Is vice selfishness? Is virtue selflessness?

[2ndRateMind]

Just asking!

It may be useful to pose these questions the other way around:

• If one is selfish, is that vice?
• If one is selfless, is that virtue?

And what do virtue and vice have to do with sanctity and sin, anyway?

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

Edited March 31, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[pwrfrk]

Pffft!  Darned if I know!

[2ndRateMind]

2 hours ago, pwrfrk said:

Pffft!  Darned if I know!

☺️

Simple questions, but that doesn't mean they're easy questions. Sometimes, the simplest questions are the hardest questions.

As ever, I am interested in the specifically LDS perspective on this issue.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited March 31, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[2ndRateMind]

So, I'm not sure whether to take the forum's silence on this matter as me being sent to coventry, or assent, or dissent.

For what it's worth, it may be worth considering the seven deadly sins in Christianity: pride, sloth, wrath, gluttony, avarice, lust and envy. Seems to me these are all selfish 'ways of being'. And as for the seven cardinal virtues, as defined in opposition to these vices: humility, diligence, patience, abstinence, liberality, chastity and kindness, all respectively; well, it seems to me these virtues are all selfless.

Or do you have a differing model of virtue and vice in your church?

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited April 1, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, 2ndRateMind said:

So, I'm not sure whether to take the forum's silence on this matter as me being sent to coventry, or assent, or dissent.

For what it's worth, it may be worth considering the seven deadly sins in Christianity: pride, sloth, wrath, gluttony, avarice, lust and envy. Seems to me these are all selfish 'ways of being'. And as for the seven cardinal virtues, as defined in opposition to these vices: humility, diligence, patience, abstinence, liberality, chastity and kindness, all respectively; well, it seems to me these virtues are all selfless.

Or do you have a differing model of virtue and vice in your church?

Best wishes, 2RM.

I don’t think the Church of Jesus Christ has put a lot of effort into coming out with gradients of sin or gradients of virtue; or even making legalistic or philosophical statements about what makes “sin” “sin”.  The closest it has really come is to define “sin” as “to knowingly act against God’s will”, and warn against a series of activities seen as falling under that umbrella (whilst encouraging other activities it holds are more in alignment with God’s will for us).

As far as “ranking the sins” goes—We have various scriptural passages which, read together, can be solidly be interpreted as saying that “denying the Holy Ghost” (generally defined as being in a spiritual state where, if you saw Jesus knowing who and what He was, you would crucify Him again if you had the power) is the “unpardonable sin”, that taking innocent life is very nearly so, and that some form of sexual sin is the “next most serious” sin.  Beyond that, though, there’s no theological equivalent of a “sentencing matrix”. 

From Christ’s description of the two great commandments, we might presume that *all* commandments are aimed at eschewing the activities or, as you put it, “vices” that alienate us from God and/or our fellow man; and we could probably extrapolate that  “virtues” are those activities that innately reconcile us to God and/or others. I think that’s true in many, many cases—maybe all of them.  The restored Gospel also encompasses the idea that God is, in a very real way, molding us into His own image preparatory to our becoming like He Himself is and doing the kinds of things that He Himself does; so we anticipate that His commandments have something to do with that process and that people who don’t live those standards are limiting their own divine potential.  There’s wouldn’t really be a need to pigeonhole sins as “greater”, “lesser”, or “deadly”—they’re all deadly; it’s just that some of them are harder to stop than others.

But as an imperfect human I have a limited understanding of what brings true union with either God or mankind; so it’s not like I’d apply the above-stated rubrics to any given Church teaching on “vice” or “virtue” for the sake of determining whether I “have to” comply or whether I may safely disregard it.  (“God wants me to not be so alienated from this hooker, so I’m going to disregard my church’s counsel and enjoy her services for a night!”)  Fundamentally, I usually try to avoid certain activities and pursue others because the Church suggested I ask God about it, and I did, and God told me He wanted me to do it—full stop.  

Edited April 1, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[mordorbund]

[anatess2]

JAG's answer is spot on.

I'll posit a simplified version of it here.

