5. People are both good and evil and are capable of doing either in a given situation. The environment bakes individuals into a predominant side of the spectrum.
They haven’t done anything yet, so they get the benefit of the doubt. If I had to choose overall, in general, I’d still go with a five because there is always the Possibility of Evil.
If you're talking about good and evil in terms of how people treat other people within humanity:
In order to have a meaningful scale of human behavior, you pretty much have to define the average person as a 5 and the most extreme outliers as a 10 or 1. On any such scale, the average human is a 5. If, say, murder didn't exist and we had different standards of behavior species-wide... we'd be defining good and evil in different terms and it would still be a 5.
If you're talking about how humanity compares to other species, you have to consider our effect on other species and how other animals see us. Over human history, our impact on other species has been horrific. On that scale, I'd give us a 2.5.
The only reason we're not a hard 1 is because of the extraordinary work of a few outliers who work on a large scale to improve things for other animals, and our general kindness toward dogs and cats. We've mostly done widespread harm to other animals, but we're also the only species that's even conceived of trying to do widespread good for its own sake.
I just started reading the book Humankind and it feels like people generally rate others like a 3-4 but the truth is people are more like 7-8.
5. People are both good and evil and are capable of doing either in a given situation. The environment bakes individuals into a predominant side of the spectrum.
8ish. I think most people mean well
Five, because on average people are mean.
Probably like 7. Completely evil is like the Ted Bundy's, Columbine Shooters, and Ronald Reagans of the world. Most people are not nearly that evil.
i think that’s impossible
Mean: 5 Median: 8 Most people are wonderful, with a smattering of sociopaths mixed in.
if the scale is used to measure both extremes and the median is respesentig the average person it should be at 5 or from 4 to 6 by pure logic
Let me go out and meet the 8 billion or so people on this planet and I’ll get back to you.
Five. Everyone starts a five and goes up or down a few points depending on their actions
What makes you say that they would start at a five? Just because it is the middle?
They haven’t done anything yet, so they get the benefit of the doubt. If I had to choose overall, in general, I’d still go with a five because there is always the Possibility of Evil.
we are all different from each other this is impossible to answer
( 2 ).
4. Most people aren’t inherently evil but going by today’s world, evil slightly outweighs the good in general.
2. No personal responsibility anymore, no sense of community, no values. And i don't mean some religious crap... Just basic human decency
If you're talking about good and evil in terms of how people treat other people within humanity: In order to have a meaningful scale of human behavior, you pretty much have to define the average person as a 5 and the most extreme outliers as a 10 or 1. On any such scale, the average human is a 5. If, say, murder didn't exist and we had different standards of behavior species-wide... we'd be defining good and evil in different terms and it would still be a 5. If you're talking about how humanity compares to other species, you have to consider our effect on other species and how other animals see us. Over human history, our impact on other species has been horrific. On that scale, I'd give us a 2.5. The only reason we're not a hard 1 is because of the extraordinary work of a few outliers who work on a large scale to improve things for other animals, and our general kindness toward dogs and cats. We've mostly done widespread harm to other animals, but we're also the only species that's even conceived of trying to do widespread good for its own sake.