07/26/22

Looking at Matthew Crawford’s Essay (2022) “Covid Was Liberalism’s Endgame” (Part 7 of 10)

0035 A mystery resolves into a heresy.  An intersection unravels into a two-level interscope.  One nested form goes into the content level.  The other nested form enters the situation level.  Two configurations are possible.  Typically, one predominates.

What is a heresy?

You tell me.  The answer appears before you.

0036  In the heresy of technocratic progressivism3leviathan1b virtually situates democracy1a.

What is leviathan1b?

Leviathan1b is the potential of a state that will protect us (from one another)1b.  Another way to describe this term is the potential of feelings of security1b, in a world filled with sociopaths2a.

Figure 15

0037 The implication is that human nature3a coheres with purely calculated judgments2cA, dispassionate perceptions2bAand stoically accepted sensations and decodings2aA.

Such dedication to reason means that humans are basically sociopaths, unable to register the emotional reactions of others.  There is no way that these sociopaths can govern themselves.  Therefore, democracy1athe potential of self-governance1a or the potential of a state arising from people being reasonable or sensible1amust be virtually situated by a leviathan1b, underlying a state of nature3b

Figure 16

Human nature3a is sociopathic3a.

The state of nature3b is a state of fear3b.

0038 Yes, the state of fear3b, which describes what the leviathan1b apparently aims to prevent, becomes the normal context favored by technocratic progressivism3, as it3 brings the actuality of the unraveled individual2 into relation with the potential of ‘remaking humans’1.

0039 Surely, this does not makes sense.  Yet, it is precisely what Crawford witnesses during the lockdowns.

Human nature2a is ruthlessly3b suppressed by sovereign acts and decrees from a department of the leviathan1b aiming to protect vulnerable people2b, on the basis of a threat to health from the state of nature3b.  Lockdowns and mask requirements violate commonsense2a, yet anyone questioning the sovereign acts and decrees is regarded as a sociopath1a, who does not care about the health of vulnerable people2b.

I suppose that Crawford’s witness implies that the state of nature3b is a state of fear3b that, contrary to rational calculation3a, arises from the potential of a state that aims to promote feelings of security1b and to provide both material and psychological safe harbor for vulnerable people2b.

Does that sound like lockdowns and stimulus checks?

07/26/22

Looking at Matthew Crawford’s Essay (2022) “Covid Was Liberalism’s Endgame” (Part 8 of 10)

0040 A suprasovereign liberal civic religion dies with the unraveling of the individual2, defined as the intersection of commonsense2V and vulnerabilities2H.

In the normal context of technocratic progressivism3, a mystery2cC unravels into a two-level interscope.  But, the unraveled individual2b does not make sense to humans in their natural… um… state3a.

0041 The two-level interscope characterizes sensible thought.  However, the emotional judgments2cA, phantasms2bA, impressions2aA and feeling2aA of vulnerable persons is more like a religious experience2b, compared to an exercise in commonsense2a.

Yet, this religious experience2b is sensible in the normal context of a state of fear3b, where the leviathan has the potential to declare a state of exception1b.  Consequently, in technocratic progressivism, the perspective levelc does not come into play.

Or, at least, itc appears not to.

0042 Here is a diagram.

Figure 17

0043 How does Locke’s human nature3a become regarded as sociopathological3a?

How does Hobbes’s state of nature3b manifest as a state of fear3b?

The original normal contexts do not seem exceptional.

The latter normal contexts do.

0044 Crawford writes that, in the 1990s, social scientists dispose with the “rational actor” model of human behavior.  Cognitive psychology (and evolutionary psychology) sees humans as unconsciously employing evolved cognitive modules.

Along the same lines, bureaucratic criteria1b, such as performance metrics2b, replace commonsense judgments2a.  Examples include so-called “evidence-based medicine”, standardized tests and curricula, and self-driving automobiles.  These policies are designed to protect vulnerable persons2b, given the sociopathic (unconsciously employing evolved cognitive modules) nature of doctors, teachers and ahem… people who drive.

