Graduate studies at Western
Sophia 44 (1):91-103 (2005)
|Abstract||In this paper I examine a recent objection to the retributive punishment theory of hell, specifically that the theory entails something obviously false: that it is possible to commit an infinite sin. I defend the moral principle behind one account of infinite sin, a principle referred to as the Status Principle (that other things being equal the higher the status of the offended the party, the more serious the sin). I show that recent objections to this principle are far from conclusive, and that the principle is more plausible than perhaps initially thought.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
W. Glenn Kirkconnell (2010). Kierkegaard on Sin and Salvation: From Philosophical Fragments Through the Two Ages. Continuum.
Nils Holtug (2002). The Harm Principle. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.
Larry M. Jorgensen (2009). The Principle of Continuity and Leibniz's Theory of Consciousness. Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (2):pp. 223-248.
Göran Hermerén (2012). The Principle of Proportionality Revisited: Interpretations and Applications. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (4):373-382.
Frances Howard-Snyder (2008). Damned If You Do; Damned If You Don't! Philosophia 36 (1):1-15.
Crispin Wright (2001). Is Hume's Principle Analytic? In Bob Hale & Crispin Wright (eds.), The Reason's Proper Study. Oxford University Press.
Kenneth Einar Himma (2003). Eternally Incorrigible: The Continuing-Sin Response to the Proportionality Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 39 (1):61-78.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,429 of 739,350 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,350 )
How can I increase my downloads?