---

"Without Fail...," by Jessica Hatala

Without fail, every time I am involved in an in-class discussion/debate here at the Indiana Academy, someone asks "why" certain human attributes are always present in a plot. Again, reliably, the answer is "because humans are inherently good." Never is the wording of the phrase varied. This leads me to believe that all of our conversations have become stagnantly predictable. I propose a slightly deeper question. Is man truly "inherently good?"

Humans are a social species. I believe that I can make this assertion without outlining a Socrete-ian argument chalk full of "therefore's" and "if so's". Because man is social, he needs a society to survive. Then, man's behavior toward other men (I use men as a general term. Of course women are included; I'm not being misogynistic.) is not because he is naturally kind, but is used as a means of survival. Humans need to live amiably with each other in order to avoid being ostracized from the group. Ants and bees function in the same basic way, and yet we do not dub their species as naturally good. This function is simply viewed as natural behavior. I will assert that human behavior is also pre-ordained by nature, and not by some in-born virtue.

Nature is neither good nor evil; it simply is. We cannot look at a storm and say, "Oh, that storm is malicious." In the same respect we cannot look at a mother bear defending her cubs and say, "That was a courageous act." The unalterable laws of the universe dictate nature, with the survival instinct among them. Just because humans have developed complex civilizations to ensure this societal network does not mean that they have evolved past the most basic need for survival above all else.

I am in no way discounting the fact that a higher power may have created all of nature or the moral orientation of that power. I am simply identifying the fact that man cannot be separated from the rest of creation by such an empty phrase as "Man is inherently good." Obviously man is a part of the natural world surrounding him. Nature cannot be judged, and just because the fruits of a man's actions may be beneficial to others, thus considered good, that does not, in any way, open the door for a judgement to be made on his motives.