Are people born good or evil?

Or do they just become that way as they go through life?
Look, let’s take the most obvious example: would a figure like Hitler have been Hitler regardless of the circumstances he was born into? 🙂

This might lean more toward philosophy than psychology, though there’s definitely some overlap.
The issue is that defining good and evil is largely the domain of philosophy. Psychology tends to focus on the behavioral patterns and mental disorders that manifest as those actions.
That said, various psychological theories imply a baseline for whether humans are inherently good or bad, so it's a fair topic for discussion here. For instance, based on Freudian theory, one could argue humans are fundamentally flawed because the id operates strictly on the pleasure principle. On the flip flip side, Transactional Analysis—essentially the successor to psychoanalysis—starts from the premise that people are born with a fundamental "I'm OK—You're OK" attitude.

Now, would Hitler have been Hitler regardless of his upbringing? Likely not. Even if someone possesses an innate predisposition toward antisocial personality traits, such as psychopathy, it doesn't guarantee they will become a criminal. In fact, many people with those traits find success in high-stakes fields like business, politics, the military, or professional sports.
On the other hand, given the political and economic climate of that era, someone else might have stepped into that role regardless. We'll never truly know.
Based on what you've said, I'd suggest that while some people may be born with a greater potential for good or evil, their environment ultimately dictates which direction they take.

Look, nobody—and I mean absolutely nobody—is born evil. If everyone around you treats you like some kind of monster from day one, eventually, you’re going to start acting like one just to survive.

Lawrence Wells said:Honestly, nobody is born inherently malicious. If everyone around you treats you like some kind of monster from the very start, eventually, you’re going to turn into one.

I can't say I really agree with that perspective, 😛

Take two boys I know—they're sons of my close friends, only about two years apart, maybe 12 and 10 years old.
They grew up under the exact same roof, in the same environment, with parents who treated them both identically... yet the older one is this perfectly polite, well-adjusted kid, while the younger one is a total demon 😠
From the time he could barely walk, he's been displaying this raw rage, this destructiveness—and I don't just mean the typical hyperactive stuff people try to label everything as these days—no, he's a genuine little savage in a child's body.

So, how do you actually explain that kind of gap? 🤔

In my view, it all comes down to the brain—which actually begins its development while the baby is still in the womb. We essentially enter this world with a certain baseline temperament that continues to take shape as we age, though the capacity for change slows down significantly as we get older. Beyond that, there’s a constant feedback loop at play; if you have a child who is naturally rebellious or troublesome, the environment's reaction is going to be fundamentally different than if they were a "well-behaved" kid. Because of that, even within the exact same household, the dynamics are never truly identical... it's simply impossible for them to be.

If someone actually lives by the pleasure principle, wouldn't logic suggest they should just be a decent person? Think about it—if I’m kind to you, there’s a much better chance you’ll be kind back to me. On the flip side, if I'm a jerk, you're probably going to be one too. Of course, some people have their priorities totally flipped, but that's a whole different conversation altogether...

I believe a person is formed by the combination of genetic inheritance and upbringing. With the right guidance, one can mitigate and channel what might be considered "bad" genetics, though they cannot be entirely erased. Of course, by "bad," I am simply referring to the qualities typically associated with that term.

I’ve been thinking about this—it feels like the most significant role in life is played by whatever we’re just born with, right? Like, our baseline. Everyone else spends their whole lives trying to push their environment forward, while genes seem like they matter the least, if they even matter at all. I still leave some room for other factors, though... I guess I don't really know what else could possibly have that much pull over us.

Galatea said:If someone actually lives by the principle of seeking pleasure, wouldn't logic dictate they should act decently? Think about it—if I'm kind to you, there's a much better shot that you'll be kind back to me. On the flip side, if I'm a total jerk to you, then you're probably going to be one to me... sure, there’s always that outlier where someone’s internal math is just completely flipped, but that’s a whole different conversation entirely...

I can't help but feel like we've got way more egoists out there than actual altruists—it's pretty depressing, really. People generally start with themselves, and if there happens to be any leftover energy or time, maybe they'll glance at someone else. That's why I think chasing pure pleasure usually leads straight to that selfish mindset. You're such a massive idealist, 😉.

I've always felt like people are a bit like clay. We all have these specific traits that make us who we are, and just like working with clay, life ends up shaping us into who we become.
But at the end of the day, raw clay is just clay—it's simple, plain, and waiting to be molded.

Sukuba said:I feel like our innate traits play the most significant role, while environment takes center stage and genetics seems to matter the least.

Doesn't that statement contradict itself? If we possess something "by birth," then we have received it through our genetic makeup. Were you referring to something else?

Maleficent said:Aren't you kind of contradicting yourself there? If we have something 'from birth,' then isn't that just 'genetic inheritance'? Or were you going somewhere else with that thought?

