Summary of text [comment] pages 43 and 44
Schoonenberg noted that, according to de Chardin, “evil” arose from statistical necessity, due to the multiplicity and variety of innumerable attempts to bring “something out of Nothing”. These attempts, even for the short span of a lifetime, means that scandals – events that shock our moral sensibilities – will occur. But do not worry. The world is rising towards ever increasing unity.
[To me, it seems that de Chardin’s term “unity” stands in contrast to “multiplicity”. “Unity” puts “multiplicity” into context and “multiplicity” situates “nothingness”.
In nested form: Unity3( multiplicity2( Nothingness1))
“Unity3” brings “mulitiplicity2” into relation with “the potential inherent in Nothingness1”.
Unity3 puts multiplicity2 into context.
Multiplicity2 emerges from Nothingness1.
Multiplicity2 situates Nothingness1.
Perhaps, de Chardin imagined “unity” to be “some sort of end point in the evolution of multiplicity”.
But is that not the same as a normal context?]