[space]

quoted for page propagation.

\/\/\/

Originally Posted by Glice

Sin, as in the prohibition on negative human acts, isn't vastly different to various reward theories, or theories on evolutionary symbiosis, or affirmative behavioural theories. You could say that 'sin controls' - and there's bit where you'd be right - but you could just as easily say 'sin is an anthropocentric articulation of the evolutionary principle of reward systems in socialised animals'. I know it's not precisely how sin is used in religion, but at base, isn't sin the principle that if you fuck over another human, you will get fucked over back? Ok, you can disagree on the agency of that reciprocal fucking over, but surely that's a very basic principle of socialised existence (and therefore not exclusive to the religious dialogue, except in a piddling nomenklatura)?

I ♥ reciprocal fucking