I don't think character is something passed down through DNA—no, I'm convinced every person is just a reflection of their own soul, or character, or whatever label you want to slap on it. When I said 'from birth,' I just meant it in the sense of when something starts to exist... I wasn't talking about genetics.

Genes dictate the smaller percentage, while upbringing accounts for the larger portion 😛

Sukuba said:I truly believe that a person is simply a reflection of their soul.

That falls under the umbrella of spirituality rather than psychology. 😉 🙂

Amanda Jackson6 said:A person is like a lump of clay—they have these specific elements and ingredients that make them unique, and just as we shape clay, life shapes the individual.
But at its core, clay is just clay... shapeless, pure, simple...

So you're saying people start out as a blank slate? Just formless and simple? I don't know, it makes me think about babies—practically speaking, when they're just a month or two old, they all get basically the same amount of love and attention from their parents, yet there's always that gap in how they react or behave. One cries constantly, another doesn't cry at all. I even read somewhere—don't take this too literally, just an example—that you can almost predict certain personality traits based on how a baby reacts the first time they're put in a bath or something. Who knows? Anyway, I also know someone who had a genuinely rough childhood with terrible parents, yet grew up to be an incredibly kind and wonderful adult. We always talk about how environment affects us, right? Like, negative surroundings shouldn't necessarily create a negative person, though most people assume that's how it works. But to me, it feels like upbringing or environment isn't the deciding factor—it doesn't just mold someone into a set pattern. Character matters, sure, but the environment plays its part too. 🙂

Everyone's got their own take on things, I guess. It's hard to play the expert and decide who's actually right, so it doesn't really matter. Just my two cents.🙂

mistybison said:At this point, we’re drifting into "spirituality" territory rather than actual psychology. 😉 🙂

Which is exactly why I said—look, call it whatever you want—but I don't necessarily see character as a spiritual trait, even if someone who considers themselves deeply spiritual might try to claim it. It really just comes down to how you choose to look at things, I guess. 🙂

Amanda Jackson6 said:That is why I mentioned you can call it whatever you like; I don't necessarily view character as a spiritual trait, though a more spiritual person might see it that way depending on their perspective. 🙂

I am not sure I follow your line of reasoning. 🙂 If a trait is innate, it is encoded in our genes. This applies to both physical and psychological characteristics. If we believe certain qualities are "given" to us but they aren't part of our genetic makeup, what else could they be—other than the soul, which moves us into the realm of faith? 🤔

mistybison said:I don't think I follow you. 🙂 If something is innate, then it’s written in the genes. That applies to physical traits, but psychological ones too. If we believe something is "given" to us, but it isn't coded in our DNA, then what else could it be—besides a soul? And once we start talking about that, we're drifting into the realm of faith.🤔

See, that’s where I have to push back on your point about how "if something is innate, it’s in the genes" applying to both physical and psychological traits. I just don't buy it—not entirely. Sure, physical stuff? Absolutely. But psychological traits... maybe. Like, if someone is naturally a happy person, their kids might have a predisposition toward that, right? Or maybe depression runs in the family? Fine, maybe. But when we talk about actual *character*—you know, whether someone is a hypocrite, greedy, funny, honest, or just a decent human being—I don't see that as a genetic blueprint. To me, that's character. And look, character doesn't necessarily have to mean "the soul"—that depends on your own beliefs, and honestly, we don't need to get bogged down in a theological debate here unless we want to go off on a tangent. Does that make even a little bit more sense?🙂

I mean, honestly, what even counts as "psychological traits" these days? Maybe personality doesn't have such a direct line to psychology anyway—it’s kind of a double-edged sword, isn't it? I don't even know anymore. You really managed to throw me for a loop there, 😁 but the thing is, the question was framed in a way where you don't necessarily have to stick strictly to psychology. It leans into those philosophical gray areas, too, so it's hard to stay within one single lane. Everything is just so interconnected... it feels a bit silly, really, that we even feel the need to box ourselves in with these arbitrary boundaries we've created. Everything gets split up into these neat little categories and subcategories, when in reality, it's all just one big, messy web.

Sukuba said:So you're saying people start out as a blank slate—just totally formless and simple? It makes me think about babies. Even when they're getting the exact same amount of love and attention from their parents, they still react so differently. One might cry constantly while another is totally chill. I even read somewhere that how a baby reacts to their first bath could hint at their future personality—take that with a grain of salt, obviously, just an example. Plus, I know someone who had a really rough childhood with terrible parents but grew up to be such a kind, wonderful person. We haven't really talked about how our environment plays a role, and while we usually assume a bad environment creates a bad person, that isn't always true. To me, it feels like upbringing isn't the deciding factor that shapes us into a specific mold. Character matters most, though the environment definitely plays its part. 🙂

We’re all unique. Everyone reacts differently based on their own experiences, which are shaped by a million different things, and genetics play a huge role too...
Humans are complex. There are so many subconscious factors influencing us, but there's a foundation we're built on. In my humble opinion, that core foundation can't be evil.