Moral Personality, Perversity, and Original Sin

Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (1):3 - 25 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay sets forth a philosophical reformulation and defense of the doctrine of original sin. The sticking point of the traditional doctrine is its apparent commitment to the proposition that moral guilt is heritable. While I make no claim to defend the justice of vicarious punishment (the idea of having one person suffer for the sins of another), I credit nevertheless the idea of vicarious guilt. As responsible beings, we have to answer for evil that we cannot conceivably have willed ourselves. The reformulation of original sin and guilt takes its inspiration from Kant's conception of radical evil, which is refined in light of some contemporary reflection on the nature of responsible freedom.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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

Sin and Original Sin.Philip L. Quinn - 2010 - In Charles Taliaferro, Paul Draper & Philip L. Quinn, A Companion to Philosophy of Religion. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 614–621.
Original Guilt.Hud Hudson - 2014 - In The Fall and Hypertime. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 55-77.
Kant.Guy Elgat - 2021 - In Being Guilty: Freedom, Responsibility, and Conscience in German Philosophy From Kant to Heidegger. New York , NY, United States of America: Oxford University Press. pp. 16-58.
Male radicale.Maria Antonietta Pranteda - 2002 - In Pier Paolo Portinaro, I Concetti Del Male. Torino: Einaudi. pp. 159-183.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
55 (#1,088,247)

6 months
6 (#1,535,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references