On Sinning

Okay, get ready for a gloriously stream-of-conscious post. I have thought about this approximately 0% before deciding to delve into it. A good friend posited the idea to me that people have the propensity towards one central "sin" more than any other. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to be operating under the assumption that we're discussing the "seven deadly" sins.
Lust, Greed, Pride, Envy, Sloth, Gluttony, and Wrath. (I only memorized them because of Fullmetal Alchemist. I suck)

My immediate reaction was that people are capable of all sorts of sin in tandem. I am... beginning to have hesitations about how I've approached the discussion at all though. So, I'm going to step back and define each of the "sins" and give them a bit more of a thorough examination.

1. Lust: Sexual desire. Being horny. Wanting someone as an object. I don't actually like that we've classified this as a sin. Lust is not only natural, but also healthy in a mutually respecting relationship between consenting participants. I've said it before in my other blog post on Objects and Subjects, but I think that objectification is completely acceptable in appropriate contexts.

Now obviously, if we obsess over Lust and allow it to rule our lives, we become beholden to disease, danger, and questionable choices. The more emphasis we place on one aspect of our lives, the less emphasis is due to the others. A matter of moderation (I may never stop with this theme. I am so sorry for subjecting you to this).

2. Greed: The desire to possess more than you currently do. This too is a natural predilection of humans, ingrained in our psychology by default. However, without boundaries, Greed is likely to consume and destroy your life, much in the same way any of the seven "sins" can. But doesn't Greed in moderation help us as well? Without ambition and drive, we accept complacency. Without passion to gain more, we fall into the trap of stagnation. We should be thankful for the things that we do have to our name, but does that mean we should accept the status quo? To that end, cannot Greed be completely justified?
At what point do we define desire as Greed? Did women who desired the right to vote count as "Greedy"? Does the impoverished who wants food every night count as "Greedy"? We're inclined to simply "feel" when someone is or is not greedy. Desiring "fairness" isn't Greed. But does that mean that wanting something someone else possesses doesn't count as Greed? Or is that Envy rather than Greed? (More on this thought in a little while)
What if I see a stray cat, and I want one as a result? Is that Greed?
What if it's a 50" TV instead of a cat? There's an intense hesitation to call the first Greed, but not the second. Why is that? Both are luxuries. Is there something about the responsibility carried with owning a pet that somehow negates the selfishness of wanting to own one?

Is Greed only justifiable if it measurably improves your life satisfaction? How could we possibly measure that, let alone hold others to it as a standard?

3. Pride: Pride holds with it much of the same connotations as "Honor." Zuko, anyone? Is it wrong to be prideful? Is it bad to be excited about the merits of your own actions? What about progress you've made? Confidence is only generated from positive feelings about yourself and your actions. Confidence is a virtual necessity to happiness, so without pride, there can be no true happiness, for in its place would rest self-doubt and insecurity.

The inverse, of course, is that we're too prideful. Arrogant. Narcissistic. Egotistical. Creatures without fault. This poses its own set of problems. With we have no humility- no sense of our own ability to do wrong- then we do not learn from our actions and we do not consider the implications of our deeds beyond what good they can cause.

Are you beginning to sense a pattern as well?

4. Envy: Much in the same vein as Greed, Envy is the desire for what is not yours. While Greed is the child that wants all of the toys, Envy is just the child that wants the toy you have. I hesitate to consider this a beneficial trait in any regard, since it's so superficial on the face of it. However, if we look at the psychological effects of Envy, we may still find some good in this "Sin." Untempered, Envy can simply consume you in the same way that Greed can. Focusing all of your energy on the goal of acquiring that which other people have. Obviously destructive no matter how you look at it.
But what if you had just a little Envy? What if you had just enough Envy to examine the things in your life in order to determine what's really important? Just enough Envy to see the things you truly want in the world? Without Envy, there's no direction from birth. We see other people having fun, living, loving, and laughing. We want that. With Envy, we have the drive to see what it is about peoples' lives that make them happy, and we seek to acquire it ourselves. Whether it's a friend who actually listens, a lover who actually respects, or a job that actually makes you happy. When we see the potential for others to be happier than we are, we see a path of progression; a method for moving forward.
Without Envy, we might be happy, but only because we don't know what would make us happier.
 Perhaps Envy is the better "Sin" to attribute to women who wanted the right to vote. Freedom is the very essence of wanting access to what other people have in equal measurement by default. A respectable and worthy project, I would say.

