The “evolution of talk” covers the evolution of the human capacity for language as well as the modes in which that capacity is expressed. Aspects are discussed in chapters 1,2 and 7 of An Archaeology of the Fall.
[Culture is the way that this takes place.
So what is the bottom line?
The concept of ‘natural attraction’, regarded from the point of view of human evolution, is not natural.
It does not encourage the male to be the female’s helper.
It does not provide a cultural motif through which the female anoints the male and puts him in charge.]
Summary of text [comment] page 71
[A brief review of male-female pair bonding is in order.
The human male evolved to be the female’s helper.
This adaptation could not take place without assurance by the female of the male’s paternity of the children.
The female evolved a hard to fake behavior that provides this crucial assurance.
She put the male in charge of the family.]
[To me, the nested forms of recognition and participation model both grace and self-destruction as actualities.
The state of grace is different from the state of self-destruction.
However, Schoonenberg pays tribute to a different contrast.
Grace (as supernatural) is different from nature (as natural).
This concern belongs to modernism. Modernism focuses on actuality and ignores normal context and possibility.
Or maybe, moderns focus on actuality in order to hide their agendas (normal contexts) and manipulations (biasing what is possible).
The contrast between grace and nature is a stand-in for the contrast between the supernatural and the natural.
Does this distinction belong to the realm of actuality?
Or, does it belong to the realms of normal context and possibility?]
[Progressives decrease the liveliness of the spontaneous order by imposing ‘fairness’ with respect to material and immaterial limitations. They act as if ‘they are able to adjust spontaneous orders to suit their organization objectives’. They act as if self-esteem is a thing or a state of things.
Normal contexts are limited, and limiting. They are tailored to fit a Progressive designation.
‘Self-esteem’ is not situated by ‘recognizing myself as an image of God’. It is a thing to be manipulated. It is a thing to be directed according to various religiousinfrasov organizational goals.
For example, in America, race and gender awareness mimics tribal affiliation. Identity-based affiliations are supposed to increase self-esteem, according the Progressive’s definition of the word ‘self-esteem’.
Progressives diminish everyone in ‘their implementations of cures for our lack of self-esteem’. Consequences do not matter. They are religiously driven to impose their cures on all society.]
Summary of text [comment] pages 67 and 68
[When ‘I recognize myself as an image of God’, I glimpse God’s Omnipotence.
Sanctifying grace is an interpellation by the Holy Spirit.
Sanctifying grace cleanses ‘my lack of self-esteem’.
‘The realization of my own self-esteem through the image of God’ inspires me to join various organizations. These institutions strive to address the material limitations of other children of God. They have an objectorganization to give. The objectorg is a gift, not a demand. The objectorg offers a trade, not a tax.
This striving grows the entire spontaneous order.
In that growth, I feel the amazing mystery of God.]
