Summary of text [comment] page 42
Development is key to understanding the difference between moral and natural evil. Sin always entails a certain amount of immaturity, “a failure to grow”.
In addition, humans needs conversion.
These features of moral evil; immaturity and “need for conversion” are not features of natural evil.
[How to formulate this in terms of moral evilmetaphysical and moral evilphysical?
Immaturity might apply to the firstness of moral evilphysical.
Moral evilphysical2(1): __3( human acts create situation2( moral evil proceeds –- from the – immature – person1 …)
___3( actus hominis2( passio hominem1)
“The need for conversion” might apply to the thirdness of moral evilmetaphysical.
Moral evilmetaphysical3(2): … determines “subject1” as a person3 – in need of conversion – & determines status of subject(3)( limitations under the situation2 ( __1 )
malum hominis3( actus et potenia hominis2( ___1 )
I conclude that immaturity and the need for conversion go together in the same fashion as metaphysical and physical evil.
I would label these features of the nested form “intentionality”. Both immaturity and the need to conversion pertain to intentionality, one as firstness and the other as thirdness.]