Sigmund Freud and Carl Rogers had very differing views on the human race. Freud believed that people were innately bad, and by bad I mean in ways like being destructive, cruel, and selfish. He believed that if it weren't for society telling us what we were allowed to do and what we couldn't, civilization would collapse. These constraints, he believed, created a certain discontent within people. This is because the Id(run by the pleasure principle), which is predominant when we are born and thus the most natural mind-set is constantly suppressed by society. This causes frustration. In Freud's theories he explains how we cope with this by methods such as sublimation. He used sublimation to explain our love of things like art i.e. painting, sculpture....ect, and various other activites that we participate in. Suppression of our animalistic instincts, he believed, was necessary if humans are to live in societal groups. Freud's pessimistic view of people could have partially came from various issues that he had faced in his life like his daughters dying, cancer, and Nazis. Regardless though, one does not have to do anything but watch the news to verify the validity of his claims.
Now on the other side of the spectrum is the humanist psychologist Carl Rogers. Rogers believed that people are innately good, and that people can be described as, "positive, forward-moving, constructive, realistic, [and] trustworthy." Rogers believed that people, if given free will, would naturally move in a direction that would improve society and perpetuate the human race. He explained the evil he saw as primarily generated by cultural factors like money, prejudices, injustices, as well as things like a rough upbringing.
So I would like to discuss this and get everyones opinion on who was more accurate, and anything else you would like to add about this.