Can Evolutionary Psychology Confirm Original Sin?

Faith and Philosophy 24 (3):268-283 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Christian responses to the developing field of evolutionary psychology tend to be defensive, focusing on the task of showing that Christians have not beenpresented with any reason to abandon any central beliefs of the Christian faith. A more positive response would seek to show that evolutionary psychologycan provide some sort of epistemic support for one or more distinctively Christian doctrines. This paper is an attempt to supply such a response by focusing on the distinctively Christian doctrine of original sin, which presents itself as an especially likely candidate for support from evolutionary psychology. I consider five versions of the doctrine in order of increasing content, arguing that all but the last can receive such support. However, in order to argue for the fourth version (which includes the doctrine traditionally described as “original guilt”), I enlist the aid of a Molinist understanding of divine providence. A consequence of this application of Molinism is that God holds us morally accountable, not only for what we actually do, but also for what we would do in any non-actual conditions, and that He acts on His knowledge of what we would do in such conditions. Because many may find this consequence problematic, I also argue that it is both morally acceptableand necessary for the perfection of the relationship between God and human beings. The last version of original sin that I consider insists that it must be thecausal product of the first sin of the first human being(s), but I argue that this is not a reasonable alternative if original sin is to be equated with behavioraltendencies inherited from an evolutionary ancestry.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,347

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Responsibility and atonement.Richard Swinburne - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Original sin or original sinfulness? A comment.Simon Heans - 2013 - Heythrop Journal 54 (1):55-69.
Essays in Christian philosophy.Leonard Hodgson - 1930 - Freeport, N.Y.,: Books for Libraries Press.
Moral Personality, Perversity, and Original Sin.James Wetzel - 1995 - Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (1):3 - 25.
Sin and Human Cognition of God.Rik Peels - 2011 - Scottish Journal of Theology 64 (4):390-409.
The metaphysics of original sin.Michael C. Rea - 2007 - In Peter Van Inwagen & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), Persons: Human and Divine. Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press ;. pp. 319--356.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
93 (#185,957)

6 months
14 (#185,919)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Philosophy and Christian theology.Michael Murray - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Evolution, Middle Knowledge, and Theodicy: A Philosophical Reflection.Daniel H. Spencer - 2020 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 25 (2):215-233.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references