This article explores the question of whether adultery can be considered a sin based on Homo Deus. Considering dictionary definitions, modern humanistic values, and legal changes, we discuss why adultery is no longer considered a sin.
Read Homo Deus, Part 2, Chapter 7, The Humanist Revolution, which discusses extramarital affairs and adultery. In this section, the most interesting discussion in humanist ethics is about which human emotions are more important in a conflicted situation like infidelity. This topic of human emotions and ethical dilemmas is a constant point of conflict between individual freedom and social morality, and can be discussed from a variety of perspectives. In this section, I decided to take a deeper look at the question of whether adultery is a sin or not.
Based on the content of Homo Deus, I came to the conclusion that adultery is not a sin. Before I explain why, let’s take a look at the dictionary definition of sin. There are two main dictionary definitions of sin. First, sin is defined as an act that deviates from conscience or morality. Second, sin is defined as an illegal act that violates the law and cannot be punished.
Let’s take the case of South Korea, where adultery was abolished on February 26, 2015. Article 241 of the Criminal Code was removed 110 years after its inception, citing that adultery unduly restricts the right to sexual self-determination and the secrecy and freedom of private life, and has a destructive effect on the maintenance and protection of the family community. As a result, the second of the dictionary definitions of sin no longer holds true in modern society.
This leaves only the first definition of sin, and it is important to clarify what conscience is and what morality is. Conscience can be defined as a moral consciousness that determines the value of things and judges one’s actions as right or wrong, good or bad. This concept of conscience tends to be fluid, based on humanistic values, rather than judged according to absolute standards. Humanism is a philosophical perspective that respects the feelings and rights of individual human beings, which can lead to changes in social norms.
Of course, from a humanistic perspective, otherness, or consideration for others, is also essential for social norms to be set. However, as mentioned earlier, in a situation where adultery is no longer legally illegal, I decided to focus more on what is “good” and “bad” according to humanistic judgment.
To determine this, I decided to define “good” and “bad”. The dictionary definition of ‘good’ is that the nature or content of an object is above average and satisfactory, and the dictionary definition of ‘bad’ is that it is not good or right. The key to ‘bad’ here is that it is not good, so we can judge it by the dictionary definition of ‘good’. If a person committing adultery finds satisfaction in the act and considers it good, it is affirmed by humanistic values, and as a result, it does not violate their conscience. Therefore, it is not a sin.
In Homo Deus, the person committing adultery acts because they have a desire to do so. It also mentions that if they think it’s bad, they will stop themselves. Therefore, if the person committing adultery affirms it based on their own judgment, it is logical.
The remaining argument is the question of deviating from morality. A moral is the right way for a person to act in a certain position. The problem with this is that what is the right way for a person to act can change depending on the time and culture. Because morals are shaped by social and cultural context, they are not fixed and can change. Furthermore, the law is the most influential factor in setting the standards of morality. This is because people look to the law as a basis for rightness. However, as I already mentioned earlier, adultery is no longer an illegal act.
In the end, I came to the conclusion that adultery is not a sin based on these points. Under the influence of humanistic values along with social and legal changes, the concept of sin can be fluid. This discussion can continue to evolve in different forms in the future in relation to ethical dilemmas.
