Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 QR

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[In the modern definition, less ‘freedom’ means more ‘responsibility’.

Less ‘responsibility’ means greater ‘freedom’.

‘Freedom’ and ‘responsibility’ are opposed.

So, from the intersecting nested form of the welfare recipient, ‘the mirror of the world3H’ lifts a key responsibility weighing the recipient’s heart2. Now, the recipient is free (without responsibility) to realize the potential of a disability.

The recipient can work, but the recipient also cannot work.

Remember the realm of possibility allows contradictions.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 QQ

[It doesn’t matter whether the sovereign gives you something2a or takes something2a away from you. What matters is that something2a reflects both your potential1a, ultimately, your choice3b.

At the extreme, the subject is completely objectified.

I3b and me1a become, what Giorgio Agamben called, homo sacer.

The mirror of the world3a becomes the camp.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 QO

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[In this postmodern scholastic discussion, freedom2a(1a)) and responsibility3a(2a are co-opposed.

Sovereign decrees often decrease the range of the co-opposition of responsibility and freedom by regulating something2a.

Intervention narrows the range of both responsibility and freedom available to the subject. It brings the subject into words3a(2a and bondage2a(1a)).]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 QJ

[In so-called “welfare”, the subject conforms to the words of the sovereign authority’s thought experiment (that providing the transfer payment will achieve greater “equity”).

For the subject, freedom and responsibilities transform into bondage and words.

For the government agent, words and bondage for the subject are perceived as the justified application of an objectorganization onto sovereign subjects.]