Using Punishment and Self-Persuasion to Explain Adam and Eve The Book of Genesis tells the story of how God created man and woman. He allowed Adam and Eve to eat from any tree in his garden except the Tree of Knowledge, and if they did so they would face death. A serious threat was made to them; that of death. As we all know, Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge and were banished from the Garden of Eden. Looking at the situation from the perspective of social psychology, I will examine why this was the case and what God could theoretically have done to be obeyed. In other words, I will discuss why a mild threat might have worked better in this case. What is forbidden is desired. This ancient adage is the source of the death of Adam and Eve. So it is natural to conclude that the only way to redeem the two, other than walling up the Tree of Knowledge, is to make the desired fruit somehow less desirable. One possible solution to this conundrum is to threaten them with a lighter form of punishment; say if they were threatened with an hour of manual labor. You might wonder what makes it different from severe punishment. In both circumstances, they will experience dissonance. Adam and Eve would realize that they are resisting the temptation to taste that delicious fruit. Under severe threat, when they ask themselves why they haven't tried it yet, they remember the death threat. In other words, they have sufficient external justification; they would rather stay alive. This reduces their dissonance. Dissonance is experienced even with mild threat, but the difference is crucial. When they ask themselves the same question, they can't come up with a convincing answer because the threat is so mild that it doesn't provide the... middle of the paper... desirable. However, since this isn't what happened in the story, it's still worth examining what happened. As we have established, Adam and Eve, after some time, had reduced their dissonance to the point that eating the fruit was no longer a problem; they decided it was time. The snake serves to facilitate or accelerate their decision and nothing else. It seduces them into doing so, but they would never have done so if they had devalued the fruit. The serpent simply persuades them, assures them that they are making the right decision. In conclusion, a less severe threat might have worked better for Adam and Eve than the one that was thrown at them for all the reasons discussed. It could have made all the difference in the world for the two. Although the story is not typical, I have tried to demonstrate that modern social psychology can be applied and used to understand even the most ancient stories..