Remember, Menninger was also a Progressive.<\/p>\n
At the time of writing, he did not know that \u201csin\u201d was already being replaced by \u201cpolitical incorrectness\u201d.<\/p>\n
Consider the term that he added to the envy set: the sin of affluence<\/em>.<\/p>\n The horizontal axis becomes:<\/p>\n The crime of unequal outcomes to be punished with policies enforcing \u201cfairness of outcome\u201d(the political incorrectness of affluence(psychology of \u201cequal potential demands equal outcome\u201d))<\/p>\n \u2026 Or something like that.<\/p>\n Is the \u201csymptom of the psychology of \u2018equal potential demands equal outcome\u2019\u201d the Progressive equivalent of \u201cdisposition to covetousness\u201d?<\/p>\n Clearly, on the horizontal axis, the reasons for affluence are misdiagnosed.\u00a0 People do not become affluent because they somehow \u201ccheat\u201d others of equal potential.\u00a0 People become affluent by owning up to what they have and taking opportunities.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Remember, Menninger was also a Progressive. At the time of writing, he did not know that \u201csin\u201d was already being replaced by \u201cpolitical incorrectness\u201d. Consider the term that he added to the envy set: the sin of affluence. The horizontal axis becomes: The crime of unequal outcomes to be punished with policies enforcing \u201cfairness of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-670","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-science-of-original-sin"],"yoast_head":"\n