Precise definitions of the deadly sins...

rutt

... from the all time master, [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas. [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] I'm an atheist, but you just can't beat Aquinas when it comes to these things.[/font]

1. [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sloth -- "sluggishness of the mind which neglects to begin good... [it] is evil in its effect, if it so oppresses man as to draw him away entirely from good deeds."[/font]
2. Pride -- "inordinate self-love is the cause of every sin (1,77) ... the root of pride is found to consist in man not being, in some way, subject to God and His rule."
3. "Gluttony denotes, not any desire of eating and drinking, but an inordinate desire... leaving the order of reason, wherein the good of moral virtue consists."
4. [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Lust -- [/font]...wherever there occurs a special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming, there is a determinate species of lust. This may occur in two ways: First, through being contrary to right reason, and this is common to all lustful vices; secondly, because, in addition, it is contrary to the natural order of the venereal act as becoming to the human race: and this is called "the unnatural vice." This may happen in several ways. First, by procuring pollution, without any copulation, for the sake of venereal pleasure: this pertains to the sin of "uncleanness" which some call "effeminacy." Secondly, by copulation with a thing of undue species, and this is called "bestiality." Thirdly, by copulation with an undue sex, male with male, or female with female, as the Apostle states (Rm. 1:27): and this is called the "vice of sodomy." Fourthly, by not observing the natural manner of copulation, either as to undue means, or as to other monstrous and bestial manners of copulation.
5. Anger -- "the name of a passion. A passion of the sensitive appetite is good in so far as it is regulated by reason, whereas it is evil if it set the order of reason aside."
6. [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Greed -- "it is a sin directly against one's neighbor, since one man cannot over-abound in external riches, without another man lacking them... it is a sin against God, just as all mortal sins, inasmuch as man contemns things eternal for the sake of temporal things."[/font]
7. Envy -- [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Envy according to the aspect of its object is contrary to charity, whence the soul derives its spiritual life... Charity rejoices in our neighbor's good, while envy grieves over it."[/font]

Notice how careful he is to deliniate the sin (especially lust and glutttony) from the normal act. Not that we always agree with him nearly 1,000 years later (especially about lust.) Ginger's egrets certainly fall far outside of St. Thomas' definition of lust.

Stick with St Thomas, and your shots will be right on the mark.

Mitchell

Are we supposed to fit all the sins in one picture?


mitch

wxwax

Mitchell wrote:

Are we supposed to fit all the sins in one picture?


mitch

Yes. Is that a problem?

ginger_55

And I thought this might be a problem before: when I thought this was a challenge involving emotions.

Sid, you are funny.

So are you, Rutt.

ginger (amused, but not feeling "challenged")

jeff lapoint

ginger_55 wrote:

And I thought this might be a problem before: when I thought this was a challenge involving emotions.

Sid, you are funny.

So are you, Rutt.

ginger (amused, but not feeling "challenged")

rutt,

thanks for the St. Tom did someone from my grade school forward that to you? the nuns still haunt me to this day...

i think the classical view is a great place to start, but i would urge against following ole tom to the letter. the sins have evolved a broader, less literal definition in modern times that can include emotions and inner struggle.

its the subtle, day to day emotions and common sin/evil that i find far more interesting. these, to me are the truly powerful images because i can relate to the them. an image of myself pouring over pictures of nice glass the day after i went way outside my means to get a 20d is more human and visceral to me vs. an 800lb man eating 12 hotdogs at once.

to me the "sins" transcend religion and are more real as introspective tools in our everyday battle to be ourselves.

sorry for the rant and i hope this does not come off as an overly religious post. 15 years of catholic education beat all religion out of me and left only philosophy...

jeff

Stan

wxwax wrote:

Yes. Is that a problem?

:lol4lol4lol4

If you find one pic that says it all, it may well be judgement day

Shakey

7 deadly sins pppttthhhttt! I would say those are my best virtues.
A simple self portrait and I got this challenge nailed.



Tim

rutt

Spockling pointed out that I had repeated the definition of greed for envy. So I fixed it.

Stan

rutt wrote:

Spockling pointed out that I had repeated the definition of greed for envy. So I fixed it.

So damned if you do, damned if you don't. Take pride in your abilities and achievements, or couldn't care less. damned either way

rutt

Stan wrote:

So damned if you do, damned if you don't. Take pride in your abilities and achievements, or couldn't care less. damned either way

One thing Aquainas is not is inconsistent. Read carefully. The kind of pride that's a sin is inordinate self-love, not being subject to God and his rule. That's perfectly consistent with pride in your work. And the kind of slotth that's bad is sluggishness of mind that ... draws away from good deeds. So I think you are safe both in pride of workmanship and in taking nap.

