Which thinker argued against innate goodness, claiming people are innately evil?

Which thinker argued against innate goodness, claiming people are innately evil?

• A. Xun-zi
• B. Meng-zi
• C. Confucius
• D. Laozi

Answer: (A)

Xunzi makes the case that human nature is not innately good; instead, people have natural desires and tendencies that can lead to selfish or disruptive behavior if left unchecked. Morality, in his view, comes through deliberate cultivation—education, ritual propriety, and strong social institutions that guide and reform those desires. This contrasts with Mengzi (Mencius), who argues that humans are born with an inherent capacity for goodness, and with other thinkers in the tradition who emphasize moral cultivation or alignment with the Dao rather than innate evil or good. So the thinker who argues against innate goodness is the one who sees moral virtue as something actively formed through discipline and learning.

Xunzi makes the case that human nature is not innately good; instead, people have natural desires and tendencies that can lead to selfish or disruptive behavior if left unchecked. Morality, in his view, comes through deliberate cultivation—education, ritual propriety, and strong social institutions that guide and reform those desires. This contrasts with Mengzi (Mencius), who argues that humans are born with an inherent capacity for goodness, and with other thinkers in the tradition who emphasize moral cultivation or alignment with the Dao rather than innate evil or good. So the thinker who argues against innate goodness is the one who sees moral virtue as something actively formed through discipline and learning.