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

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
Keywords Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0739-7046
DOI 10.5840/faithphil200724312
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 53,682
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Responsibility and Atonement.Richard Swinburne - 1989 - 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.
Damaged Goods.Peter King - 2007 - Faith and Philosophy 24 (3):247-267.
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.


Added to PP index

Total views
70 ( #135,878 of 2,349,390 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #510,581 of 2,349,390 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes