Did Adam and Eve have complete dominion of reason over appetite?

[po18guy]

po18guy:

If they had the freedom and ability to choose not to, yes.

Of course they had the freedom to choose not to. Are you saying that because they had the freedom to choose against eating the fruit, but made an unreasonable choice, that this is evidence of “dominion of reason over appetite”?

Please clarify. I am not putting out this question to defeat faith, not at all. What I am seeing is that an adult spirituality might take a look at underlying issues going on.

First, I am a dollar store theologian, so take it for what it’s worth. Having said that, they misused their free will, abandoning their dominion when they chose the world in preference to God. The angels had heaven - the Beatific Vision - and 1/3 of them rejected it!

 

[OneSheep]

They had to decide through their own reason/consciences whether to follow what God declared as good or to make up their own definitions.

Is “making up their own definitions” evidence of complete dominion of reason over appetite?

For example, hunger was not a cause that compromised their ability to reason and led them to eat the fruit.

You are correct, the desire was coming from a different human want, correct? What did they naturally want?

Let’s assume Adam and Eve had used their consciences to choose not to eat the fruit. In that case, the decision they made with their fully formed consciences would not be degraded or compromised by any hunger they felt, no matter how hungry they felt, etc . . . In this way, their reason had total dominion over their sensual appetites. Things such as hunger, sexual desire, fight or flight reflex, etc… would not compromise the decisions made by their consciences.

I agree. If they had followed their well-informed consciences, their reason would have had dominion over their sensual appetites.

 

[OneSheep]

It was not impossible for Adam and eve to be disobedient. They had perfect control of their power to choose, but they chose wrongly.

So “perfect control” can be manifested in poor decisions? How is that “perfect”?

 

[OneSheep]

First, I am a dollar store theologian, so take it for what it’s worth. Having said that, they misused their free will, abandoning their dominion when they chose the world in preference to God. The angels had heaven - the Beatific Vision - and 1/3 of them rejected it!

I think you can see, though, that “abandoning their dominion” was in itself evidence of lack of dominion of reason over appetite (or anything else).

No use beating it to death, though. When you make a bad choice, and later regret it, is it natural to hang onto self-blame?

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

Let’s assume Adam and Eve had used their consciences to choose not to eat the fruit. In that case, the decision they made with their fully formed consciences would not be degraded or compromised by any hunger they felt, no matter how hungry they felt, etc . . . In this way, their reason had total dominion over their sensual appetites. Things such as hunger, sexual desire, fight or flight reflex, etc… would not compromise the decisions made by their consciences.

I agree. If they had followed their well-informed consciences, their reason would have had dominion over their sensual appetites.

They did, and they choose wrongly.

You’re trying to project a definition of reason here that the Church doesn’t mean. As if we’re logical computers. The Church just means that their consciences/abilities to reason were not impaired by any sensitive appetites. Ours are.

 

[o_mlly]

… how can it be said that they had "complete dominion of reason over appetite?

We always choose the good but often what appears good is merely only apparently good and choosing it is a failure of right reason. Adam and Eve’s sin was one of pride, “When you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods” (Gen 3:5).

 

[po18guy]

Your expectations are unreasonable. If they had been incapable of abandoning the good, neither could they have loved freely. Delve into freedom and the human will and you may begin to see the situation more clearly.

Have any Saint Augustine?

 

[OneSheep]

They did, and they choose wrongly.

I’m confused. They followed their well-formed consciences, but chose wrongly?

You’re trying to project a definition of reason here that the Church doesn’t mean.

That’s certainly possible, but I am not intending to “put down” the definitions. We can see why the definitions are at least temporarily beneficial.

The Church just means that their consciences/abilities to reason were not impaired by any sensitive appetites.

Well, their ability to reason was obviously impaired by something, because no rational person would make a choice to harm their own children.

What impaired their reasoning?

And two “meta” questions:

Why is it important to make a distinction between the ability of Adam and Eve vs. our own ability to reason?

Here is an underlying question: Why do people want to hang onto blame?

 

[OneSheep]

If they had been incapable of abandoning the good, neither could they have loved freely.

When a person chooses against love, are they truly connected to Truth?

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

The Church just means that their consciences/abilities to reason were not impaired by any sensitive appetites.

Well, their ability to reason was obviously impaired by something, because no rational person would make a choice to harm their own children.

What impaired their reasoning?

And two “meta” questions:

Why is it important to make a distinction between the ability of Adam and Eve vs. our own ability to reason?

Here is an underlying question: Why do people want to hang onto blame?