God gave us 2 great commandments - Love God, Love others as ourselves.  To add another layer to this, God's Plan of Salvation operates on the important function of Free Will.  Virtue, therefore, are those qualities we develop in ourselves through our free will that bring us closer to alignment with these commandments.  Vice are those qualities that bring us farther from alignment with these commandments.  Vice are also those that hamper or remove free will regardless of the removal being done to force us to exercise that which is good.  Note that the 2nd commandment is to Love others as ourselves - not just others, not just ourselves... but others WITH ourselves.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2019 by anatess2

[Vort]

Note 1:

"To send someone to Coventry" is a British idiom meaning "to ostracize or ignore someone".

Note 2:

There is a song or a saying or a proverb or a legend or a tradition or something that speaks of seven deadly sins. I know nothing whatever about these and hope you do not.

-Elder Bruce R. McConkie

[Traveler]

Whatever sin it is - it is always made exponentially worse by keeping it a secret or any efforts at covering it up.   Oddly; whatever the virtue it is - it is rendered cheep or even worthless by any attempts to make certain that the world knows you are the master of it.  People that brag about their faults and lie about not having virtues confuse me such that I do not care to discover more about them

 

The Traveler

[2ndRateMind]

12 hours ago, Traveler said:

Whatever sin it is - it is always made exponentially worse by keeping it a secret or any efforts at covering it up.   Oddly; whatever the virtue it is - it is rendered cheep or even worthless by any attempts to make certain that the world knows you are the master of it.  People that brag about their faults and lie about not having virtues confuse me such that I do not care to discover more about them

 

The Traveler

Yes, I have noticed that people sometimes admit to sins, or vices, or selfishness, as if the admission somehow excused them of fault. (I may be greedy, but at least I'm honest about that!). Yet, transparency is surely to be encouraged. There is a paradox there, that I am not sure I have fully resolved to my satisfaction. Is it good, or bad, to confess? Perhaps the answer lies in the attitude of the confession.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited April 2, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Yes, I have noticed that people sometimes admit to sins, or vices, or selfishness, as if the admission somehow excused them of fault. (I may be greedy, but at least I'm honest about that!). Yet, transparency is surely to be encouraged. There is a paradox there, that I am not sure I have fully resolved to my satisfaction. Is it good, or bad, to confess? Perhaps the answer lies in the attitude of the confession.

Best wishes, 2RM.

I tend to think that there is some balance to things and that spiritual things are not so different from physical things.  Not all physical injuries are serious enough that we need to constantly make sure everybody knows.  Examples are things like, woe is me, I got a paper cut or I stubbed my toe in the dark last night or I scratched my knee doing some gardening - I will not be able to go to work or help anybody today - I must rest and tend to my injuries.  There are things that everybody does not need to know.  But there are times when there are deep wounds  that require stitches or broken bones that need to be cared for while mending.  Serious physical affiliations usually need the help of someone that specializes in such injuries to assist in the process.   Certainly a serious head injury that causes a person to lose consciousness is a sign a person needs help and at the same time making adjustments in life in order to assist the healing does not mean that a quality of living is over.

The problem with many spiritual injuries is that there is no blood spurting out or broken bone sticking out.  We can pretend that spiritual injuries do not hurt or afflict us.  We can pretend that there is no spiritual pain and believe that G-d or the goodness of the universe has abandoned us to suffer the unkindness of others.  Like physical pain - spiritual pain really only afflicts us with whatever pain we will suffer while ignoring the actual cause and shifting blame somewhere else.  There are other similarities and some differences between physical and spiritual suffering but I leave that as an exercise for those wishing to discover them.

 

The Traveler

[2ndRateMind]

18 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I don’t think the Church of Jesus Christ has put a lot of effort into coming out with gradients of sin or gradients of virtue; or even making legalistic or philosophical statements about what makes “sin” “sin”.  The closest it has really come is to define “sin” as “to knowingly act against God’s will”,

Thanks for that. It was a really useful post.

I am not sure however, that I was arguing for gradients of sin, some more deadly, others less. I'm happy to leave that to the theologians. But I do think that examples of the types of attitude and behaviour that sin and vice might be are useful. They give us all something conceptually concrete to consider, and reflect on. Similarly with sanctity and the virtues. As for philosophy; well, it seems to me to be a perfectly valid line of enquiry to seek to distinguish between virtue and vice, sanctity and sin, and to seek to justify that distinction. Else, how are we to know what is God's Will, and what isn't?

