General Remark on the Original Predisposition to the GoodIn this passage, Stevenson explains that people are born with the natural predisposition to be good and whether a man chooses to be good or evil is his own decision and is simply a result of what he has made of himself. Based on the concept of radical evil, only intention matters when defining what is evil, therefore a man's evil nature must be a result of his own free will, because if he was not aware of what he was doing then it would not be seen as evil in the eyes of Immanuel Kant. Man creates for himself whether he becomes good or evil based whether or not he decides to incorporate those incentives which correspond to his predisposition for good into his maxim. Since man has to decide for himself whether he wishes to be good or evil, that would therefore lead to the conclusion that man is neither morally good or evil.Since it is said that man is created good, then it can only be interpreted to mean that man was in turn created for good, or to do what is understood to be good. Even if it were true that outside forces are required in order to make man "good," as if through character building obstacles or positive assistance, man would still need to both prove that he is deserving of this help and be completely accepting of the help. Essentially the only way that a man could become good by this means would be to integrate this positive increase of force into his maxim. Otherwise, his good nature would not be a result of his own free will and he would not be considered by others to be a good man.When Stevenson ponders on the question of how an evil tree can bear good fruit, he is explaining that we cannot come up with a solution which transforms a naturally evil man into a good man. However, because we assume the reality that man can be originally good and become evil, we cannot rule out the possibility that man can also become evil and revert back to his original goodness since we know that evil is a result of free will. Therefore, we cannot deny the fact that it is possible for an evil man to become good once again. Because, even though a man has fallen into evil, he cannot ignore the mandate which is deeply embedded inside the souls of human beings driving man to better himself. In order to satisfy this inborn command, we must first be capable of becoming better, even if what is within our power to do is in itself inadequate and by doing so we merely make ourselves receptive to a higher assistance which is incomprehensible to us. However, we must assume that through it all, there is still a "germ of goodness" which remains completely pure and withoutcorruption or eradication.Questions:After reading this, I still wonder if Stevenson means that the "germ of goodness" is the human predisposition for good which is what I believe that he means. Also, I don't understand what could suddenly change in an evil person to cause them to want to be good. Stevenson explains that we have an inborn desire to want to better ourselves, but what I don't understand is how a person could initially become evil in spite of this command. I just wonder what it is that suddenly makes the person fall back under the power of this mandate all over again. The only solution I could think of would be what Stevenson talks about earlier in the text concerning supernatural cooperation which would give man that boost to become good once again. But, if this desire to become better is part of a predisposition which is present in all human beings, then why would a man rely on an outside force to become good? These were just a few concepts that confused me when reading this