Gluttony, lust and the other ‘deadly sins’ are seen as immoral, but are we hardwired to commit them? | Guy Leschziner

TThe first thing that strikes me when I visit Alex at her assisted living facility is the huge lock on the kitchen door. Accessible rooms are devoid of any food or drink, with the exception of two sugar-free pumpkin dispensers in the living room. Even the food waste bin outside the back door is padlocked. Packages delivered to home residents are opened in front of staff and searched for secretly ordered food. These extraordinary efforts are crucial to prevent housemates from overeating.

For Alex and her fellow citizens, their constant and insatiable hunger is not a matter of gluttony. This is not a sign of immorality or depravity of soul. This is a function of their biology. Everyone living in this house has a rare genetic disorder, Prader-Willi syndrome, which affects the area of ​​the brain that controls appetite and hunger. For them, the signal to stop eating never materializes. People with this condition are doomed to never feel full, sometimes even eating non-food items in search of satiety. Their hunger is so strong that they sometimes overeat to such an extent that they die of a perforated stomach or choke on regurgitated food.

Indeed, for each of the behaviors defined as the seven deadly sins by Pope Gregory I in 590 sl. AD, and immortalized in the public consciousness in Dante’s Divine Comedy, there are countless examples where the cause is clearly exclusively biological. Drugs to induce Parkinson’s disease extreme sexual desirefor example, or even a change in sexual preferences. Brain tumors or degenerative neurological diseases generating laziness or pride. Because of anger, there are families with a mutation in a gene sometimes called “warrior gen”, where men are extremely prone to aggression and violence.

It is clear to these people that their “sinful” behavior is not entirely under their control. A certain medical condition largely explains why they are the way they are. These cases clearly illustrate that a change in the structure or function of our brain can lead to a change in our actions or personality. And in general, these aspects of humanity are determined by the internal neurological mechanism.

The seven deadly sins are woven into the tapestry of what it is to be human, and for a reason. Each of these tendencies, at least in moderation or under specific circumstances, can be seen as a survival tool. They are driven by evolutionary imperatives. Without lust, we are doomed not to reproduce, to disappear. Greed and gluttony encourage the accumulation of physical possessions or calories, a defense against less time. The sloth balances the energy expenditure against the potential reward. But when these behaviors are excessive or inappropriate, they lead to harm.

We are all somewhere on the spectrum of each of these traits. Even for those of us with healthy brains, however, unaffected by disease or disorder, there are factors beyond our control that affect the nature of who and what we are.

Many of these determinants are present from conception: genes inherited from our parents that will influence our appetite and body weight in adulthood. Common variants of the so-called warrior gene that affect our levels of aggression in later life have even been used in commutation of sentence for serious crimes such as murder.

Other factors can affect our brain development while we are still in the womb. Exposure to testosterone while our brains are growing affects levels of aggression later in life; comparing the length of your index finger to your ring finger gives a measurement of testosterone exposure intrauterine. Studies of people born after the 1944-45 famine in Holland demonstrated that those exposed to fasting in early pregnancy are more likely to be obese adults, with associated medical complications.

Even after birth, our brains are made flexible by our environment. Exposure to a stressful or traumatic upbringing can alter the development of those brain structures that regulate the generation and control of emotions such as anger and fear. Our parenting style can nurture our children’s self-esteem, but also their levels of narcissism, a form of pride.

It could be argued that there is a clear distinction between those who are not “normal” or “healthy” and the rest of us. For those with an overt neurological illness, they have little or limited control over their nature, while the rest of us have free will—the ability to choose, to act in one way or another—despite the many factors beyond our own control. But the dividing line between what constitutes disorders of the body or brain and disorders of the “soul” is not static. In the past, many of these behaviors I describe would not have been considered medical causes. As medical technology advances, more and more people have an apparent physical cause.

So at what point does the normal end and the pathological begin? When do all these internal and environmental factors that shape the structure and function of our brains become a heavy enough burden to rob us of the ability to exercise free will?

There is still no consensus among scientists or philosophers about the nature of free will, whether we all have it or whether it is illusory. In all likelihood, as with the seven deadly sins, our degree of free will also lies on a spectrum. For now, though, who should be the arbiter of the boundaries between normal and pathological, biological and moral? Is it the doctor, the scientist, the judge, the philosopher or the priest?