Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-wj8jn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-14T21:20:52.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Anselm of Canterbury on the fall of the devil: the hard problem, the harder problem, and a new formal model of the first sin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2015

WILLIAM WOOD
WILLIAM WOOD*
Affiliation:
Oriel College, Oxford, OX1 4EW, UK e-mail: william.wood@oriel.ox.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The fall of the devil poses two distinct philosophical problems. Only one of those problems has received sufficient scholarly attention. The hard problem asks how the devil's choice to disobey God can be both suitably free and morally significant. The harder problem asks how it can be subjectively rational. Explaining the former does not suffice for explaining the latter. Drawing on the thought of Anselm of Canterbury, I develop a model of the first sin that uses the framework of consumer preference theory to show how Satan's act of disobedience can be free, morally significant, and subjectively rational.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 223 - 245
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anselm of Canterbury (2007) Anselm: Basic Writings, Williams, Thomas (tr.) (Indianapolis: Hackett).Google Scholar
Anselm of Canterbury (2007) De libertate arbitrii [On Freedom of Choice].Google Scholar
Anselm of Canterbury (2007) De casu diaboli [On the Fall of the Devil].Google Scholar
Anselm of Canterbury (2007) Monologion.Google Scholar
Anselm of Canterbury (2007) Cur deus homo [Why God Became Man].Google Scholar
Augustine of Hippo (1972) Concerning the City of God against the Pagans [De civitate dei], Bettenson, Henry (tr.) (New York: Penguin Books).Google Scholar
Augustine of Hippo (1993) On the Free Choice of the Will [De libero arbitrio], Williams, Thomas (tr.) (Indianapolis: Hackett).Google Scholar
Babcock, William S. (1988) ‘Augustine on sin and moral agency’, Journal of Religious Ethics, 16, 28–55.Google Scholar
Barnwell, Michael (2009) ‘De Casu diaboli: an examination of faith and reason via a discussion of the devil's sin’, Saint Anselm Journal, 6, 1–8.Google Scholar
Brower, Jeffrey (2004) ‘Anselm on ethics’, in Davies, Brian & Leftow, Brian (eds) The Cambridge Companion to Anselm (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 222–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Robert F. (1978) ‘The first evil will must be incomprehensible: a critique of Augustine’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 46, 315–329.Google Scholar
Caplan, Bryan (2000) ‘Rational irrationality: a framework for the neoclassical-behavioral debate’, Eastern Economic Journal, 26, 191–211.Google Scholar
Chappell, T. D. J. (1995) Aristotle and Augustine on Freedom: Two Theories of Freedom, Voluntary Action, and Akrasia (New York: St Martin's Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Peter (2012) ‘Augustine and Anselm on angelic sin’, in Hoffmann, Tobias (ed.) A Companion to Angels in Medieval Philosophy (Leiden: Brill), 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macdonald, Scott (1999) ‘Primal sin’, in Matthews, Gareth B. (ed.) The Augustinian Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press), 110–139.Google Scholar
Rabin, Matthew (1995) ‘Moral preferences, moral constraints, and self-serving biases’, Economics Working Papers from University of California at Berkeley, no. 95-241.Google Scholar
Rogers, Katherin (2008) Anselm on Freedom (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Salvatore, Dominick (2008) Principles of Microeconomics, 5th edn (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Timpe, Kevin (2012) ‘The arbitrariness of the primal sin’, Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, 5, 186–205.Google Scholar
Visser, Sandra & Williams, Thomas (2009) Anselm, Great Medieval Thinkers (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Willows, Adam M. (2014) ‘Augustine, the origin of evil, and the mystery of free will’, Religious Studies, 50, 255–269.Google Scholar