0045 Here is a picture of what human nature transitions to under the normal context of technocratic progressivism3.  Evolutionary psychology informs us that human nature is full of sociopathic tendencies, due to our “selfish genes”.  Cognitive psychology models human thought processes as circuits of unconscious modules, working in tandem.

Figure 18

Commonsense2a gets redefined.

Some call this progress.  Others call it, “dehumanization”.

0046 During the 2000s, theatrical political initiatives introduce a perspective-level actuality2cthe state of exception.  Astate of exception is declared in order to confront emergent vulnerabilities2b.  These declarations do not need to satisfy commonsense2a, in the old sense of the word, because “commonsense” has been redefined.  In fact, the original concept of human nature3a has been narrowed by scientific inquiry into a suite of sociopathic tendencies3a.

Technocratic progressivism3 dons the mantle of science in its pursuit to remake humans1.

0047 Here is a picture of the transitioned unraveled individual.

Figure 19

0048 Of course, the most recent theatrical incident coincides with a complex sequence of conjunctions among Jupiter, Saturn and Pluto in the Houses of Capricorn and Aquarius.  See Razie Mah’s blogs for March and April 2020.  A novel coronavirus (the common cold) rages through Wuhan after the New Years Festival celebrating the Year of the Rat, then spreads to the world.  The virus’s progress is marked by the technocratic implementation of a polymerase chain reaction test.

Never mind claims that the test also shows positive for influenza.  Hospitals in China and Italy are overwhelmed with old people in the middle of winter suffering complications and the doctors are calling for experts to save them with medical protocols.  Corporate television reports the breaking news.

Disease translates into data.  Data feeds panic2b.

07/25/22

Looking at Matthew Crawford’s Essay (2022) “Covid Was Liberalism’s Endgame” (Part 9 of 10)

0049 The federal government responds.  But the term, “federal”, is now delocalized.  It used to refer to a federation of sovereign states in America.  Now, it means a federation of sovereign states in both America and Europe, even though the Europeans have not recognized the subtle shift in terminology.

Technocratic progressivism knows how to shift the meanings of words.

0050 Here is a picture of the plague-unraveled individual.

Figure 20

0051 The normal context of the federal government3c brings the actuality of a medical state of emergency2c, complete with quarantines of healthy citizens, into relation with the potential of ‘biosecurity’1c.

The normal context of a state of fear3b brings the actuality that the novel coronavirus endangers vulnerable persons2b into relation with the government apparatuses of subsidiary states, such as Germany and Italy, as well as America and Canada1b.

The normal context of the sociopathic reactionary resistance3a brings the actuality of common folk denying the well-publicized dangers2a into relation with the potential of a countervailing democratic initiative1a.

Of course, the federal government3c and the leviathan1b can manage the anticipated3a commonsense2a democratic1ainitiative.  That is where the control files on politicians, influencers, corporate media celebrities, religious leaders, and so on, enters the picture.

0052 How about some anecdotal evidence?

Crawford describes his observations of people in the California Bay Area, a technocratic progressive heartland.

First, people wear masks outdoors, not so much for personal protection, but because zero covid is a heroic battle, requiring a literal effacement of the individual.

Ah, wearing masks1a signals one’s virtuous solidarity with vulnerable persons endangered by the virus2b.  It is an expression of democracy1a in support of the leviathan1b, rather than common folk, who do not care about those designated as “vulnerable”2a.

0053 Here is the virtual nested form in the category of firstness.

Figure 21

The normal context of biosecurity1c virtual brings slogans from the leviathan1b into relation with the potential of affirmation by democratic expression1a.

Here is a diagram.

Figure 22

0054 What about lockdowns?

Does staying home during a lockdown show democratic assent?

Here is a picture of the virtual nested form in the realm of actuality.

Figure 23

0055 Crawford describes how lockdowns force social isolation.  Social atomization is one of the conditions that support the rise of totalitarian movements.  The Party offers the only way to… um… party.

