Step 2: Research Review

Revised Question: Do negative actions of others/some make [all] humankind bad?

Do not make a jump from “beginning of time” to social media (now a days)
Most dangerous writing app
People automatically go to the bad place.

What does it mean to be a good human?

Ethics, philosophies of humanity

Good people Social media

Search Engines: Google Scholar, Atkins Library, HONY

1. Keyword List:
a. Affect
b. Behavior
c. Conflict
d. Religion/Money/Discrimination/Race
e. Terrorism/Terror
f. Meaning
g. Humanity
h. Past --- (connects with events)
i. Events --- (connects with affect)
j. Interaction --- (connects with behavior)
k. Human interaction --- (connects with interaction)
l. Intergroup
m. Harm
n. Trafficking

I started my research with the following keywords: affect, behavior, positive, events,
interaction, and human interaction. Some of these words I would combine together in
my research while others I would use separately, on their own. Words such as religion,
money, and race brought up numerous results, however, these results were almost
always unrelated to my topic. I tried to keep my topic broad to start with because I was
not completely sure where I wanted my paper to go. As I started to do my research I
narrowed down my research. My idea started from what does it mean to be human? To
do negative actions of some make humankind bad?
2. Concept Map: (*an image should be shown below*)
3. Search for Themes and Develop a Stance (demonstration of synthesis/evaluation
of the sources):

Q: [How] Do negative actions of some make [all] mankind “bad”?

1. How we interact with each other…
a. Positive (+)
i. Compliments
b. Negative (-)
i. Insults
c. How/Who do we learn to “interact”?
i. Unsaid concepts
1. Family
2. Friends
3. Social media** ( ** = this can be a paragraph of its own)
2. Definition of “bad”
a. Synonyms
i. Awful
1. Extremely bad or unpleasant : causing feelings of fear and
wonder. (source: Merriam-Webster)
ii. Careless
1. Done, made, or said without enough thought or attention.
(source: Merriam-Webster)
iii. Unacceptable
1. Not satisfactory. Not pleasing or welcome. (source:
Merriam-Webster)
iv. Of low standard
1. Low quality. (source: Cambridge English Dictionary)
a. Quality - how good or bad something is : a
characteristic or feature that someone or something
 has : something that can be notices as a part of a
person or thing : a high level of value or excellence.
(source: Merriam-Webster)
3. Experiences that lead us to do “bad” things
a. Bullying
b. Which is more influential? (*insert statistics*)
i. Adulthood
1. Friends
ii. Childhood
1. Parents
2. Friends
4. Why do people do what they do? (related to 3.)
a. Makes them feel good.
b. Makes them feel rebellious (related to 5.)
i. Rebellious - fighting against a government : refusing to obey rules
or authority or to accept normal standards of behavior, dress, etc. :
having or showing a tendency to rebel. (source: Merriam-Webster)
5. What happens when we break rules?
a. Physiological/emotional
b. Consequences
i. Good
ii. Bad
6. Why do we choose evil over good?
a. Free will - The ability to choose how to act : the ability to make choices
that are not controlled by fate or God. (source: Merriam-Webster)
i. Religion (relates to 7.c.)
7. How and where does...come into play?
a. Race/demographics
b. Discrimination (related to a. and c.)
i. Hate crimes
c. Religion
i. Extremists
1. 9/11
d. Politics
i. Democrats vs. Republicans
e. Money ($$$)
i. Lack of
ii. Too much
f. Mental Health
i. Diagnosed vs. undiagnosed
1. Is everyone that commits harm have a mental health
disorder?
8. My hypothesis
a. Prior to research:
i. Whether one believes in religion or not, almost everyone can
agree that we are born with free will. We can do whatever we
want whenever we want, however, that does not mean that what
we do is not without consequences. Through development in
childhood and the final stages of adulthood we are exposed to the
 acts and experiences because of others. Our career and
education are half our doing and the other half of whoever is
helping us get there. Do not get mistaken that this paper is not
entirely about fate or the spontaneous outburst of a single
person/persons. Assuming that everyone has a reason to what
they do we look into how our interactions through our
development affect our perception on what it means to be and do
good or evil. Do experiences lead us to do “bad” things or do
good? As humans, are we addicted to the consequences
(physiological/emotional) that follow with behaviour? Lastly, does
race, discrimination, religion, money, and/or politics determine our
decisions. Is the world mostly good or evil? Is evil contagious?
Perhaps more shootings, terrorist attacks, hate crimes occur
because people like the attention.
b. After research: (*Research still in progress*)

Additional questions from concept map:

- What if the media focused on the positive?
- Would more good stem from hearing about good?
- Is doing “bad” contagious?

