The Labyrinth of Our Own Making: Unpacking the Cause of Sin and Moral Error

The question of why we err, why we stray from the path of goodness and reason, has haunted humanity since the dawn of philosophy. It's a question not merely academic, but deeply personal, touching the very core of our existence and our aspirations for a just society. From the ancient Greeks to the Enlightenment's grand synthesizers, thinkers have grappled with the elusive cause of sin and moral error, dissecting the human psyche to locate the genesis of our ethical failings. This article delves into these profound inquiries, drawing on the timeless wisdom contained within the Great Books of the Western World, to illuminate the complex interplay of ignorance, desire, and the enigmatic will that so often leads us astray.

The Ancient Roots of Misdirection: Ignorance and Imperfection

For many ancient philosophers, particularly those preceding the Christian era, moral error was often attributed to a fundamental lack of understanding.

Socrates and Plato: Sin as Ignorance

Socrates famously asserted that "no one does wrong willingly." For him, and subsequently for Plato, all wrongdoing stemmed from ignorance. If one truly knew what was good, one would naturally pursue it. Sin, in this view, isn't a malicious act of the will but a miscalculation, a failure of intellect to grasp the true nature of virtue. The cause of error, then, is a deficiency in knowledge, a clouded perception of the Forms of the Good. The path to rectitude lay in education, in dialectic, in illuminating the mind.

Aristotle: The Failure of Practical Reason

Aristotle, while acknowledging the role of knowledge, introduced a more nuanced perspective. Moral error, for him, isn't just about knowing the good in the abstract, but about applying that knowledge in specific situations – what he termed phronesis or practical wisdom. The cause of ethical missteps can be a failure to hit the "mean," an excess or deficiency in action or emotion. While ignorance might play a role, Aristotle also recognized the power of uncontrolled appetites and passions that can override rational judgment, even when one intellectually understands the better course of action. This hints at a deeper struggle within the individual, beyond mere intellectual deficiency.

The Augustinian Predicament: The Turn of the Will

With St. Augustine of Hippo, the locus of moral error shifts dramatically from intellectual failing to the profound mystery of the human will. This marks a pivotal moment in Western thought regarding the cause of sin.

The Free Will as the Origin of Evil

Augustine, deeply influenced by his own struggles and conversion, posited that sin is not a substance, nor is it merely ignorance. Instead, it is a privation, a turning away from God, the highest good, by a perverse act of the will. The cause of sin is the misuse of our God-given free will. We choose to love lesser goods (material possessions, worldly pleasures, self-aggrandizement) more than the ultimate Good. This is not a defect in God's creation, but a defect in the created will itself, a self-inflicted wound.

(Image: A classical painting depicting Adam and Eve's expulsion from the Garden of Eden, emphasizing their sorrowful faces and the angel's stern gesture, symbolizing the immediate consequence of a fundamental choice of the will and the introduction of sin into the world.)

Augustine's insight is revolutionary: the will is not merely an instrument for executing rational commands, but possesses its own agency, capable of choosing against reason and against God. This choice, this "bad will," is the true cause of sin.

Scholastic Refinements: Aquinas on Intellect and Appetite

Thomas Aquinas, synthesizing Aristotelian philosophy with Christian theology, further elaborated on the mechanics of moral error. For Aquinas, sin is essentially an "inordinate act," a deviation from right reason and divine law. The cause lies in a disordered appetite, where the will chooses a particular good that is not in conformity with the universal Good, or where it chooses a lesser good over a greater one.

Key Elements in Aquinas's View of Sin's Cause:

  • Intellect: Presents goods to the will. Error can occur if the intellect misjudges a particular good as the ultimate good.
  • Will: The rational appetite that chooses. It is free but can be influenced by passions and imperfect knowledge.
  • Passions: Can incline the will towards certain objects, potentially overriding rational judgment.
  • Ignorance: Can still be a cause, but Aquinas distinguishes between "invincible ignorance" (which excuses) and "vincible ignorance" (which does not, as it could have been overcome).

Ultimately, for Aquinas, the fully voluntary sin involves a defect in the intellect's judgment and a consent of the will to that erroneous judgment or disordered appetite.

The Enlightenment's Gaze: Duty and Rationality

Immanuel Kant, a towering figure of the Enlightenment, shifted the focus from the theological understanding of sin to a purely rational and ethical framework of moral error. For Kant, the cause of moral error is a failure of the will to act purely from duty and universalizable maxims.

The Categorical Imperative and the Moral Will

Kant argued that a truly moral act is one performed out of duty, not inclination or expected consequence. The will is good only when it acts in accordance with the categorical imperative – that is, when its maxim (the subjective principle of its action) could be willed to become a universal law.

The cause of moral error, or "immorality," for Kant, is when the will chooses to act on a maxim that cannot be universalized. This is a failure of practical reason, a self-contradiction of the will. It's not about ignorance in the Socratic sense, nor a turning away from God in the Augustinian sense, but a failure of the autonomous will to consistently legislate for itself as a member of a kingdom of ends. The moral agent knows their duty, but chooses to make an exception for themselves, thus undermining the very fabric of universal moral law.

The Enduring Question: Our Responsibility in Error

Across these profound philosophical traditions, a common thread emerges: the human being, through intellect or will, bears a significant responsibility for the cause of sin and moral error. Whether it's a failure to know, a perverse turning of the will, or a dereliction of duty, the agency lies squarely within us.

Summary of Causes of Sin/Moral Error:

Philosopher/Tradition Primary Cause of Sin/Moral Error Key Concept/Mechanism
Socrates/Plato Ignorance of the Good Lack of knowledge, clouded intellect
Aristotle Failure of Practical Reason Misjudgment of the mean, uncontrolled passions
Augustine Perverse Will Free will choosing lesser goods, turning away from God
Aquinas Disordered Appetite/Will Will consenting to erroneous judgment or passion, against reason/divine law
Kant Failure of Duty Will acting on non-universalizable maxims, self-contradiction

The journey through these Great Books reveals that the cause of our ethical failings is rarely simple. It is a complex interplay of our cognitive capacities, our desires, and that most mysterious faculty: the will. Understanding these historical perspectives is not just an academic exercise; it's a crucial step towards confronting our own moral imperfections and striving for a more virtuous existence. The labyrinth of our own making may be intricate, but with philosophical insight, we can begin to chart a path towards greater clarity and ethical integrity.

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Augustine Free Will Sin Great Books""

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Kant Moral Duty Categorical Imperative Explained""

Share this post