Also, social isolation purifies the citizens of the Bay Area, who democratically assent1a to the leviathan1b rather than what used to be called “commonsense”2a.  Those wearing masks outdoors dance to the cultish vibe of hygiene maximalists.  Here are the uncontaminated spiritual warriors of a nascent hygiene state.

Crawford waxes eloquent about a social scene that makes common folk want to puke.

0056 Here is a picture of the virtual nested form in the category of secondness.

Figure 24

0057 Need I continue?

The denizens of the San Francisco Bay Area abandon commonsense2a and embrace medical tyranny1b.

Denizens?

Well, they aren’t individuals anymore, are they?

07/25/22

Looking at Matthew Crawford’s Essay (2022) “Covid Was Liberalism’s Endgame” (Part 10 of 10)

0058 The coronavirus of 2019 ends liberalism as a civic religion.

These diagrams, inspired by and roughly coherent with Crawford’s text, provide complementary food for thought.  The resolution of the mystery of the individual marks the death of liberalism and the coronation of technocratic progressivismas a suprasovereign being.  A religion is supplanted by its heresy.

0059 The liberal religion holds a mystery as the object that brings all into relation.

The individual is the intersection of commonsense and vulnerability.  Crawford notes that individuals have a certain nobility.  Liberals never strive to destroy that spiritness.  They desire to create a better individual, the old fashioned way, through reform and renewal.

0060 The religion of technocratic progressivism (which I also call big government (il)liberalism), suspends the lively, spontaneous party that defines individuals, and imposes a three-tiered interscope, where the normal context of the federal government3c virtually brings the actuality of a state of fear3b into relation with the potential of a reactionary resistance3a.

The virtual nested form in the category of thirdness is prophetic, since it suggests that an ultimate state of exception2c will occur when common folk become dangerous to vulnerable persons2b because of the common folk’s tendency to use commonsense and value self-governance2a is declared to be “toxic”.  In short, “commonsense2a” (in the original sense of the word) is regarded as “criminal2b” (according to the leviathan1b).

0061 Indeed, what Crawford does not say stands just beyond his mournful lament of the tragic end of individual spiritness.

What Crawford does not say is prophetic.

0062 The website is UnHerd.

Michael Crawford contributes regularly.

0063 The overall argument is introduced in Razie Mah’s masterwork, How To Define The Word “Religion”.

The topic of the individual is discussed in A Primer on the Individual in Community and in points 0081-0086 in The First Primer on the Organization Tier, by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues.

07/10/17

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 DH

[The Russian Soviet Communist Godhead embodies this potential:

Liberty (of the state to own all property)

Equality (of all citizens in state ownership of property, with the party speaking for the citizens)

Fraternity (among members of the Communist Party. Party members assure liberty and equality, and challenge the bourgeois, who are the source of all failure.)]

03/6/17

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AD

[Come to think of it, sensible construction based on private or closely shared social constructions comes in handy for taking advantage of the ideological frameworks of others.

Hey, I can use widely held social constructions in order to cultivate my own wealth or status.

For example, consider the ambitions of state academics.

They pretend that their sensible constructions are not built on social constructions. They pretend that they are ‘not religious’, because that is the current opiate of the masses. Plus, their closely shared religious beliefs are unlikely to be challenged.

They can proselytize without risk.]

03/2/17

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AB-2

[Which social construction will contradict our (human) self-centered and selfish sensible attitudes.

In the Lebenswelt that we evolved in, the few contenders were family, band and tribal traditions.

In our current Lebenswelt, we are faced with a wide variety of contenders.

After the Incarnation, we are faced with the thinkgroups of our Zietgeist and the thinkdivine of the Way.

Deception is everywhere. Thinkgroups pretend to provide the Way.]

02/24/17

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 Y-2

[Hmmm. That raises a question:

What are the rules of science?

What is the rule that allows scientists to construct mind-dependent beings (ens rationis) that are true to the presumed mind-independent beings (ens reale)?

It seems that the mind-dependent being must image or point to ‘the subject of study’, thereby producing a sign-object in the mind of the scientist.

Models provide images.

Experimentation provides indexes.]