(General outline to help guide my thoughts:)

*Make sure to include SUMMARY at the beginning
Introductory Paragraph: Argument. What are we researching?
Paragraph 1: What does it mean to be bad? Varies from person to person?
a. Hate crimes
b. Terrorism
Paragraph 2: Past/History as an influence.
a. Mental health/Trauma
i. PTSD
b. Religion--how certain religions practice good (or bad) behavior
c. Lack of ethics?
d. Family/friends/peers/etc.
Paragraph 3: Interactions as an influence. Witnessing events occur.
a. Is doing “bad contagious”?
b. What if good news was broadcasted as much as bad news?
i. Would human interaction improve?
c. Race/Discrimination/Money
Paragraph 4: Why do we choose evil over good? Vice versa.
a. Free Will
i. Who?
ii. How?
Paragraph 5: Other people’s opinions of human nature.
Last Paragraph: Conclusion of thoughts. Thesis.

Note to Self:
- Try not to make this paper all about terrorism.
4. Works Cited/References page:
a. Morton, T. A., & Postmes, T. (2011). What does it mean to be human? How salience of the human
category affects responses to intergroup harm. European Journal Of Social Psychology, 41(7),
866-873. doi:10.1002/ejsp.831
i. http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=1aafbbd6-
70fc-42e2-a195-863fd904d91a
%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=673657
62&db=a9h
1. Certain ethnicities play a factor into why certain people are harmful. “Jewish
North American and Native Canadian participants were more forgiving of
Germans and White Canadians.”
2. Genocide and intergroup harm were pervasive. “Thus, perpetrator groups were
forgiven for the past because their actions were not unique but instead reflected
how human beings typically behave toward one another.”
3. “When harmful actions are perceived to be part of human nature, activating the
human category might indeed facilitate a more forgiving response to harmful
actions against the ingroup (Wohl & Branscombe, 2005). Such a response might
be reflected in greater understanding of the harmful behaviour of individual
outgroup members and a reduced tendency to blame such behaviour on the
group as a whole. But this negative image of humanity might also facilitate self-
forgiveness among groups that have perpetrated harm against others (MOrton &
Postmes, 2011), for example by making harmful actions easter to justify and less
guilt-worthy.”
a. Negative image of humanity may excuse past harm
b. Negative image of humanity may cause more harm to stem about
i. “Normalizing” violence
4. “When an exclusive ‘us versus them’ distinction is salient, people are prone to
perceptually and behaviourally favour their ingroup and prone to suspicion about
outgroups. As such, ingroup favouritism can easily spill over into active hostility
toward the outgroup given the right circumstances (e.g. Smith & Postmes, 2009).
In these ways, the salience of intergroup distinctions can be a strong contributor
to competition and conflict between groups.”-----This article talks alot about
outgroups, ingroups, subgroups, etc., however, does not fully define what types
of groups these are (probably assumes that the reader knows what they are
talking about).
5. “...human beings are flawed creatures.”
6. “People tend to see their own traits as more human than the traits possessed by
others, this tendency is amplified for undesirable personal traits.”
7. “...When harmful behaviour is believed to be consistent with human nature..,
such behaviour should seem less troubling.”
8. From research conducted in this article: “...thinking in terms of the human
category can lead to the normalization of violence when such behavior can be
construed as consistent with human nature.”
9. Doing bad is just part of human nature. ---according to research conducted
b. Hardaker, J. A. (2015). What does it mean to be human?. Reform Magazine, 40.
i. http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=7&sid=1aafbbd6-70fc-42e2-a195-863fd904d91a%40sessionmgr103
1.
c. Wood, A. T. (2002). WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN? EDUCATION FOR WORLD
CITIZENSHIP. Catholic Education: A Journal Of Inquiry & Practice, 6(1), 96-110.
i. http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=24&sid=1aafbbd6-70fc-42e2-a195-863fd904d91a%40sessionmgr103
1. “Human beings also have the potential to love, to create, to seek truth, and to
play, among many other activities.”
 2. This article mainly has to do with exercising our political powers: “education for
democracy is not just about politics but about realizing the full spectrum of the
