Do you believe sloth, greed, lust, gluttony, anger, envy, and pride are sins?

[Amelia G]

Do you believe sloth, greed, lust, gluttony, anger, envy, and pride are sins? They are listed as the seven deadly sins. If I'd majored in religion, I might know what religion started that idea. I'm going to guess Catholic, but it could be Anglican, and it could be some popular superstition in some random European country. No idea and not in a research mood tonight.

Which, if any, of the seven deadly sins do you feel are bad?

Which of the seven deadly sins do you commit without shame and which of the seven deadly sins do you struggle not to commit and which do you feel no attraction to whatsoever?

[Mindgames]

Dante listed them, and various Popes, Hermits and fetishistic monks cataloged them from around the 5th century onwards.

Thomas Aquinas listed 6 ways of committing the sin of gluttony.

1. Praepropere - eating too soon
2. Laute - eating too expensively (coincidentally, the sin of living in LA)
3. Nimis - eating too much
4. Ardenter - eating too eagerly
5. Studiose - eating too daintily
6. Forente - eating too fervently

I'm happy to indulge in all seven - they're each part of human nature and serve useful purposes.

[theUnclean]

I don't prescribe to the concept of sin. Always considered it as nothing more then a control doctrine.

[Deadly Envy]

Depend.

Most of them can be good or bad.

Only one that I'd really consider bad is sloth because you get nothing done if you sloth.
On other hand with greed, lust, gluttony, anger, envy,and pride, you get more done because they motivate you and you have to get up to get what you want.

[Amelia G]

Dante listed them, and various Popes, Hermits and fetishistic monks cataloged them from around the 5th century onwards.

Thomas Aquinas listed 6 ways of committing the sin of gluttony.

1. Praepropere - eating too soon
2. Laute - eating too expensively (coincidentally, the sin of living in LA)
3. Nimis - eating too much
4. Ardenter - eating too eagerly
5. Studiose - eating too daintily
6. Forente - eating too fervently

I'm happy to indulge in all seven - they're each part of human nature and serve useful purposes.

I'm down for all of those except number 5, unless they mean using the correct fork, which I'm not attached to but willing to do in order to commit #2 and #6.

[keiko]

I believe that all are destructive to harmony and peace in excess. you eat too much too fast, you get a belly ache, you spend all day being angry, you're going to hurt someone. you give into lust and more than likely you'll end up fighting with someone you love, not necessarily an SO but a friend maybe who does love the person you just fucked for the hell of it. Vanity results in styling products and glamours that will bankrupt you, cause your skin to break out and your hair to thin.

Everything in moderation, including moderation. they're not really "sins", for that implies far too great a consequence, but they do have consequences, rather immediate ones at that. esp gluttony. *noms on chocolates*

~K

[Aza]

Elaborating on what K said, ANYTHING that can be abused will be labeled a "sin" by the Catholic definition just as soon as it's discovered that people abuse it. The Legendary Seven are all representative derogatory terms for abuse of various worldly pleasures. (According to some religious right-wingers, pleasure itself is a sin; apparently God consigns us straight to Hell the minute we begin to enjoy these lives he's given us.)

That having been said, I'm going to take my fine-looking ass back downstairs to lounge around, gorge on chocolate, and perhaps jerk off while raging in silent jealousy of people with money.

[Ajax Knucklebones]

Yes' um....I also believe we have tiny aliens in us. The cure is a E-Meter reading at a nice cost and then a cleasning...And by cleasning I mean 'Volta and Cruise comes over and gives you the official Scientology tossed salad procedure. The cost is your old beliefs and all of your assets.

[nathanmbailey]

My whole concept of religion is that it was created by man to control man, so I don't consider any of those to be sins, and I enjoy performing each one from time to time, ocassionally all 7 at once even.

[Morning Glory]

sounds like a list of requirements for a successful businessman.

[DJ Bat]

Yes' um....I also believe we have tiny aliens in us. The cure is a E-Meter reading at a nice cost and then a cleasning...And by cleasning I mean 'Volta and Cruise comes over and gives you the official Scientology tossed salad procedure. The cost is your old beliefs and all of your assets.

And you can get the little bitches for cheap now!

Other then that, Sin = Human Nature. Yin and Yang. Lime & Coconut. Zigfried & Roy.

[Ajax Knucklebones]

Greed....It did in my whole county.

[Raza]

I should hope so; 'sin' is a very enjoyable word to abuse, and it'd be a shame if we could not rely on it applying to the classics.

