In Defense of Sin

by John Portmann (Editor)

Intriguing, and occasionally unsettling, In Defense of Sin is a refreshingly frank exploration of some real facts of life. Portmann gathers an on-target collection of great writers on transgressions large and small. Read about defenses for promiscuity, greed, deceit, gossip, lust, breaking the golden rule, and more--and use this unusual guide to decide for yourself if sin has a place in our contemporary, and virtually unshockable, society.

Provocative and illuminating, this book may change how you think about sin, morality, and what's right.

Contributors include Aaron Ben-Ze'ev, Anthony Ellis, Jane English, Ludwig Feuerbach, Sigmund Freud, Bernard Mandeville, Jerome Neu, Friedrich Nietzsche, David Novitz, Joyce Carol Oates, David A.J. Richards, Seneca, Jonathan Swift, Richard Wasserstrom, and Oscar Wilde.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Religion

320 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 2001

Reviews

[Benjamin · Rating 2 out of 5]

In Defense of Sin is guilty of bait-and-switch. The book purports to be an anthology of writings (both essays and snippets from classic literature) extolling the virtues of what are commonly regarded as sins—greed, deceit, adultery, suicide, and more. It’s an intriguing idea, but few and far between are the writings that truly speak to this end. To cite one egregious example, the section titled “In Defense of Lust” features an essay that argues not that lust has some sort of intrinsic merit or inherent value, but that engaging in cybersex does not constitute infidelity. In my mind, this is not a matter of an essay going off-topic, it is a matter of the essay never being on-topic to begin with! An even more convoluted example is Jonathan Swift’s satire “A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People from Being a Burden to Their Parents or the Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public” being touted as a “defense of murder.” Though this tongue-in-cheek endorsement of infanticide is humorous, it in no way gives the reader any new considerations about murder, pro or con. (Leaving one to ask, “so what was the point?”)

There are a couple of thought-provoking chapters included here (Anthony Ellis’ article on casual sex, which is questionably tagged as a “defense of promiscuity,” is quite good and does a much better job of addressing lust than does the aforementioned article on cybersex), but overall the book is off-base. It misrepresents itself and in turn has the propensity to insult the reader who expects the book to live up to the description on its cover, which states that it will “surprise, intrigue, and provoke you.” Funny … when I was told not to judge a book by its cover, I somehow thought the book description was the one exception!

[SarahD · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading this book, with it's 'interesting' title, apparently gives soccer mom's on the bus the right to judge you and your sinful ways. Even when you explain that it's good to get different perspectives on your so-called beliefs. This did not sway said soccer mom, and now there's at least one person in the world that believes I am hell-bound.

Other than that, the book is an interesting collection of texts on a number of traditional sins. I can't say that it always changed my mind, but it was nice to read short bits of different philosophers. And it was rewarding to challenge common perceptions of what sin is.

[Jamie Wangen · Rating 3 out of 5]

there were a few thought provoking essays, but by and large, I felt like they missed the mark. For one egregious example, Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is offered as the essay in defense of murder. Um, no.

A better choice would have been something examining the issue of assisted suicide, capital punishment, or any number of morally gray issues relating to actual murder.

[Eh?Eh! · Rating 2 out of 5]

received as a gift, didn't find its discussions very compelling