They were given misinformation by the snake/devil. But they did have sufficient knowledge to make the right choice and trust God. They put aside that trust.

Why do you assume that we’re just looking for some way to hang onto blame? That’s rather judgmental about our intentions.

 

[Zaccheus]

So “perfect control” can be manifested in poor decisions? How is that “perfect”?

Perfect control and right or wise choice are not the same thing.

 

[po18guy]

Dominion? Of all born of woman, only the Blessed Mother could not sin - so perfectly was her will conformed to that of God. Yet, she loved and therefore retained free will - the very requirement for love. However, she has a grace that no other human ever had. The hypostatic union being in a different realm.

 

[po18guy]

OneSheep:

So “perfect control” can be manifested in poor decisions? How is that “perfect”?

Perfect control and right or wise choice are not the same thing.

Mario Andretti had perfect control over his race car, but occasionally made a poor choice, and lost it.

 

[Gorgias]

The angels had heaven - the Beatific Vision - and 1/3 of them rejected it!

They had heaven, but they didn’t have the Beatific Vision.

Is “making up their own definitions” evidence of complete dominion of reason over appetite?

No, it’s evidence that they misused their conscience.

If the apple had looked really nasty, but they wanted it nevertheless, then that would have been evidence of appetite over reason.

If they had followed their well-informed consciences, their reason would have had dominion over their sensual appetites.

Not an appetite issue, though.

So “perfect control” can be manifested in poor decisions? How is that “perfect”?

Yes. Because I can perfectly control my car, yet end up at the wrong destination.

Well, their ability to reason was obviously impaired by something, because no rational person would make a choice to harm their own children.

Their ability to reason was working well; their ability to obey their conscience, it seems, was not.

Perfect control and right or wise choice are not the same thing.

This!

 

[o_mlly]

Did Adam and Eve have complete dominion of reason over appetite?

Yes. Their sense appetites were ordered to move them to act only in the presence of an object proper to that appetite. That is, they did not suffer from concupiscence.

However, their irascible appetites, passions that moves us in the presence of an arduous task, did not seem to incline them to resist the evil in the lies of the devil. Or they, blinded by pride, did not recognize the present evil.

 

[OneSheep]

Perfect control and right or wise choice are not the same thing.

Are you suggesting that our actions are not guided by our choices?

 

[OneSheep]

They were given misinformation by the snake/devil. But they did have sufficient knowledge to make the right choice and trust God.

They were given sufficient knowledge to know that they were believing a falsehood, and that their actions would result in harm to their children?

Why do you assume that we’re just looking for some way to hang onto blame?

I am thinking that we hang onto some blame because blame itself helps to form the conscience. It’s more of an observation than an assumption. So our “intentions”, though subconscious, are actually quite good.

 

[OneSheep]

No, it’s evidence that they misused their conscience.

Is “misuse of conscience” evidence of the dominion of reason?

If the apple had looked really nasty, but they wanted it nevertheless, then that would have been evidence of appetite over reason.

However, the appeal was the benefit of knowledge of good and evil, plus perhaps a liberation from the constraints of obedience, a desire for autonomy, and several other desires come into play, i.e. desire for power. It could look really nasty, but still have appeal to appetite.

Not an appetite issue, though.

Perhaps. What did A&E want, and why did they want it?

Yes. Because I can perfectly control my car, yet end up at the wrong destination.

That would limit the objective to control of the vehicle’s function. The objective, however, is much more than controling its function, the objective is to arrive at the destination. If you end up in the wrong place, your actions were far from perfect, right?

 

[OneSheep]

Yes. Their sense appetites were ordered to move them to act only in the presence of an object proper to that appetite. That is, they did not suffer from concupiscence.

However, their irascible appetites, passions that moves us in the presence of an arduous task, did not seem to incline them to resist the evil in the lies of the devil.

Are you saying that they did not have complete dominion of reason over their “irascible” appetites?

Or they, blinded by pride, did not recognize the present evil.

What is “pride” when used in that sentence?

 

[OneSheep]

Mario Andretti had perfect control over his race car, but occasionally made a poor choice, and lost it.

Yet, if he had the experience he now had before he had confronted the decision in which he had made the poor choice, then he would have chosen differently. His objective was not to crash, of course, and his lack of experience (or insight, in this case) limited his ability to reason. His reason was not complete.

Is there something in our nature that wants to hang onto blaming Eve and Adam? Isn’t it true that if they weren’t completely aware, it is harder to blame them, to hold onto blame? Does this not mirror what we all do, to hang onto self-blame? Does it not serve a purpose?

Isn’t there great power in the statement “I should have known better”?