[Velvet-Tongue]

sloth- Really only a drain on yourself. lack of ambition, laziness, and I'd throw apathy in here as well. Being a useless drain on society and stunting or destroying your own spiritual/mental advancement is a sin to me. You're wasting your life. Do something.

greed- Obviously, beeing greedy is sinful. Taking too much, abusing others, thinking only of whats good for YOU are all greedy.

lust- Lust in the confines of a loving relationship is not sinful to me. You love your girlfriend/wife/boyfriend/husband whatever. Go and fuck their brains out. However... you're lusting after another mans/womens mate or forgetting your duty and responsibilities to chase pussy/dick then yes thats a sin.

gluttony- Over eating is unhealthy and selfish. Food should be shared or atleast not over done. Eat till you're saited, not full.

anger- Being wrathful and hateful is the reason our world is where it is. Hatred and ignorance and the anger born from them stops us from advancing as a race. How often have you ruined your days, weeks, years, relationships, friendships by being angry? I'm trying to develope universal love as part of my spiritual advancement (not universal doorstop) if in my furture line of work I have to kill someone..I hope I can do it with duty and not hate in my heart. Bad people should be seperated from us but you dont HAVE to hate them.

envy- Being selfish and jealous can lead to horrible things. But its one of those sins that with the right amount can be motivating. You're dead jealous of another artists work..so you work to better yourself. You're jealous of your ex and her new boyfriend? So you push the boyfriend door the stairs and blame fate. Not good.

You're jealous of your acquaintances goof fortune..so you ruin their good name so they can be as miserable as you are. Not good.

pride- Another sin that when done lightly can be beneficial. However too much pride (as anyone whos read the greek tales can attest) ends in downfall. Too much pride ='s ignorance. Too much pride ='s Arrogance. Too much pride ='s a lonely, and empty life.

[Raza]

VT laying down some 21st century Commandments ITT.

[Clockwork Jello]

Well said Velvet-Tongue!

[keiko]

I notice you didn't say anything about the sin I am most guilty of. What's your take on Vanity, VT?

~K

[helcyon]

What's wrong with Sloth now? It's all good.

• I enjoy "committing" the act of sloth
• I was in a band called Sloth (oh wait... they were called Sloth later... at the time it was "Bog").
• The drummer's name is still Sloth. He moved to South Australia to be with a girl and her kids after she saw a pic of his dick he put online. No I haven't seen it.
• An "ai" is a type of sloth with three toes from south America. It is an awesome creature whose main use is to help get rid of excess letters at the end of a game of Scrabble.

[Velvet-Tongue]

I notice you didn't say anything about the sin I am most guilty of. What's your take on Vanity, VT?

~K

"In conventional parlance, vanity is the excessive belief in one's own abilities or attractiveness to others"

There is nothing wrong with being clean, pretty or well dressed. Vanity comes into play when you take the desire to simply be clean and attractive and turn it into an obsession.

Look at Paris Hilton, all the money in the world and she blows it all on what? her Vanity. Excessive plastic surgery, incredibly expensive designer clothes and jewelry. Shes trashy. She's a jeweled covered egg with a dead, rotten yolk inside. Shes using fashion, makeup and being trendy to cover up the fact that she helped no one but her own ego.

[Dean4]

i agree with morning glory i dont think those are sins

[Raza]

"In conventional parlance, vanity is the excessive belief in one's own abilities or attractiveness to others"

There is nothing wrong with being clean, pretty or well dressed. Vanity comes into play when you take the desire to simply be clean and attractive and turn it into an obsession.

Look at Paris Hilton, all the money in the world and she blows it all on what? her Vanity. Excessive plastic surgery, incredibly expensive designer clothes and jewelry. Shes trashy. She's a jeweled covered egg with a dead, rotten yolk inside. Shes using fashion, makeup and being trendy to cover up the fact that she helped no one but her own ego.

So basically, it's ok to want to be pretty, but not ok to put more effort into it than other people can relate to, because if people can't relate to you they'll invent and attribute random failings to you to rationalize the difference. Applies especially if you're famous.

[Iggyisdead]

I more or less subscribe to a more Buddhist way of thought so I don't really believe in the concept of sin per se.

[Velvet-Tongue]

So basically, it's ok to want to be pretty, but not ok to put more effort into it than other people can relate to, because if people can't relate to you they'll invent and attribute random failings to you to rationalize the difference. Applies especially if you're famous.

No it's okay to be pretty and to work to make yourself so but if looking good is only goal of your life then yeah its wrong.

Being famous is not just about being hot and fashionable. You have a responsibility to set a decent example (Either through the work you do, things you sell, ideas you publish) since you're being viewed and looked up too by so many people.

Yeah its fun to look at incredibly hot women who spend thousands of dollars on awesome clothes, plastic surgery and the like. Or to listen to crazy death metal about cutting off the heads of your foes and fucking satans asshole.

but beyond being curiosity's, boredom relievers etc they're inherently useless. Scar13 is a good example, she is a very beautiful women and being beautiful is her life. But when you learn about her you also see that shes a vegertarian, champions human creativity/freedom and helps people. She is not inherently vain. She has other motivations in life.

