of the population and will always be there but just lurking around the corner. It is important to be alert without living in fear.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I don't feel that the question can be answered as simply as whether your good or evil. I believe that there is much more to that. it depends on not only your reasoning of Hu you do the things you do and how you view those things. I guarantee the dearth fader feels that the rebels are in fact the evil ones trying to stop him from getting what he wants.

2. I don't know exactly what defines us as humans besides what we look like however it must have something to do with the fact that we need to survive under any means necessary whether that be scavenging for resources or taking them from others.

3. I have no idea whether i agree with him or anything he said as you can probably tell I have strong feelings about this topic and couldn't really agree with anyone but I do think he does make some good points

# data[].attributes.body
1. I believe man is more complex than being inherently good or evil. That is like asking whether or not every type of food is appealing or distasteful. There would be no real or direct answer to that question. This is the same with asking whether man is good or evil. No single being is the same and we therefore cannot be labeled or depicted to be a certain way.

2. I don't think any acts can define us as humans. I believe it is up to how we define ourselves by the choices we make and actions we uphold. We can either decide to be the best version of ourselves or the version of ourself that took the wrong pathway or made the wrong decisions.

3. I have to say that I do agree with Cain's view. The light and good will always outnumber the dark and evil. As he mentioned, we would not be here if we were inherently evil or if the dark over shadowed the light.

# data[].attributes.body
1) When answering these types of questions I often get confused while trying to sort out my morals and beliefs while I have so much more things to learn. That is why when I am posed with these questions I often like to think of them from a psychological standpoint. There are branches of psychology such as behaviorism that say when you are born your mind is a complete blank slate, and from that moment on society can mold you and your thoughts or beliefs into whatever they desire. However there is also ideas such as situational behavior that suggest that your actions are based your environment and situation alone, not on your morality as a person. So when trying to judge a persons goodness based on one point in their lives we must take into consideration their upbringing, past incidences, mental state, and culture in which they live among other things. If we judge every person from North Korea to Southern California by the same standards of only "good or evil", that isn't very fair now is it?

2) Throughout history we have used the phrase "they're only human" as an excuse. Are we being lazy for letting out emotions control our actions, showing weakness in times of adversity, even giving up after being pushed to the limit? I don't think so. To be human is to have a twisting, turning, and sometimes bumpy road from point A and a point B. A destination or a goal is what keeps us moving. Unlike the gods in ancient mythology our path from A to B isn't solved with a simple lighting bolt to our enemies. And unlike animals we are able to understand and are coherent of the emotions and morals that drive our personal path. So it may be that most of the goals we have will be a winding road that seems like it is leading nowhere, but our ability to recognize hardship, though we may give up or even persevere, is what makes us different than all the other things out there.

3) I don't really agree with his point of view. His opinions are his own and I respect them but I think that if he wanted to really take an in depth view of human nature his news article would be much longer. Also to take most of your ideas and themes from one event in our entire history seems a little lame. If his point was to describe his findings of good and evil within the events of the Boston Marathon he should have made that his title. The title "Is Man Inherently Good or Evil" is a little misleading. Though I am not one to judge his own opinions and thoughts I do wish he would have looked at his question with a different approach.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Each person is different. They can be kind hearted, they can be evil, and so many more. Man is more complex than being good or bad. Good or bad is just too vague. It doesn't define us all completely.

2. What we do everyday defines us.

3. I do agree with the author. Only a small amount of the people in the world are malicious. But their actions only should define them, not the kind people. So the evil people actions don't define the whole human race. Only affects them.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think that man is more complex than being good or evil. Sometimes we can become angry and maybe do

something out of the ordinary, but that doesn't define us as good or evil. Sometimes we can even do something

kind for someone like compliment them or just be nice to them for no reason. We are human and react in human ways

that there is such a small fraction of us out of the whole population that are "evil" in a way.

2. The acts that define us as being human are that we get upset and react in certain ways or we are happy and do small

acts of kindness. Because we are human we aren't perfect and make mistakes.

3. I agree with Will Cain's point of view of saying that there is such a small fraction of people in the whole world's population that are in a way, "evil." Just because one group of people are doing bad things like terrorism doesn't define the human race as being evil. At the same time just because one person in a situation is helping injured people, like the man in the cowboy hat, doesn't mean the human race is good. So, man is more complex than just being good or evil.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I think that man is more complex than good or evil. That is not to say there is no man who is wholly good and wholly evil but human nature is not this simple. We all commit acts of kindness to those who need comfort but we have all made a statement we regret and in a rage have told people things that have hurt them. There is a spectrum of moral positions one can occupy at any point in his or her lifetime.

2) Acts which define us as humans are the random acts of kindness we commit out of our hearts. The pencil we lend, the compliment we give, the white lie to spare feelings, and the truth that someone needs to hear. It is our intuition and our ability to have a sense of what "feels right" which makes us human.

3) I agree with Will Cain in some respects but not in others. I believe he is correct in saying that if man we truly evil we would have perished long ago. I also agree in that there certainly is good in the world such as the man in the cowboy hat. I disagree that it is as simple as this. While his optimistic outlook is uplifting and gives us hope it also glazes over some of the darker aspects of human nature. There are so many factors it cannot be this simple. Genetics, home life, experiences, current situation, and things taught to us by our gaurdians since being brought into this world all impact out judgement, actions, and our over all nature. To be human is to be somewhere inbetween.

# data[].attributes.body
Hi all: Now that you've read the CNN article, respond to the following questions, posting your responses directly on this wall.

1. Is man (really, Cain should be using the term human here) inherently good or evil? Or is the issue more complex than this binary?

2. What acts define us as humans?

3. Do you agree with, disagree with, or qualify the author's (Will Cain) point of view?