SIN? In a science magazine? Atheists will tear their hair, agnostics scratch
their heads, and priests prepare to repel borders. It鈥檚 OK, you can relax. The
pages that follow are a decidedly secular affair, concentrating on sin in terms
of cultural taboos that evolved for two straightforward biological reasons.
First, and most obvious, to prevent us from pursuing enjoyable and necessary
things (like sex and food) to destructive excess. And second, to balance the
selfish instincts of individuals and their genes with the interests of the
groups they lived in. In this view, then, morality is born where culture
collides with biology. St Gregory the Great, the 6th century pope who is loosely
credited with inventing the Seven Deadly Sins, must also have recognised that.
How else could he have come up with a list of taboos that so brilliantly
captures all the foul emotions and biological drives that can prevent humans
from living in harmony?
Of course, if Gregory were alive today he might want to update the list. What
would irk him now would be shoppers coveting Rolex watches rather than oxen. For
a lesson on avarice in the late 20th century, he could do no better than visit a
shopping anthropologist
(Avarice).
In this era of 鈥渃hemical leisure鈥�, our Greg might also feel it necessary to
redefine lust. After all, normal sexual desire would seem positively benign
compared with the intense cravings of many heroin and cocaine addicts
(Lust).
The poor old saint might also be forced to rethink wrath. Evolutionarily
speaking, there is nothing maladaptive about all that Old Testament-style
premeditated anger
(Wrath).
Impulsive rage, however, is quite another matter. We
must all be grateful that Yahweh never had cause to drive.
Advertisement
As for sloth and gluttony, these would have to be promoted to the deadliest
of all sins in view of the health problems they cause. How shocked he would be
at what labour-saving devices like the mobile phone are doing to our bodies
(Sloth)
and how aghast at the volumes of food that tomorrow鈥檚 high-tech gluttons
could be stuffing
(Gluttony).
The idea that envy exists because, like sex, it is good for our genes would
no doubt intrigue Gregory
(Envy). But it would take a brave saint indeed to
rewrite the moral rule book in the light of the needs of our selfish genes.
Never mind Rome, who would want to incur the wrath of today鈥檚 critics of
evolutionary psychology?
As for sinful computers, the priests of the Inquisition would have loved the
idea. Unfortunately, programming software agents to have even the semblance of
complex emotions such as pride is itself a nightmare of complexity
(Pride). And
only when machines have true emotions or survival drives will we humans need to
impose sin-like taboos on them to preserve harmony.
There again, such speculations may only encourage Gregory to create an eighth
deadly sin鈥攆alse prophecy.