human potential through the exercise of freedom.”
3. Does not talk so much about violence, but about education: “Education for global
democracy, or global citizenship, therefore rests upon an assumption that the
aspiration for freedom is universal to all human experience--regardless of cultural
heritage--and constitutes one of the most ennobling qualities of our humanity.”
4. Hypocrisy. Define?
5. “We have to see our students, moreover, as whole persons, and we have to
embark on a new campaign to engage all the principal American institutions--
business, the media, the courts, government--in a new level of commitment of
education.”
d. Whiting, D. (2006). Meaning-Theories and the Principle of Humanity. Southern Journal Of
Philosophy, 44(4), 697-716.
i. http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=32&sid=1aafbbd6-70fc-42e2-a195-863fd904d91a%40sessionmgr103
1.
e. Stanton, B. (2018, March 23). Humans of New York. Retrieved March 24, 2018,
from http://www.humansofnewyork.com/ ************
i. http://www.humansofnewyork.com/
1. I’m starting an advocacy group at my university to break the
stigma around domestic violence. We have about seventy
members so far. I want to give women the confidence to speak
about things that they only whisper about. I know what it’s like.
I lived under the reign of my father for most of my life. He’d
throw things. He’d punch us. I had to do so many little things to
help us survive. I told the nuns at my school. I told our
neighbors to call the police if they heard screaming. I made a
duplicate key so we could go back for food whenever we
escaped the house. During one argument I tried to put myself
between him and my mother. He grabbed a knife and held it to
my throat for three minutes. I remember him saying: ‘You’re a
disgrace to me,’ and ‘I never wanted you,’ and ‘You make life
harder.’ I was terrified, but I’d been terrified for most of my life,
so I knew exactly what to do. I removed my mind from the
situation. I prayed for my mother. I tried to reflect on my life. I
remember feeling happy because I’d been alive for fourteen
years, and I’d protected my mother for all that time.” (Manila,
Philippines)
2. Thanks to everyone who donated to the fundraiser this week!
As of this moment, $1,836,000 has been raised from over
35,000 donors. That will be enough to build 3,000 sturdy
bamboo houses for Rohingya refugees that are currently living
in make-shift plastic shelters. A family of five can live in each
house, so with monsoon season approaching, these houses will
significantly improve the living conditions of **nearly 15,000
people.** Thank you so much to everyone who donated. I’ll be
leaving the fundraiser up for the rest of the day for anyone
who’d still like to make a donation: http://bit.ly/2H0w5lm Before
moving on, I want to give a special thanks to Jerome Jarre, who
was largely the inspiration for this fundraiser. (Pictured here
 with Sai’d, who’s story we shared yesterday.) Last year, Jerome
teamed up with a group of You Tubers and social media
influencers to form Love Army—which has raised nearly
$5,000,000 to help displaced people in Somalia as well as
Rohingya refugees. I was most impressed by the fact that
Jerome then moved to both Somalia and Bangladesh for several
months to ensure the money was being used effectively with
zero overhead costs. Jerome and Sa’id will be working with
hundreds of paid Rohingya volunteers to construct the houses
we’re funding, and will ensure all $1,800,000 goes directly to
refugees. So thank you, Jerome and Sa’id, for your work and
inspiration.
f. Besier, G. (2014). Neither good nor bad : why human beings behave how they do.
Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.librarylink.uncc.edu
g. Christina Moutsiana, Neil Garrett, Richard C. Clarke, R. Beau Lotto, Sarah-
Jayne Blakemore, & Tali Sharot. (2013). Human development of the ability to
learn from bad news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
110(41), 16396. doi:10.1073/pnas.1305631110
i. “Human decision making is markedly influenced by beliefs of what
might occur in the future.We form and update those beliefs based on
information we receive from the world around us. However, even when
we are presented with accurate information, cognitive biases and
heuristics restrict our ability to make adequate adjustments to our prior
beliefs.”
ii. Human tendency to discount bad news. Aka. just because you draw
explicit attention to bad news does not mean that is the best way to
transfer a message--example: “highlighting unknown risk factors for