OK, OK. I love Aquanas for how logical and carefully reasoned he is, but the real point of this thread was to help spark some creativity for this challenge. I think Aquainas is very carefully to distinguish the really sinful acts and thoughts from other things that just go by the name. It might pay to keep this in mind when trying to get inspired for this challenge.

rutt

jeff lapoint wrote:

rutt,

thanks for the St. Tom did someone from my grade school forward that to you? the nuns still haunt me to this day...

I had the advantage over you on this. I was raised in a non-religious family and only read St. Thomas as part of a wayward fascination with philosophy. He was a master logician and his reasoning about the existence of God (can't be known by reason only by faith) stands up to this day. Probably the clearest thinking ever on this topic.

eff lapoint wrote:

an image of myself pouring over pictures of nice glass the day after i went way outside my means

Let's see. I think this would be greed. It falls pretty neatly into Aquanas' definition of greed. So we haven't escaped from St. Thomas yet. And how are you going to get that shot anyway?

jeff lapoint

rutt wrote:

I had the advantage over you on this. I was raised in a non-religious family and only read St. Thomas as part of a wayward fascination with philosophy. He was a master logician and his reasoning about the existence of God (can't be known by reason only by faith) stands up to this day. Probably the clearest thinking ever on this topic.

couldnt agree more with you on this one, but it is way better to have it read for this reason than to pound religion into some young lads head

rutt wrote:

Let's see. I think this would be greed. It falls pretty neatly into Aquanas' definition of greed. So we haven't escaped from St. Thomas yet. And how are you going to get that shot anyway?

i dont think we could ever truly escape from his reasoning on the subject...i was just suggesting that the spirit of the definitions might be more powerful than the letter of the definitions. just my take. i cant wait to see others interpretations.

i could never get the shot for many reasons:

1. its hard to take shot of yourself in public
2. i would have to have my wife take it and then she would know what i was up to

rutt

jeff lapoint wrote:

i could never get the shot for many reasons:

2. i would have to have my wife take it and then she would know what i was up to

So, to apply Aquainas to this case, I think your wife would be "your neighbor" and by buying that lens (or whatever), you'd be "overabounding in riches" and she'd be "lacking in them."

I was sort of thinking that STA had nailed this particular case for this reason even before you let the details slip.

Really, I think there is a lot of fun to be had here. But then, there are no nuns in my history. I can see how that could ruin Aquainas as a source of fun.

ginger_55

I drove around all afternoon. Just got back. I was particularly looking for sins in progress, Uncle Tom or otherwise. I guess down here in the south, we just don't see much sin in public. Bless our hearts. (If you think I am going to show you my sloth, well..........I am not)

g

Charlie Brown

ginger_55 wrote:

I drove around all afternoon. Just got back. I was particularly looking for sins in progress, Uncle Tom or otherwise. I guess down here in the south, we just don't see much sin in public. Bless our hearts. (If you think I am going to show you my sloth, well..........I am not)

g

you obviously dont hang out the same places i do.

rutt

ginger_55 wrote:

I drove around all afternoon. Just got back. I was particularly looking for sins in progress, Uncle Tom or otherwise. I guess down here in the south, we just don't see much sin in public. Bless our hearts. (If you think I am going to show you my sloth, well..........I am not)

g

Gluttony at the very least, I'd think. But it's like the birds, you have to be there at the right time of day.

Andy

rutt wrote:

Gluttony at the very least, I'd think. But it's like the birds, you have to be there at the right time of day.

stevie and i had gluttony for sure last night. itsa shame nobody documented it for the challenge

rutt

andy wrote:

stevie and i had gluttony for sure last night. itsa shame nobody documented it for the challenge

So there was "leaving the order of reason, wherein the good of moral virtue consists?" In San Francisco? Sounds good. Wish I'd been there.

landrum

Living in Houston, I should have no problem finding a shot for Gluttony! :eat

I'm hoping I can come up with something more original, however. Plus, it's kind of gross watching some people eat! :puke

Angelo

Mitchell wrote:

Are we supposed to fit all the sins in one picture?


mitch

sure! it's simple!

pathfinder

Angelo wrote:

sure! it's simple!

Now That's Funny, Angelo!!!:D

landrum

:haha :lol4

Angelo wrote:

sure! it's simple!

evil eggplant

Sure..

Visit Nevada and shoot this:

A slot machine inside Mcdonalds across the street from a bordello. I'm not sure if that's all of them, but you can scratch a few off the list.

Mitchell wrote:

Are we supposed to fit all the sins in one picture?


mitch

Angelo

pathfinder wrote:

Now That's Funny, Angelo!!!:D

ginger_55

Angelo wrote:

sure! it's simple!

Angelo, you sly fox!

That is just great: wish I could figure out an EASY way to share the whole thing, but it needs to be in context. That is funny.

g

Angelo

ginger_55 wrote:

Angelo, you sly fox!

That is just great: wish I could figure out an EASY way to share the whole thing, but it needs to be in context. That is funny.

g

I've graduated from "loon"?

rutt

bump