Note: The sign “=” (equal sign) does not mean a “conclusion”. The sign for a conclusion is (for example and because it is on your keyboard): “=>”.
Your conclusion is false, because nobody is “born with an active evil tendencies”.
No, and if you had read my posts carefully, then you would know it.
Your wording is false. Morality has to be learned. It is a matter of education. The DNA says nothing about morality but merely about the potential to learn. If a human learns morality in a wrong or an evil way, then it is because of a false learning. Not morality but learning morality is in the DNA.
Your premise is false. Unfortunately, it can be used rhetorically.
Maybe that it is the same statement for you whether one says it is learning morality or just morality itself, but it is not the same statement. What is said about morality is “merely” said by adults (at least not by children who have to learn morality). So morality is an adult matter. Children have to learn morality. So if they do not learn it, then they have a tendency to become evil - but not because of their DNA, at least not in the first place, because the genetic code contains the possibility of learning morality but not morality itself. That is also the reason for the need of ethical education and why belief system (religions) occured. Again: Genetically, learning morality is DNA based, but the morality itself is not.
That is also false. Those posts catched my attention.
Again: Humans are not “born with a POTENTIAL to be beastly and evil”. They are born with a potential to learn what morality means.
Note: It is the adult ethic system that interprets this or that as being good or evil. In other words. Morality changes. Thus ethic systems change as well. So: Why are you not also saying that “all animals are evil”? And if you are saying that, then I ask you: Why are you saying that? Why are you interpreting it in that way?
Btw, one of my forte is Philosophy of Morality and Ethics with emphasis on Kant’s.
As I wrote in the other thread, there is a ‘Nature’ and ‘Nurture’ aspect to Morality.
DNA wise, all humans are born with the POTENTIAL with basic morality.
There has been lots of studies relating to inherent morality within humans via the study of babies which are less than one year old, i.e. to discount the ‘Nurture’ element.
Here is one article from Scientific American to lend greater credibility of my point;
However you can research this topic all over the internet to educate yourself on this point.
If you are highly perceptive you would have noted this fact from observations within humanity.
The Nurture factors [learning, improving, etc.] merely enhanced the Morality that is innate [Nature] within humans.
Animals follow their instincts to kill, fight, injure and they do not has any strong potential for morality like humans and high level of self-consciousness to contrast what is good against what is evil from the moral perspective.
I don’t bash Muslims and I do not blame Muslims directly for the atrocities committed by SOME Muslims. I do not even blame those evil prone Muslims who committed the evils and violence because they were unfortunately born with an active evil tendencies.
The critical root cause and blame are the evil laden elements in the Quran and within the ethos of Islam that catalyze and trigger the evil prone Muslims to perform their duty as “good” Muslims and those acts out in reality turned out to be evil and violent to the rest of humanity.