diseases”
h. https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2015-06-08/good-bad-
and-robot-experts-are-trying-make-machines-be-moral (needs citation---is
this an ‘OK’ source?)
i. Talk about robots coming for our existence--morality?
i. file:///C:/Users/Kelsey/Downloads/9781135128227_googlepreview.pdf (needs
citatation)...Meghan Griffith Free Will the basics
i. Free will: “power to make choices”
ii. “The term “free will” is sometimes used to distinguish the power of
choosing from other kinds of freedom.”--differs from “political freedom”
or “freedom of speech”
iii. Intellect: “the part that reason”
iv. *Question for Kelsey: Is our free will limited? When? If so.
v. “The idea that from any point in time the whole future is fixed – that is,
that events can only unfold in exactly one way – is called determinism.
Determinism is often characterized in terms of causes, but not always.
For now, it is enough to say that in general, philosophers often worry
that determinism would rule out the possibility of genuine free will.”
 vi. “It might come as a surprise that many of the solutions say that we can
have free will even if all our choices are necessitated! This kind of view
is generally called compatibilism. It may be interesting to note that
some (but not all) compatibilists even say that having our choices
necessitated is the only way we can have free will.”
5. PNAS May 11, 2010. 107 (Supplement 2) 9015-9022; published ahead of print May 5, 2010.
----needs to be recited
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914616107
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/Supplement_2/9015
a. “Most fundamental are the advanced intellectual faculties, which allow
humans to categorize (see individual objects as members of general classes),
think in the abstract and form images of realities that are not present (and,
thus, anticipate future events and planning future actions), and reason. Other
distinctive functional features are self-awareness and death awareness;
symbolic (creative) language; tool making and technology; complex and
extremely variable forms of cooperation and social organization; legal codes
and political institutions; science, literature, and art; and ethics and religion”
b. “People have moral values; that is, they accept standards according to which
their conduct is judged as either right or wrong, good or evil.”
c. “The particular norms by which moral actions are judged vary to some extent
from individual to individual and from culture to culture (although some norms,
such as not to kill, not to steal, and to honor one's parents, are widespread
and perhaps universal), but value judgments concerning human behavior are
passed in all cultures.”
d. Point to ponder: “This universality raises two related questions: whether the
moral sense is part of human nature, one more dimension of our biological
make-up; and whether ethical values may be products of biological evolution
rather than being given by religious and other cultural traditions.”
The “Very Good” Human Race by Hepworth Clarke, Zelaika S.
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=1&sid=ba870dcd-05eb-4dc4-b048-2dc239c95aa8%40sessionmgr103

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/robb-willer-what-makes-people-do-good

Cameron, C. D. (2017). How Science Can Tell Whether You're a Good Person. Time.Com, 1.
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=aef6c4c8-e23f-46a1-a091-
082026eab63e%40pdc-v-
sessmgr01&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=bth&AN=122518767
- How to know if someone is good--ask them

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-officials-hurricane-harvey-death-toll-at-82-mass-casualties-have-
absolutely-not-happened/2017/09/14/bff3ffea-9975-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html?utm_term=.81d1c7054647
Moravec 2017

http://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/719604
Wilson 2006

https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/23/us/hurricane-katrina-statistics-fast-facts/index.html
(CNN 2017)

SYMPATHY AND EMPATHY

http://www.jstor.org.librarylink.uncc.edu/stable/pdf/25681533.pdf?
refreqid=excelsior:5ca910a413e012c64e7c56602448953d
The difference of being human: Morality Francisco J. Ayala1
Ayala, F. (2010). The difference of being human: Morality. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 9015-9022. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.librarylink.uncc.edu/stable/25681533

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/character