Sins or Shams?
The purpose of this paper is to
rank the "seven deadly sins" in order of importance, or severity;
however, to rank the sins, one must first believe in the concept of sin. As it is commonly defined as a violation of
a divine law, I cannot accept the existence of sin, as I do not accept any
divine laws. That being said, I will
tell you why.
I feel that the concept of sin
is part of an elaborate system of control, at its foundation political in
nature. The concept of sin in
Christianity was developed to attempt to control those who adhere to the religion,
and to force them to accept humble positions in relation to the church and
their false god. The seven sins (pride,
greed, sloth, wrath, lust, gluttony, and envy) are all basic aspects of human
nature, and in each case can be manipulated to cover a wide range of helpful
human emotions and actions, which are helpful in furthering personal happiness,
but are not helpful to authority attempting to control others.
Pride is a natural human
instinct, and important in the development of both self confidence and the self
concept. The vast majority of cases of behaviour
delinquent to the expected measures of our society come from individuals who
never felt they had anything to be proud of, thus developing a poor self esteem
and an apathetic view towards society's mores.
Christianity says that pride takes credit for one's actions away from
god, where it belongs, but this concept is not conducive to personal human development,
and one must first believe in god for it to be valid.
Greed and envy can both be
stretched to cover one of the most important aspects of human life; ambition. If a person works hard, in order to amass a
large sum of financial wealth, they could be called greedy. This is an unfair generalisation, since
seeking money is not in and of itself harmful to people. It is a practical way to ensure that a
comfortable lifestyle can be maintained, and that one's descendants will be
provided for. Envy, which is desiring
something you do not have, is quite healthy in self-regulated moderation. If you envy someone else's car, for example,
you may be prompted to work harder, to earn more money, to purchase a better
car for yourself. Envy inspires
ambition, and without ambition, there would be next to no sociological or
technological progress.
Sloth, gluttony, and to a
degree, lust, are all harmless taboos, in and of themselves. To lay around all day is a quite fair choice
one can make, understanding of course that they will not accomplish much. Sloth is a harmless indulgence of
relaxation; according to Christianity, taking a few days on holiday to stretch
out in the sun on a beach is a deadly sin.
Gluttony can be viewed in a similar way; it's consequences are physical
in nature only, and if it offers pleasure without harming anyone else, it
cannot be worth eternal punishment.
Should one be forced to go to suffer eternally after death for eating a
really delicious cheesecake which gives them pleasure? By the same reasoning, should one suffer
eternally for indulging in the natural human pleasures of sexual stimulation in
all its various forms?
On a different level, lust can
be argued to be an even more foolish "sin". Intercourse is necessary for procreation, and helps to establish
a bond between two people. It does not
make sense that establishing a bond should be considered so evil.
Of all the sins, wrath is the
only one that has potential dangers to others inherent in it. However, to eliminate wrath in all aspects
of one's life is to encourage submission.
If something is unjust, do we not have the right to redress of
wrongs? Suing for damages in a court of
law falls under wrath, for it is seeking revenge in a sense for actions against
an individual. It is also a way to
shake off an oppressive authority, which violates more basic human and civil
rights. Perhaps this is why it is a sin
in Christianity; it prevents the commoners from shaking off the oppressive
church, which taxes them and rules their life.
The fact that murder, one of the
most harmful human actions possible, is excluded from the list is evidence of
the inherent foolishness of this list of sins.
It is obviously designed to limit self accomplishment, enjoyment of
life, and basic human rights and dignities.
If being a helpless non-person is appealing to some people, it certainly
is not appealing to me.