Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 PA
[Progressives prefer forced over unforced conversion.
The material outcomes appear identical.
But the immaterial outcomes are not.]
09/18/18
Category Archives: Our current Lebenswelt is not the Lebenswelt that we evolved in
Human psychology evolved under in the social milieu of constrained complexity. Currently, humans live in unconstrained complexity. What has this done to our minds? These topics are addressed in various parts of An Archaeology of the Fall, particularly in chapters 8C and 11B.
09/17/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OZ
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Progressives cannot account for the immaterial world.
They cannot see it.
Categorical associations open the opportunity to envision how Progressives immaterially (or spiritually) gain from imposing their organizational objects.]
09/14/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OY
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[In the case of giving up smoking, the overt behavioral change of unforced conversion appears identical to the change induced by forced conversion.
Progressives do not see that there is an immaterial difference.
Why?
They are committed to a materialist ideology.
Big Government Liberalism is the Materialist Ideology that won the Cold Battle Among the Enlightenment Gods (1945-1989), otherwise known as ‘the Cold War’.
Is it no better than the material ideology that lost the war?
Satan casts out Satan.
Yet, “his” house still stands.]
08/29/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 ON
[What I want on the basis of reason2V conflicts with what used to make me happy2H.
This contradiction is contextualized by I, seat of choice3V.
Since I, seat of choice3V is attuned to reason, a true conversion may occur.
I, seat of choice3V may begin to influence my desire1H.
True conversion increases responsibility and freedom.]
08/28/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OM
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[How would true conversion work in this example?
The health claims in the mirror of the world3H are rational. They contrast with what I desire1H. Yet, they adhere to my choice2V, because value1V is rational. As a result, I can envision my not smoking3V addressing a potential value1V, even though my habit2H continues to light up.
My choice2V to light up may come from the potential of something itself. I may value a ritual halt to negative thought sequences1V.
Lighting up originally connected to a potential inherent in me1a (in the interscoping form) and still does, but not so exclusively.
I am becoming more reasonable1V.]
08/27/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OL
[If a sovereign power forbids me from smoking tobacco cigarettes, then my responsibilities and my freedom decrease.
My ‘I, seat of choice3V’ is overthrown. My ‘mirror of the world3H’ narrows.
My entire heart grows smaller.
The forced cessation of smoking constitutes a pathetic parody of responsibility and freedom.
It increases words and bondage.]
08/24/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OK
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Sovereign intervention in the markets produces forced conversions to a religioninfrasov.
The citizen’s behavior becomes more formalized and less dependent on freedom. Personal responsibility diminishes. The whole person becomes of a slave to the mirror of the world3H.]
08/23/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OJ
[For the Progressive, the potential of the mandated healthy lifestyle outweighs the social costs of forced conversion.
Why?
The costs of compliance accrue to the subjects.
The benefits of imposition accrue to the elites.
What benefit does the elite accrue?
Objectsorg emerge from and situation the possibility of righteousness.]
08/21/18
08/17/18
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 OF
[What does my heart see in the mirror of the world3H?
My heart sees the romantic view of brotherly smoking diminished.
My heart finds rational arguments against smoking tobacco products.
My heart sees smokers demonized.
Rational arguments may not be sufficient for attaining the organizational objectives of the anti-smoking lobby, even though the health argument can easily be understood. Demonization does the trick.]