If the same beautiful women or death metal band also used their loads of cash to help people/the world/educate then looking good is not their only goal in life. hence they're not inherently vain.

Like I said, Vanity is incredibly hard to peg since it means different things to different people. It's also why its not one of the "7 deadly sins" its an amalgamation of many different "sins".

[Velvet-Tongue]

I more or less subscribe to a more Buddhist way of thought so I don't really believe in the concept of sin per se.

Well if you're thinking buddhist then you substitute karma for sin. Buddhist monks being the pinnacle of Buddhist thought are what? Not gluttons, celibate, incredibly generous, constantly active in meditation/public works/teaching, work to keep a calm and very tranquil mind (not angry) and dress simply and live simply so they dont form connections to others and develop envy or pride.

[Velvet-Tongue]

Listen, I'm not trying to preach to anyone here. I'm just as guilty of the "7 deadly sins" as anyone else is. The ideal is that you should work in your life to not get bogged down in the lowest and most animal parts of being human.

Being lust, envious, greedy, violent, lazy, gluttonous and prideful are part of being human; but so is being generous, loving, caring, empathetic, compassionate, brave, courageous, wise and knowledgeable.

My personal ideal is to champion the good, loving, courageous and wise side of being human. The superego, higher being etc etc whatever you want to call it. Doing that you can make a real heaven on earth and improve the lives of all those around you.

Will I ever get to the point where I can walk around and truly say "I'm practicing what I preach. I'm a living, walking avatar of my ideals" hopefully! But just the journey of TRYING to do it is what is transcendental.

[Iggyisdead]

Well if you're thinking buddhist then you substitute karma for sin. Buddhist monks being the pinnacle of Buddhist thought are what? Not gluttons, celibate, incredibly generous, constantly active in meditation/public works/teaching, work to keep a calm and very tranquil mind (not angry) and dress simply and live simply so they dont form connections to others and develop envy or pride.

yeah but when you describe something as 'sin' you lean one way or another giving something a 'good' or 'bad' label therefore not letting it merely be. From what I understand Buddhism is not about eliminating desire as the 'seven deadly sins' are about eliminating desire. It's about understanding why you feel that way and understanding why the desire is there in the first place. So yeah, I don't believe in 'sin' because who I am to say what is 'good' and what is 'bad'. But I do believe in desire.

[Raza]

No it's okay to be pretty and to work to make yourself so but if looking good is only goal of your life then yeah its wrong.

So is it 'ok', or is it actually a positive effort? 'Ok' by what standards, anyway? And in a hypothetical person whose only motivation is to look good, can you argue how the presence of that one desire is causally related to the absence of all others? Or do you just feel that once they fall short of what they 'should be', whatever is left of the person is necessarily negative (rather than neutral, as vanity previously was) in moral nature?

Being famous is not just about being hot and fashionable. You have a responsibility to set a decent example (Either through the work you do, things you sell, ideas you publish) since you're being viewed and looked up too by so many people.

'Fame' isn't something you do or have. Rather, it is something that exists in other people, measuring their awareness of you, as well as their recognition of your status as someone many others are presumably aware of.

How can other people's thoughts on you burden you with moral obligations? Can I change what's right or wrong for you merely thinking about you a certain way?

This seems like a very unreliable and unpredictable basis for ethics, and would probably cause a lot of inequality.

Yeah its fun to look at incredibly hot women who spend thousands of dollars on awesome clothes, plastic surgery and the like. Or to listen to crazy death metal about cutting off the heads of your foes and fucking satans asshole.

Personally, I like to have the best of both worlds and look at manga depictions of incredibly hot girls having their heads cut off.

but beyond being curiosity's, boredom relievers etc they're inherently useless. Scar13 is a good example, she is a very beautiful women and being beautiful is her life. But when you learn about her you also see that shes a vegertarian, champions human creativity/freedom and helps people. She is not inherently vain. She has other motivations in life.

If the same beautiful women or death metal band also used their loads of cash to help people/the world/educate then looking good is not their only goal in life. hence they're not inherently vain.

I think you mean 'exclusively'.

Anyway, I vehemently object to the idea that individuals have a moral obligation to be 'useful' to the rest of the world. We're responsible only for ourselves, and it is absurd for you to declare what joy someone else presumably isn't getting out of a hobby like enhancing their own looks.

