In his
column today in the
New York Times, David Brooks raises the question of what it means to talk about evil in human beings. His single case in point is the horrible killing of 16 Afghan civilians by
Robert Bales. As we consider the theological concept of sin in relation to the broader topic of salvation, it may be helpful to consider this example. There is a natural desire to bracket out actions such as this, that is, to consider them to be done by people who are completely evil. Bales's situtation, however, challenges this; but it also raises some fundamental questions about the relationship between depraved actions and psychological conditions (such as
PTSD).
Some questions to consider:
- How do we describe human nature? If it is basically good, how should we account for events like the one described in this newspaper column? If it is basically evil, how should we account for the many, many noble actions of people?
- What is the relationship between evil or sinful behavior and psychological diagnosis? Is there any rationale to "pathologizing" such behavior?
- Is immoral action simply a result of individual decisions, or is it possible to talk about sin and evil as social and/or systemic?
I'd like to comment on the second question. Many studies have been done in the psychological community to understand criminal behavior. very few criminals have anything wrong with their psychological health. Their brains are functioning perfectly fine, but it was their environment that seemed to have caused their behavior. To try and make a blanket statement in any way about psychology is wrong. You cannot scientifically apply anything to everyone. If you say: "All criminals have this malfunctioning area of the brain." All it takes is one criminal to do the same thing and not have that structure wrong. There should be no link between sin and psychology, because you can't make a link to good behavior and psychology. Many theorists have tried to make theories about good behavior, but the rule of "correlation does not equal causation" usually applies. it's too difficult to control for all variables when talking about sin or good behavior.
ReplyDeletemy thoughts on human nature and morality is that it is always changing. As the next generation is born and raised in society they are taught morality through school and from their parents so the morality in the coming years is born from our actions today as a society. Granted every person is different so there is no one set morality level theres just a majority's view of morality. To connect this with theology since humans are not divine we are ever changing and are suseptible to sin. Society has changed from persecuting christians to christianity being a major religion so whats to say where society will be at in the future. most things like killing has been universally a sin but the morality has changed. Society as a whole has gotten rid of unusual punishment and even the death penalty but Jesus was publicly humiliated and tortured on the cross. Culture is also a big part of morality and as we know cultures change. Immoral actions are carried out by indaviduals but society determines whats moral so society could never be immoral then. there will just alwasy be some people that either are incapable of knowing morality or the people who chose to be immoral because they are so wrapped up in sin.
ReplyDeleteI feel like there are alot of different views one can have on human behavior and whether or not humans are innately evil or good, but I believe that all humans are sinners and that even though we were created to be good, that does not necessarily mean that we are. When God created Adam and Even in Genesis 1, it says that He created "mankind in his own image," in the image of God, meaning that we were meant to be good. But during the fall of mankind, as our text describes it, sin entered the world, and evil desire entered into the heart of man. This doesn't go to say that there are many people that don't strive to do good in the world and follow the Bible and do what they are supposed to, just that evil is at the heart of mankind. Because I am getting at mankind as basically evil, I feel like many noble actions of society come from people realizing that hope is found in Jesus and following his role, or recognizing good in others as something joy and life giving and following suit in their actions. That's not to say that there aren't really, really great Godly people out there, just that I feel that sin is at the heart of the issue of mankind and that there must be a constant denial of ourselves as Paul states in order to follow Christ.
ReplyDeleteI think human nature is how we act in life. I believe humans are born good, but some use that good more than others. God, who is all good is our creator, and I do not think he would make some of us purely good and some of us purely evil. He is good himself, so why would he create us to be evil? His intention might have been for us to do and give good to our world, but certain influences can change the way we view good. In an imperfect world like this, it sometimes can be hard to avoid evil coming into our lives. Just being rejected in society from not being “normal” can make a person evil because of the hate they harness from the rejection. In some ways, we can be seen as contributors to evil people, because we treat them a certain way. This can lead to shootings, stealing, etc. I believe that somewhere along their lives, evil people had a time in their lives that they had good intentions and thoughts. Even with all this evil, there are many good people as well, who realize that God put them on Earth for good purposes.
ReplyDelete