Not Even Philosophers Go to Hell: A Ritschlian Problem with the Justifiability of Infinite Punishment.

Scott Aikin and Jason Aleksander have recently challenged the traditional retributive doctrine of hell on the grounds that, even if we grant the Anselmian view that human sin is infinitely grave, the view that an infinite punishment is warranted for human sin is false because in order to deserve an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophia Vol. 53; no. 2; pp. 609 - 628
Autor principal: Reitan, Eric
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Apr2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=187667142&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 187667142
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00483893
        1VPF
      jtl: Philosophia
      issn: 00483893
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2025
      vid: 53
      iid: 2
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        187667142
        10.1007/s11406-025-00863-4
      ppf: 609
      ppct: 19
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 753KB
      tig:
        atl: Not Even Philosophers Go to Hell: A Ritschlian Problem with the Justifiability of Infinite Punishment.
      aug:
        au: Reitan, Eric
        affil: https://ror.org/01g9vbr38 Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA
      su:
        Hell
        Future punishment
        Philosophers
        Aikin, Scott
        Sin
        Ritschl, Albrecht, 1822-1889
        Theologians
      sug:
        subj:
          Hell
          Future punishment
          Philosophers
          Aikin, Scott
          Sin
          Ritschl, Albrecht, 1822-1889
          Theologians
      keyword:
        Anselm
        Doctrine of hell
        Retributive punishment
        Ritschl
      ab: Scott Aikin and Jason Aleksander have recently challenged the traditional retributive doctrine of hell on the grounds that, even if we grant the Anselmian view that human sin is infinitely grave, the view that an infinite punishment is warranted for human sin is false because in order to deserve an infinite penalty, the sinner must understand the infinite gravity of their offense—and most sinners (barring perhaps philosophers?) will fail to do so. While their critique of the traditional retributive doctrine suffers some problems, I contend here that something in the vicinity of it has promise: a critique of the retributive doctrine inspired by Albrecht Ritschl's view that in order for punishment to serve its purpose, those punished must be capable of experiencing their punishment as just. And even philosophers who grasp the Anselmian argument would be unable to endure infinite punishment while continuing to experience it as just. Only the most saintly—namely the blessed in heaven—could do that.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Philosophia is a copyright of Springer, 2025. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Philosophia
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N