David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Reformed Theology 4 (1):42-69 (2010)
This article provides an elaborate defense of the thesis that we have no reason to think that sin has any direct effects upon our moral cognition. After a few methodological comments and conceptual distinctions, the author treats certain biblical passages on humans' evil hearts, the function of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in Genesis 2 and 3, Paul's comments on the moral situation of the Gentiles in Romans 2, and Paul's ideas on the Gentiles' futility of mind as found in Ephesians 4. The most that can be concluded from these passages is that sin has not damaged human moral cognitive faculties to such an extent that they function insufficiently to hold people morally responsible. The author also argues that it is a consequence of sin that humans have knowledge by acquaintance of sin, and that it is only by divine revelation that humans recognize certain morally reprehensible acts, beliefs, and emotions as sinful. Finally, it is briefly argued that we have good reason to think that sin has certain indirect effects upon our moral cognition.
|Keywords||Consequences of Sin Human Cognition Moral Knowledge|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Rik Peels (2011). Sin and Human Cognition of God. Scottish Journal of Theology 64 (4):390-409.
Darlene Fozard Weaver (2003). Taking Sin Seriously. Journal of Religious Ethics 31 (1):45 - 74.
William S. Babcock (1988). Augustine on Sin and Moral Agency. Journal of Religious Ethics 16 (1):28 - 55.
Lawrence Pasternack (2012). Kant on the Debt of Sin. Faith and Philosophy 29 (1):30-52.
Michael Rea (2007). The Metaphysics of Original Sin. In Peter Van Inwagen & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), Persons: Human and Divine. Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press ;. 319--356.
Paul J. LaChance (2004). Boethius on Human Freedom. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (2):309-327.
Katherin A. Rogers (2011). Anselm Against McCann On God and Sin. Faith and Philosophy 28 (4):397-415.
Kenneth Einar Himma (2003). Eternally Incorrigible: The Continuing-Sin Response to the Proportionality Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 39 (1):61-78.
Anna Koteneva (2008). Spiritual-Moral Aspect in Investigation of Personality's Psychological Defense. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 20:255-262.
Annika Thiem (2010). Specters of Sin and Salvation. Idealistic Studies 40 (1/2):117-138.
W. Glenn Kirkconnell (2010). Kierkegaard on Sin and Salvation: From Philosophical Fragments Through the Two Ages. Continuum.
James Wetzel (1995). Moral Personality, Perversity, and Original Sin. Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (1):3 - 25.
Jack D. Davidson (2003). Leibniz on the Labyrinth of Freedom. The Leibniz Review 13:19-43.
Hugh J. McCann (2009). God, Sin, and Rogers on Anselm. Faith and Philosophy 26 (4):420-431.
Added to index2011-02-02
Total downloads27 ( #70,385 of 1,140,039 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #157,514 of 1,140,039 )
How can I increase my downloads?