Good vs Bad
- Submitted by: czechfella
- Views: 1052
- Category: English
- Date Submitted: 04/11/2011 11:37 AM
- Pages: 3
- Report this Essay
bad person noun a person who does harm to others [ant: good person]
good person noun a person who is good to other people [ant: bad person]
I don't agree with Anne that people are basically bad but i don't disagree i beliveve it lies between these too because bad and good is too broad of a definition but more like selfish .If people where meant to be peaceful and caring by nature, shouldn't it of happened a long time ago ? I mean we have been on this planet for over 4000 years as we are now, evolving slowly from monkeys. If we were peaceful by nature shouldn't monkeys, apes, animals and the rest of mother nature be too ?
I mean there are allot of examples of shelfish people e.g. Hitler, Bloody Mary, . It's not like these are exceptions, the list goes on and on and on... , If we where good by nature there wouldn't be so much stealing and violence.
Take for example the great civilizations from the past They have all rose to power through war staying there for a couple of hundred maybe even a thousand years and then losing it trough war as well.
Which shows that people aren't good by nature if they where George W.Bush would not be forcing other nations to either support them or be with the "terrorist". It makes him sound bad not because he actually believes there are terrorists there but because he is using it as an excuse to get to the oil in Iraq.
If you look back to the 15 century, we can see a good example of the selfishness of the great powers back then (Spain, Italy, Portugal etc.) They set out to conquer new lands because they wanted to have more land and outdo each other.
Look at the for example the American "war on terror" here is a quote from one of George W.Bush speech's about it
"Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
Which shows that people aren't good by nature if they where George W.Bush would not be forcing other nations to either support them or be with the...
good person noun a person who is good to other people [ant: bad person]
I don't agree with Anne that people are basically bad but i don't disagree i beliveve it lies between these too because bad and good is too broad of a definition but more like selfish .If people where meant to be peaceful and caring by nature, shouldn't it of happened a long time ago ? I mean we have been on this planet for over 4000 years as we are now, evolving slowly from monkeys. If we were peaceful by nature shouldn't monkeys, apes, animals and the rest of mother nature be too ?
I mean there are allot of examples of shelfish people e.g. Hitler, Bloody Mary, . It's not like these are exceptions, the list goes on and on and on... , If we where good by nature there wouldn't be so much stealing and violence.
Take for example the great civilizations from the past They have all rose to power through war staying there for a couple of hundred maybe even a thousand years and then losing it trough war as well.
Which shows that people aren't good by nature if they where George W.Bush would not be forcing other nations to either support them or be with the "terrorist". It makes him sound bad not because he actually believes there are terrorists there but because he is using it as an excuse to get to the oil in Iraq.
If you look back to the 15 century, we can see a good example of the selfishness of the great powers back then (Spain, Italy, Portugal etc.) They set out to conquer new lands because they wanted to have more land and outdo each other.
Look at the for example the American "war on terror" here is a quote from one of George W.Bush speech's about it
"Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
Which shows that people aren't good by nature if they where George W.Bush would not be forcing other nations to either support them or be with the...