How is mortal sin possible?

[fakename]

If the most lovable is that which is more knowable and vice versa, then shouldn’t people always avoid mortal sins since mortal sins are less knowable and less lovable than other things?

Is it possible to commit a sin (that is with full knowledge) but not draw the implication that you did indeed sin?

I think so, since people can know a thing in one way, and yet not know it in some other way as Aristotle observes -you can know that 1+1=2, and yet not know that 2 is just 1+1.

If so, would you be guilty of it?

 

[James224]

If the most lovable is that which is more knowable and vice versa, then shouldn’t people always avoid mortal sins since mortal sins are less knowable and less lovable than other things?

Is it possible to commit a sin (that is with full knowledge) but not draw the implication that you did indeed sin?

I think so, since people can know a thing in one way, and yet not know it in some other way as Aristotle observes -you can know that 1+1=2, and yet not know that 2 is just 1+1.

If so, would you be guilty of it?

It’s possible not to know a thing and this is why philosophy can take you only so far. Our consciences have to be formed. Not knowing something is a mortal sin mitigates it to a point but we still must confess and you are guilty even though you may not feel guilty. God knows our heart and the law is written on our hearts as it says in Rom 2:13 so I can’t see where a person cannot know guilt unless there is an impediment such as mental illnes, etc.

Edit: Not everyone has the ability and desire to learn philosophy or reason to a high degree and, ie, theology is a short cut way to know the truth.

 

[fhansen]

If the most lovable is that which is more knowable and vice versa, then shouldn’t people always avoid mortal sins since mortal sins are less knowable and less lovable than other things?

Is it possible to commit a sin (that is with full knowledge) but not draw the implication that you did indeed sin?

I think so, since people can know a thing in one way, and yet not know it in some other way as Aristotle observes -you can know that 1+1=2, and yet not know that 2 is just 1+1.

If so, would you be guilty of it?

Our culpability depends on our knowledge of the sinfulness of an act. But culpability is probably always mitigated to some extent by ignorance and by the fact that a person is always choosing a good, albeit an inferior one, whenever they commit evil. IMO, this is all tied to human self-righteousness; IOW we must always think we’re right in order to commit wrong-humans rarely, if ever, commit evil for the sole sake of committing evil.

Another observation is that sin or moral evil is said to always be against reason-to be irrational, to some degree. And it’s just a paradox of fallen human nature, I think, that, as St Paul said, we often do the wrong we know we shouldn’t do and can’t seem to do the right we know we should.

In any case I think sin is generally a result of placing the selfish interests over the requirements of love.