Fate (path dependence, physics, chemistry) subsumes every effort to command it.
1 Like
Respectfully, I don’t think you have ever actually defined what your society is
I know it does. It’s wrong. Completely wrong.
And the wheel keeps turning.
1 Like
Hell of a post
1 Like
What is wrong about the assertion that the Enlightenment, and modernism, are the secularization of Christian values?
This is a fairly benign, and widely understood, conclusion.
2 Likes
I don’t disagree except with your use of “past”. All change is not progress. All “past” is not bad.
Fundamentals and principles.
More drivel.
‘Progress’ is a specifically Christian ideation of time.
I think you are using that word to mean ‘I don’t understand’.
To do what?
Other than scale, what’s the difference?
Aside from this is my point, the first perspective to self-identify as “conservative” was a reaction to Lockean “liberalism”.
Without common defintions, we’re all just talking past each other.
1 Like
Oh no, I understand completely what you are claiming.
Oh horse feathers.
This isn’t a claim. This is a widely taught canon of Western civilization.
It’s horse ■■■■ .
Where did you get that?
We are never going to agree on definitions.
I get that you reject it, for reasons, but you are wrong. Erasmus was clear, Bacon even clearer, and everything since, from Spinoza through to Rawls, liberal democracy and liberal capitalism, is the attempt to improve the human condition on explicitly Christian terms, bound to an exclusively Christian conception of progressive time.
2 Likes
To be your own person as you define it.
Scale is everything in this context.
The problem (in my lib/progressive/whatever nick name you choose) is that a person only imagines himself to be an individual. Walden is a fantasy.
