Is there a distinctive human nature? Flashcards
(14 cards)
Introduction
- Define human nature
- Frame the question
- Introduce Augustine’s theory
- Breifly outline Augustine’s view
- Introduce the opposing view
- What three perspectives will be evaluated
• Define human nature as the innate dispositions humans are born with, independent of cultural or social influence.
• Frame the question: Does a distinctive human nature exist? If yes, what is its nature?
• Note interdisciplinary perspectives: theology, philosophy, psychology, biology, sociology.
• Introduce Augustine’s theory as a key theological account: humans have a nature corrupted by original sin.
• Briefly outline Augustine’s view that human nature is corrupted and predisposed to sin due to the Fall, inherited by all humans.
• Introduce the opposing view (Pelagius) that what appears as corrupted nature is actually a product of upbringing and environment.
• Signal that the essay will evaluate these perspectives with reference to theological, philosophical, and scientific critiques.
Paragraph 1
Main Body Paragraph 1: Augustine’s Doctrine of Human Nature as Corrupted by Original Sin
Main Body Paragraph 1: Augustine’s Doctrine of Human Nature as Corrupted by Original Sin
• Explanation of Augustine’s theory:
• Based on his reflections on sin’s origin and his own and others’ behaviour.
• Humans are naturally predisposed to sin due to original sin stemming from Adam and Eve’s disobedience in Eden (“the Fall”).
• Pre-Fall, human rationality perfectly controlled bodily desires, including sexual desire (sex was rational, not desire-driven).
• The Fall brought corruption: humans now have an irresistible tendency to sin, known as concupiscence—bodily desire overpowering reason.
• Augustine’s idea of seminal presence: all humans were “seminally present” in Adam’s loins, meaning original sin biologically transmitted to all descendants.
• Result: humanity is massa damnata (mass of the damned) by nature.
Dual loves: Cupiditas (selfish, earthly love) vs Caritas (selfless, divine love).
Main Body Paragraph 1: Augustine’s Doctrine of Human Nature as Corrupted by Original Sin
• Augustine’s wider theological framework:
Augustine’s wider theological framework:
• Grace and predestination: Humans can only be saved by God’s grace; salvation is not due to human effort.
• Predestination means God has already chosen who will be saved (the elect).
Main Body Paragraph 1: Augustine’s Doctrine of Human Nature as Corrupted by Original Sin
• Evaluation: Strengths and insights:
• Augustine’s observations resonate with human experience of moral weakness and internal conflict.
• G.K. Chesterton and Reinhold Niebuhr support the empirical reality of original sin’s effects.
• Augustine’s recognition of the complexity of human will and moral struggle is psychologically insightful.
• Offers a coherent theological explanation for universal human moral failure.
Main Body Paragraph 1: Augustine’s Doctrine of Human Nature as Corrupted by Original Sin
Evaluation: Criticisms and challenges:
• Scientific challenges:
• Genetic evidence disproves descent from only two people (Adam and Eve).
• Evolutionary biology contradicts a single Fall event; human nature evolved over time.
Augustine’s biological explanation is outdated (homunculus theory) and scientifically inaccurate.
The problem of divine justice:
• Is it just to condemn all humanity for Adam’s sin before their birth?
• Predestination implies unfair eternal damnation for many, challenging God’s omnibenevolence.
• The inscrutability of divine justice may not satisfy rational ethical critique.
• The Fall narrative is unscientific and mythological, limiting its explanatory power today.
Paragraph 2
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
Explanation of Pelagius’ position:
• Human nature is not intrinsically corrupted; apparent evil tendencies arise from upbringing and environment.
• “Educated in evil” by social conditioning rather than inherited sin.
• Humans have genuine free will to choose good or evil.
• Moral improvement is possible, evidenced historically by social progress and moral reform.
• Biblical commands presuppose ability to obey; thus humans must have the capacity for moral goodness.
• Divine grace assists but does not override free will.
• Humans are morally responsible for their actions, not condemned for Adam’s sin.
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
• Supporting contemporary evidence:
Martin Luther King’s optimism about moral progress (“the arc of the moral universe bends towards justice”).
Steven Pinker’s research showing decline in violence, suggesting human nature can improve.
Moral development and education shape behaviour significantly.
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
• Evaluation: Strengths and insights:
Aligns better with scientific understanding of human evolution and socialisation.
Preserves human moral responsibility and free will, coherent with biblical justice.
Accounts for observable moral improvement in human societies.
More ethically satisfying: does not punish the innocent for ancestral sin.
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
• Evaluation: Criticisms and challenges:
May underestimate the depth of human moral failure and internal struggle.
Augustine’s critique: Pelagius’ concept of free will diminishes the role of divine grace.
Pauline theology (e.g., Romans, Philippians) suggests human will to do good requires God’s intervention.
Pelagius’ view might lead to moral complacency or arrogance, ignoring human frailty.
Divine help or grace is still necessary according to scripture, which Pelagius struggles to define adequately.
Main Body Paragraph 2: Pelagius and the Alternative View: No Distinctive Corrupted Human Nature
• Counter-response and balance:
• Pelagius acknowledges divine help but sees it as guidance, not overpowering grace.
• Augustine’s idea of grace can seem incompatible with human freedom and justice.
• A nuanced position might accept human free will enabled but not overridden by grace.
Conclusion
• The question “Is there a distinctive human nature?” is complex and debated.
• Augustine offers a distinctive human nature: corrupted by original sin, inherently flawed and dependent on divine grace.
• This view is rich theologically and psychologically but is challenged by science, ethics, and observable human progress.
• Pelagius rejects a corrupted nature, emphasizing free will, moral responsibility, and social conditioning.
• Pelagius’ view is more compatible with contemporary science and ethical intuition but struggles with certain biblical texts and the depth of human moral failure.
Line of argument
While Augustine’s view is influential and explains human moral failure as universal, it is less convincing in light of scientific evidence and ethical concerns about justice and free will.
A balanced understanding might acknowledge that human nature is complex, involving innate tendencies shaped by biology and environment, with genuine moral freedom but also vulnerabilities.
Thus, there may be no single, fixed “distinctive” human nature but rather a dynamic interplay of biological predispositions, social influences, and spiritual/moral capacities.
The debate remains open, but any view must integrate philosophical, theological, and scientific insights to be convincing today.