[Velvet-Tongue]

So is it 'ok', or is it actually a positive effort? 'Ok' by what standards, anyway? And in a hypothetical person whose only motivation is to look good, can you argue how the presence of that one desire is causally related to the absence of all others? Or do you just feel that once they fall short of what they 'should be', whatever is left of the person is necessarily negative (rather than neutral, as vanity previously was) in moral nature?
-----------------------------------------------------
If a persons only motivation is to look good. As in absolute terms? then yes they're wasting their lives in my opinion. If people want to look attractive to themselves and others and have healthy bodies then there is no shame in that.

If as said above thats their only goal is to look good, then whats left of them is not necessarily negative as I do not know the person. But how much beyond 'eating, shitting, fucking" is there if your ONLY motivation is to look pretty?

The rest of what you're saying is rather convulsive and hard to understand.

-----------------*

'Fame' isn't something you do or have. Rather, it is something that exists in other people, measuring their awareness of you, as well as their recognition of your status as someone many others are presumably aware of.
-------------------*
If you want to dissect it down to a meaningless level that can have no concrete or even form of substance then sure.

But you can name famous people off the top of your head. And no I do not mean the artist, band or writer who is famous in a small circle. I'm using celebrity status fame for my statements.
-------------------*

How can other people's thoughts on you burden you with moral obligations? Can I change what's right or wrong for you merely thinking about you a certain way?

This seems like a very unreliable and unpredictable basis for ethics, and would probably cause a lot of inequality.

---------------------*
If you are in a position of power where people look up to you, listen to you, emulate and cherish you. You -should- be trying to set a good example. This is the ideal, but with our culture a serial killer, drug addict, or person like Paris Hilton can be listend to, emulated and cherished just as much as someone else.

I'm speaking of the ideal here, not what we have now.
-------------------- *



Personally, I like to have the best of both worlds and look at manga depictions of incredibly hot girls having their heads cut off.
------------------*

Fantastic.

------------------*

Anyway, I vehemently object to the idea that individuals have a moral obligation to be 'useful' to the rest of the world. We're responsible only for ourselves, and it is absurd for you to declare what joy someone else presumably isn't getting out of a hobby like enhancing their own looks.

-------------------*
Well theirs your view on the matter. You don't believe people have a moral obligation to be useful to the rest of the world; while I most certainly do.

If we're responsible only for ourselves then parents should leave a $20 on their babies chest and hope for the best? Thats an extremism but you hopefully get what I mean.

Your teacher should teach whatever they want with no feelings towards the possible consequences of their ideas? In a perfect world where everything taught is useful and good sure. But we dont live in a utopia.

If people are starving in the streets, being killed by foreign armies and bandits. Does the Government not have a responsibility to step in and help their charges?

If you're a world famous musician, rockstar rich with millions of fans who look up to you and emulate you, listen to your songs. Do you not have a responsibility to leave a positive impact? You'll say no. But I'd say yes.

Everyone has a duty to someone else. Duty to your family, lovers, your job, friends, pets, etc. if you're ignore all of them then you -are- inherently useless.

A person with no duties helps no one but themselves, they drain everyone and return nothing. They're useless.

.

[Velvet-Tongue]

ITT blocks of text.

[Raza]

ITT blocks of text.

No kidding. It's ok though; I read it, and I don't think we were getting anywhere anyway. Once a debate has reached a certain number of quote blocks, ceasing whatever pretense of coherence remains is the only thing left to do.

[Velvet-Tongue]

So I guess you were appalled when Phelps got caught hitting that bong recently since as a professional swimmer he has a moral duty not to smoke cannabis, um, because smoking cannabis is wrong?

I don't care if he smokes or not. He obviously does not do it alot if he beat the worlds best swimmers over and over.

However his advertisers sure did not want to be associated with it. Guys out alot of money now because he messed up his duty to his sponsors/Olympics and to the kids who look up to him so hes paying the price.

Atleast he did not pussy out and say "IT WAS TOBACCO!"

[Velvet-Tongue]

No kidding. It's ok though; I read it, and I don't think we were getting anywhere anyway. Once a debate has reached a certain number of quote blocks, ceasing whatever pretense of coherence remains is the only thing left to do.

Yeah, agreed. You're an interesting person and I enjoy reading your (usually) very different opinions on things. Thank you for the debate

[Raza]

Won't somebody please think of the children?

I came, so it's not my turn anymore.

[Velvet-Tongue]

You don't care that he messed up in his duty to the "kids"?!?

Hes been punished enough without me needing to throw anger at him via the interwebs.

[Velvet-Tongue]

He’s a professional swimmer. His commitment should end where the legalisation for competitive sports ends.

RIP Bobby Fisher!

Except that hes not just a professional swimmer. he's signed numerous advertising deals with Nike, Wheaties, etc etc etc etc. part of their contracts 99% of the time have morality clauses. They don't want their companies associated with illegal things.