[There is an ontological split in the moral order. This split leads to “tension”. “Gravity” relates to this “tension”.
The tension contains a polarity with respect to knowledge. On one hand, there is universal knowledge, immaterial, tautological, honed by both natural and cultural evolution, and revealed in freak moments of divine what-if-ness. On the other hand, there is sensual knowledge, carnal, ambiguous, stimulated by natural and cultural events, and habituated in freak moments of “wow that felt good” or “wow that felt bad”.
Now, step back. Does the term “tension” sound similar to the “tension” between “objective” and “subjective” knowledge? Even more, does “subjective’ knowledge become “objective” knowledge when one steps back?
Sensual knowledge is fragmentary. Universal knowledge is unitary. Sensual knowledge is subjective. Universal knowledge is objective.
[To me, Schoonenberg started with personal decision (which I associate with consciencespecified). He then noted a tension relating to sensual knowledge (which I associate to dispositions, which is not in the moral order) and universal knowledge (which I associate to thinkdivine_or_group, which is in the moral order).
Schoonenberg highlighted three of the elements of the intersecting nested form. Let us see how it plays out.]