Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 RS

Summary of text [comment] pages 83 and 84

[The imposition of the sovereign proceeds first, in words, then second, in unavoidable obligations.

Is it hard to see that words convey obligations?

I may use words in order to avoid obligations for me. But does that not amount to imposing the unavoidable on you?

Unlike responsibility, words have winners and losers, just like politics]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 RK

Summary of text [comment] pages 83 and 84

[The co-opposition of responsibility and freedom allows us to appreciate Schoonenberg ‘s text more fully.

Schoonenberg’s key opposition is between bondage and freedom.

Bondage is in co-opposition with words (expressions and impositions of organizationalobjectives and thinkgroup).

Freedom is in co-opposition to responsibility.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 RG

Summary of text [comment] pages 83 and 84

Schoonenberg wrote that we exercise freedom in serving either God or Satan.

[The previous round of blogs show that “freedom” is defined as the capacity to enter into responsibilities. Greater freedom means greater responsibility.

The modern opposition between “freedom” and “responsibility” conceals pre- and postmodern concepts of the co-opposition of freedom and responsibility.

The true oppositions are between freedom and bondage and between words and responsibilities.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 RF

[The camps of America may be instituted on the basis of class action lawsuits, brought by the sovereign central government, toward particular individuals or classes of individuals.

Since no individual can afford the cost of litigation, the individual must plea bargain.

As part of the plea bargain, the individual is sent to a camp.

Thus, the court system, created to serve justice, may be bent to serve the sovereign’s social justice.]