More later, maybe, about degrees of vice and virtue. I'm busy right now.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[anatess2]

34 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Else, how are we to know what is God's Will, and what isn't?

You would think that the answer is obvious... Ask God.

The philosophies of men is not the answer.

[2ndRateMind]

 

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

You would think that the answer is obvious... Ask God.

The philosophies of men is not the answer.

Hmmm. The problem appears to be that many have done exactly that, and derived different (sometimes diametrically opposed) answers. So, I place a lot of faith in free speech, and democratic discussion, which I call 'the Great Debate'. One of the nice things about digital technology is that it affords us this interweb thing, which allows us all to interact with each other, and us all to come to our own conclusions as to which arguments are most persuasive.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited April 2, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, 2ndRateMind said:

 

Hmmm. The problem appears to be that many have done exactly that, and derived different (sometimes diametrically opposed) answers. So, I place a lot of faith in free speech, and democratic discussion, which I call 'the Great Debate'. One of the nice things about digital technology is that it affords us this interweb thing, which allows us all to interract with each other, and us all to come to our own conclusions as to which arguments are most persuasive.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Do you believe there is a God or not?

Why would you think that God's Will is up for debate when people who claim to DIRECTLY ask God come to you spouting different answers???  YOU ask God.  Then you'll have your answer.

[2ndRateMind]

4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Do you believe there is a God or not?

Why would you think that God's Will is up for debate when people who claim to DIRECTLY ask God come to you spouting different answers???  YOU ask God.  Then you'll have your answer.

Yup. I know there is God. But I also think that I am less than God, and that whatever I perceive of God will be perceived through that lesserness. In other words, I see God through the darkened lens of my own sinful way of being. The way I am determines what I think God to be, and what I think His will to be. But, on the plus side, others have virtues I lack, and I have virtues they lack. So, in this 'Great Debate' we all have the potential to compensate for each others failings, and build on each others strengths.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Yup. I know there is God. But I also think that I am less than God, and that whatever I perceive of God will be perceived through that lesserness. In other words, I see God through the darkened lens of my own sinful way of being. The way I am determines what I think God to be, and what I think His will to be. But, on the plus side, others have virtues I lack, and I have virtues they lack. So, in this 'Great Debate' we all have the potential to compensate for each others failings, and build on each others strengths.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

Point to anywhere in the scriptures where God's Will is up for debate.  The Pharisees tried to trip Jesus up thinking they know better what God wills - that's how he ended up being crucified.

You claim to know there is a God.  Then you claim to say God won't speak to you because you're "lesser".  Point to anywhere in the scriptures where God refused to talk to the faithful because they are made "lesser" by sin.  Did Jesus not go to the tax collector's house?  Did Jesus not bring a criminal hanging on the cross to Paradise?  The way you are does not determine what you think God to be.  The way you are determines the choices you have made so far.  And just like the Canaanite (Gentile - no covenant) exercising deep faith in asking Jesus to heal her daughter, you also need to exercise deep faith and ask God where He wants you to be... and be prepared to act on the answer.  That is the ONLY way to know vice from virtue as it applies to what you are willing to do.

[2ndRateMind]

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

...The Pharisees tried to trip Jesus up thinking they know better what God wills...

Exactly. If you follow my line of thinking, you will find that is precisely the opposite of my position.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited April 2, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[anatess2]

Just now, 2ndRateMind said:

Exactly. If you follow my line of thinking, you will find that is precisely the opposite of my position.

Best wishes, 2RM.

You think it is.  But your position is to put God's will up for MAN to debate.  Men like the Pharisees who think they are more virtuous than others.  That's where you want to put your "faith" in rather than putting your faith where it belongs - on GOD.

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

You think it is.  But your position is to put God's will up for MAN to debate.  Men like the Pharisees who think they are more virtuous than others.  That's where you want to put your "faith" in rather than putting your faith where it belongs - on GOD.

It has always been my opinion that the Pharisees knew the answers to all the questions concerning G-d - their problem was in living up to what they knew so much about.  I am more impressed in what example a person makes of themself rather than what they think they know.  Forums are not the ideal place for demonstrating how your knowledge affects someone's behavior.

