I doubt that the Locke vs Hobbes argument will be solved here... though it would be a giant feather in INGO's hat if it were! My personal take is that some people are basically good, and some are basically bad. Nature or nurture? I don't know but experience has taught me that all people fall somewhere along the spectrum... mostly in the middle. When the stage collapsed not all the people went to help (which doesn't necessarily make them "bad"), but the ones that did moved towards the good end of the spectrum in my book. But to illustrate why Locke vs Hobbes is a difficult question; What if a child molester saved a stranger at great personal risk, from the collapse? From the perspective of the child, he's still a monster; from the perspective of the person/family of the saved he's a hero. Who's correct?