Don't mind me. I am up late and just going to deconstruct a little. I'm finding your article somewhat dense and somewhat odd.

You start by asserting that "Human Nature" is the most common explanation of why we live in a flawed world. So, I'm guessing you are going to talk about human nature and why we do awful shit to each other.

You dismiss the idea of "Original Sin" as an explanation. Seeing it as just metaphor and foreshadowing your conclusion by mentioning culture and genes.

You finish your lead in with a complete rejection of a "G-d" hypothesis. To the point of calling such a belief "pernicious".

Hmmm. My first thoughts.

Recently someone told me.

"If you have no conscience you have no sin."

They argued that animals are incapable of "sin" because they are incapable of conscience. Since babies are animals, with only the potentiality of humanness, they exist in a conscienceless/sinless state of being.

Therefore, we cannot be born "in sin" and the idea of "Original Sin" is meaningless. You seem to be taking this tack as well.

Which feels like a restatement of "tabla rasa".

I think you are overly dismissive of the deeper meaning of what Original Sin represents. Yes, it's a metaphor. But, it's a powerful place to build an argument about "Human Nature" from.

If you have no conscience you have no sin.

That would be the state of "animal innocence". Where we were before we committed the "Original Sin" of eating from the Tree of Knowledge instead of from the Tree of Life.

The "Original Sin" is becoming aware of the consequences of our actions. Of leaving behind animal innocence and being expelled from a state of ignorant bliss.

This knowledge gives us "freewill" and "choice". It makes us Godlike.

The innocent tiger simply kills the lamb. He can do nothing else. He is wholly "G-d's Tiger" and devoid of conscience, freewill, or choice.

The human, cursed by "Original Sin", understands their actions and can foresee the consequences of those actions. There can be "guilt" for choosing actions harmful to others. We can discern the difference between the Light and the Dark.

The consequence of being "born in sin". Is having choice, freewill, and a conscience.

That's not a bad place to start building an argument about "Human Nature" and the "human problem".

Humans have choice and freewill in our behavior. Therefore everything we build is artificial and reflects our choices. Including our societies and cultures.

So, why are we so very awful to each other?

Where do you go from there?

Shall I continue, or do you find me tedious?