Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 NP
07/25/18
Category Archives: Interscope & Intersection
07/24/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 NO
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[What happens to the tobacco smoker?
The mirror of the world (including the progressive regulatory zeitgeist)3a no longer allows value1b to coincide with desire1a.
The following diagram shows the interscope restricted to sensible construction (a two-level interscope.
The next diagram shows the intersection, occurring under the influence of the thinkpro-object of citizen health.]
07/10/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 ND
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[‘Responsibility3(2’ and ‘freedom2(1)’ expand or contract together.
Responsibilities3a(2a contextualize and embrace the somethings2a that my freedom2a(1a) supports.
Contrary to Modernism’s false opposition, responsibilities and freedom are in co-opposition.]
07/9/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 NC
[The technical term is ‘reciprocity’
Each of us intuitively knows that nothing is truly free. To accept a gift is to accept the responsibilities of reciprocity.
This raises a fascinating sociological question:
How does one engage in reciprocity with an institution?]
07/6/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 NB
[Would anyone offer you anything for ‘free’ (without apparent cost or obligation) in the short run, unless they hoped that the exchange would ‘obligate you, in the long run’?
An alternate approach is to offer ‘free stuff’ means ‘ with strings attached.
These strings (words) are co-opposed to bondage.]
07/5/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 NA
[So what happens when, in the Modern opposition, “freedom” is defined as lack of responsibility?
Do less responsibilities mean more freedom?]
07/3/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 MZ
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[The following are equivalent:
Mirror of the world3a(something2a
Responsibility3a(2a
The following are equivalent:
something2a( potential of my desires1a))
Freedom2a(1a))]
07/2/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 MY
[Progressive values1b are supposed to underlie our choices2b.
There should be no contradictions, when values1b align with desire1a.
Our choices2b touch base with Schoonenberg’s use of the word “service3b”.
Some value1b must be worth serving3b.]
Schoonenberg wrote that we exercise freedom in serving either God or Satan.
06/29/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 MX
[According to the interscope:
An organizational imperative2a emerges from and situates the potential inherent in me in the context of the mirror of the world1a.
Progressives speak to our desires1a.
Progressives tell us what values must be chosen1b.
Progressive values1b are supposed to inform the subject’s desires1a.]
06/27/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 MV
Summary of text [comment] page 83
Schoonenberg wrote that we exercise freedom in serving either God or Satan.
[The claim, “I am not responsible.”, touches base with the modern definition of the word “freedom” as lack of obligations, especially impositions by family, tribe and religious cultural institutions.
The irony is that this assertion, rather than achieving a lack of obligations, merely transfers one’s obligations to institutions that declare themselves to be responsible.
How clever the Progressives can be.]