 

The Traveler

[2ndRateMind]

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

You think it is.  But your position is to put God's will up for MAN to debate...

I am not sure what our possible alternatives are, other than for some individual to claim (s)he knows God's Will, and for everyone else to believe that without subjecting the claim to critical assessment. Which position strikes me as a tad dangerous, both for our individual prospects in the hereafter, and humanity's joint prospects in the here and now.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited April 2, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[anatess2]

59 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

I am not sure what our possible alternatives are, other than for some individual to claim (s)he knows God's Will, and for everyone else to believe that without subjecting the claim to critical assessment. Which position strikes me as a tad dangerous, both for our individual prospects in the hereafter, and humanity's joint prospects in the here and now.

Best wishes, 2RM.

2RM - there is only ONE WAY.  And it is for YOU to kneel down and pray as you study and ponder the scriptures, pleading to God with all honesty and humility to bring you truth and understanding.  That's the ONLY way.  God speaks through his prophets but that requires that you FIRST kneel down and plead to God to testify to you who are His chosen prophets.  This only becomes a "tad dangerous" if you have ZERO faith that the Holy Spirit testifies of truth to those that sincerely and humbly and in all faith seek to know the will of God.

I know what is vice and what is virtue.  But that only applies to me and my children to whom I am entrusted by God with stewardship.  I can testify to you of this truth.  But to know if it is true that you may act on it, you don't go around debating it.  There's no debate when it comes to God's will.  There is only faith.  And for you to be able to testify of truth, you'll need to go down on your knees and ask God.  So... what are you waiting for?

[2ndRateMind]

On 4/1/2019 at 8:16 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

As far as “ranking the sins” goes—We have various scriptural passages which, read together, can be solidly be interpreted as saying that “denying the Holy Ghost” (generally defined as being in a spiritual state where, if you saw Jesus knowing who and what He was, you would crucify Him again if you had the power) is the “unpardonable sin”, that taking innocent life is very nearly so, and that some form of sexual sin is the “next most serious” sin.  Beyond that, though, there’s no theological equivalent of a “sentencing matrix”. 

So, I would like to suggest, not a 'sentencing matrix' as such, or even a 'rewarding matrix', but a plausible line of thought that might lead to them.

Firstly, we need to distinguish between intentions and outcomes. So far as I can make out, academic philosophy in this area (ethics) is concerned pretty much exclusively with outcomes. There are are three main threads of enquiry:

• Deontology. What is moral is objective, the 'Will of God', the 'Natural Law', as determined (in Kant) by reason and as observed out of duty. Human happiness (the outcome) depends on compliance.
• Utilitarianism. What is moral is those actions and rules conducive to the greatest well-being of the greatest number. (the outcome).
• Virtue Ethics. What is moral is those (inevitably virtuous) actions conducive to eudaimonia, the flourishing or thriving of the individual, (the outcome) and therefore, in aggregate, the state, and the world.

The problem with all these approaches, or so it seems to me, is that the world is a complex, complicated, connected, integrated thing, and that outcomes are not that predictable. The law of unintended consequences always applies, and for which we cannot justly be held accountable. Which is not to say outcomes are irrelevant to the moral calculus, only that they are problematic.

Intentions, however, are entirely under our own control. We can choose between selfish and selfless intentions. (Try it; you can intend to give an extra $5.00 per month to the charity of your choice).

Then we need to consider power. (Be that social, economic, or political power). Both good and bad intentions are multiplied by the power an individual has. Thus Adolf Hitler's impact on humanity was pretty severe, while Oswald Mosley's was pretty marginal. But if intention*power is approximately = to outcome, we have a rudimentary formula to work with.

So there we have it; it is the selfish or selflessness of our intentions that determines our direction towards sin or sanctity, and here lies the skeleton outline of a theory of good and evil, virtue and vice, the moral and immoral, and their degrees, according to my 2ndRateMind.

Best wishes, 2RM

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by 2ndRateMind

[2ndRateMind]

On 4/1/2019 at 8:57 PM, anatess2 said:

JAG's answer is spot on.

I'll posit a simplified version of it here.

God gave us 2 great commandments - Love God, Love others as ourselves. 

Exactly. I cannot conceive of a more concise and pertinent summary version of the Gospels.

Best wishes, 2RM.