5. Sloth: The tendency to not act. To do nothing. To relax, vegetate, and stop. From an immediate glance, it would seem an obviously problematic "Sin" that causes stagnation, encourages the status quo, and fights progress. However, if we look further, we see the problems of fatigue, workaholism, boundless ambition, and constant movement. Humans are not meant to go indefinitely. We're not meant to run without rest. To pursue without reflection. To fly without pause. Meditation has been proven to be an effective method of increasing our ability to learn. Napping has been proven to increase our energy. Brief moments of respite give us the ability to think about our actions before carrying on. In a world without Sloth, there is no inner-reflection, no thought, no consideration, and only a draining fatigue plastered over humanity's weary face.

6: Gluttony: To consume. To take. To receive. Gluttony is the essence of absorbing without giving back. We can be a glutton for a great many things; food, wisdom, punishment, friendships. To what end is it truly bad to want to consume? True enough, if we consume too much, it will destroy us. But if we consume too little, we will perish as well. Is it wrong to enjoy this delectable cinnamon bread next to me? Is it wrong to love and have a passion for the taking of anything? To become obsessed is dangerous. To develop tunnel vision prevents our ability to consider the wide world around us. To create an ideal out of something that is real is a detraction from the grace and beauty of the natural world.
But to lack Gluttony is to lack the pure excitement of receiving things in the world. Without passion, what's the point of living? If you're not studying a topic that you're a Glutton for, you're not studying a topic that you love. You're not pursuing an interest that is likely to make you truly happy.
So we must be gluttons to some extent. Otherwise, we will be bored, listless, and unhappy.

7: Wrath: To hate. The desire to destroy. To dismantle, to wreck, to obliterate.

An immediate part of me wants to disregard this "Sin" as bad from any angle. A cursory glance reveals no benefit to this kind of anger. However, to admit that would be to admit a philosophical inconsistency with my approach. It would be to give up on the existence of moderation in all traits.

Can we have guided hatred that is beneficially destructive? An odd question to be sure. Destruction can be good, yes. However, motivated by hatred, destruction doesn't tend to yield positive results. Motivated by revenge, we only persist the cycle of violence and vengeance. But can we ever truly want to dismantle something without the feeling of scorn?
This reminds me of the notion of "objectivity." My favorite professor once reminded me that objectivity doesn't exist. Our biases will always inform our thoughts, decisions, and words. Our environment will always bleed over into our ideas. The important thing is to admit where our biases come from; to admit our own prejudices.

To that end, perhaps we've been approaching Wrath the wrong way. Maybe it's completely natural to want vengeance. To want to destroy out of hatred. Maybe that's not wrong? But perhaps we should agree to be honest about when we have such anger towards something? It's okay to be angry. Anger is justifiable in some scenarios. People do things that merit angry responses. How we temper our Wrath in those situations is more important than whether or not we have it. How we approach utilizing our Wrath is important. Our ability to see our Wrath and recognize its effects on our mind is important.

Without the passion and drive of Wrath, we do not as easily have the motivation to act. It is because a situation infuriates us that we stand up for what we believe in. Wrath finely honed in this context can provide us with a limitlessly useful tool for change.

We cannot deny ourselves emotional range. We should not endeavor to become robots or complete stoics. We should, however, recognize our emotions for what they are and how they affect our thoughts. We should avoid allowing our desires to rule our lives, though we cannot possibly hope to live a full life without those same desires.

So I do not think considering them "Sins" is healthy in the first place. They are merely emotions. Desires. Thoughts that, like any other, we can have too much or too little of. To shun them for their potential to cause us harm is to ignore their potential to provide for us a progressive, satisfying, and healthy life.


Of course, here I've completely deconstructed the topic and I haven't actually responded to my friend's original position. Is it likely that we all have something we fail to moderate ourselves on? Absolutely. Is it likely that there's one trait more than any others specifically that could use improvement? Probably, yes.

So I suppose this is my roundabout way of agreeing with her, under the condition that we frame the conversation in less of a problematic "sin" discussion, and more of a natural human emotion discussion.

Oof... Life is complicated.

-
Waddles