论人性 On Human Nature

论人性 On Human Nature

　　Philosophers have initiated a debate about the human nature since the mankind got to probe into itself. The term "state of nature" is used to refer to the hypothetical condition of humans before social factors are imposed, thus attempting to describe the "natural essence" of human nature. Most views of it fall in three typical groups. Views in the first group see humans as inherently good.

　　自从人类探索自我以来，哲学家们就开始了对人性的争论。“自然状态”这个术语是指在社会因素被施加之前，指人类的假设条件，从而试图描述人类自然的“自然本质”。它的大多数观点在三个典型群体。在第一组中的意见认为人类本质上是好的。

　　The most famous theory in this group is John Locke‘s social contract theory. According to Locke, humans in the state of nature have absolute freedom to make their orders and take their actions, without having to ask permission from anyone else. People are born equal, and willing to treat each other as they would like to be treated. This will is known as sympathy, the source of justice and kindness and eventually all virtues. In ancient China a widely known philosopher, the most notable disciple of Confucius, Mencius, held similar points, declaring that humans are naturally moral beings but are corrupted by society. The second group includes views that see humans as inherently bad. According to original sin, humans in the state of nature are tarnished by the sin of Adam. Later the group had a more rational speaker, Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes believed that humans in the state of nature would behave "badly" towards one another, but he argued that people had every right to defend themselves by whatever means. Famously, he believed that such a condition would lead to a "war of every man against every man" and make life "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Similar theories also can be found in ancient China. Xuncius, another follower of Confucius as Mencius, simply rejected Mencius‘ claim. Instead he asserted that "Human Dispositions are Detestable". The rest views that form the last group stand a neutral point in the debate. They generally believe that human behavior is determined by biological and social factors, so there is no clear boundary between “good” and “evil” and nothing is to be blamed but the gene as well as the environment. And of the two factors which one decides more? Also known as “nature versus nurture”, this question compels enormous studies. Being a constant stranger to philosophy, I’ve got nothing to do but just skim over all of the theories mentioned above, keep thinking about human nature in my own way associated with familiar examples in my own surroundings, and undoubtedly end up all these without explicit conclusions.

　　这一群体中最著名的理论是约翰·洛克的社会契约理论。据洛克说，在自然状态下的人有绝对的自由，使他们的'命令，并采取他们的行动，而不必要求任何人的许可。人出生时是平等的，愿意彼此对待，因为他们愿意接受治疗。这将被称为同情，正义和善良的来源，并最终所有的美德。在古代中国著名的哲学家，孔子、Mencius最著名的弟子，举行了类似的观点，声称人类是自然的道德而损坏的社会。第二组包括认为人类本质上是坏的观点。根据原罪，人类在自然状态是由亚当的罪玷污。后来，该组有一个更理性的扬声器，托马斯·霍布斯。霍布斯认为，人类在自然状态下会表现得“很”，但他认为，人们有任何权利用任何手段来保护自己。众所周知，他认为这样的情况会导致“一切人反对一切人的战争”，让生活“孤独、贫穷、肮脏、野蛮和短暂的。”类似的理论也可以在古代中国找到。荀子，另一个跟随孔子Mencius，简单地拒绝Mencius的要求。他说，“人的性格是可憎的”。最后一组的其他观点在辩论中是中立的一点。他们普遍认为，人类的行为是由生物和社会因素决定的，所以“善”与“恶”之间没有明确的界限，没有什么是被指责的，而是基因和环境之间的关系。和两个决定更多的因素？也被称为“天性与教养”，这个问题迫使庞大的研究。作为一个对哲学的一个不断的陌生人，我没有什么可以做，但只是掠过上面提到的所有理论，保持思考在我自己的方式与熟悉的例子在我自己的环境中的人性，毫无疑问地结束所有这些没有明确的结论。(www.yingyuzuowen.cn)

　　Because whenever I try to figure in my mind what human nature is like, I could not help recalling so many stories about it, each of which conflicts with one another. They mess me up and keep me from a clear image about it. Therefore I have to hold a moderate opinion until I find new key evidence to prove whether human nature is good or evil. Before that, I choose to believe that human nature is indeed like a coin and neither side can easily dominate.

　　因为每当我试图在我的脑海里想什么样的人性是什么样的，我忍不住想起了这么多的故事，每一个彼此冲突。他们把我搞得一团糟，让我从一个清晰的形象。因此，我必须保持一个温和的意见，直到我找到新的关键证据来证明人类的本性是好还是坏。在此之前，我选择相信，人性确实像一个硬币，任何一方都可以很容易地主宰。