Is human nature more like a wolf or a lamb ?

@in10RjFox ah yes ! that is interesting !

@revenant On reading all of the responses above, I enjoyed them all and I think they all have good perspectives in them. My opinion: (like some of those given) People are born innocent and so they are like lambs - learning by following the examples of others; If those examples are good, then they will remain as lambs and teach others to be meek and kind. If they fall among wolves (characterized by people who have been denied sufficient guidance, have had to fight to survive, etc.), then they will be fighters and takers like wolves. The psychology is 'behaviorism' = we learn to do what we see others doing - our behaviors mirror the 'values' that we've been taught.

@JollyRoger Thanks. But are wolves necessarily bad though ?

Is behaviourism enough or would there be innate qualities also ?

@revenant I don't think we're talking 'good' or 'bad'..... the conversation is more (at least I took it as) like 'passive' and 'predatory'. Those are natures that exist because of environment. Sure; Sheep don't eat meat and wolves don't eat grain.... but those are extreme comparisons. We should focus on the intent of the conversation ???

@JollyRoger That is the intent.

I was not talking about the environment but fundamental human nature.

@revenant Yes.... Wolves as animals are good: They keep the grazing animals from becoming too numerous. Human 'wolves' who prey on other people are bad.
Isn't it a phenomenon that no animal (viruses and bacteria excluded) kills humans except humans? I mean, preys upon them to limit their numbers.

@JollyRoger If humans were left in the wild with no protection they would become preys too.

@revenant left in the wild they would become hunters and also fall a pray like any other animal. It's the civilization that makes them as lambs.

@in10RjFox True. I think Golding's "The Lord of the Flies" describes the fall of moral values quite well.