Damaged goods

Faith and Philosophy 24 (3):247-267 (2007)
Abstract The Doctrine of Original Sin seems to require that human nature has literally undergone a change from its prelapsarian to its postlapsarian condition.It is not clear that this claim makes sense. How can human nature, the feature(s) in virtue of which human beings are what they are, change in time? (Think of the parallel claim about √2.) I consider three medieval attempts to resolve this problem: (1) Augustine’s two theories about shared human nature; (2) Anselm’s proposal that original sin is an individual deficiency; (3) the “biological” proposal suggested by Odo of Cambrai and developed by Pseudo-Joscelin
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified (fix it)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,631
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Camille Atkinson (2007). Kant on Human Nature and Radical Evil. Philosophy and Theology 19 (1/2):215-224.
    Michael Rea (2007). The Metaphysics of Original Sin. In Peter Van Inwagen & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), Persons: Human and Divine.
    Peter King (2007). Damaged Goods. Faith and Philosophy 24 (3):247-267.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2009-01-28

    Total downloads

    20 ( #61,410 of 548,970 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    2 ( #37,438 of 548,970 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums