0063 What is the catch?

Alternate legal theories_2c cannot endure in the absence of the original truth of justice_1c.  There are two types of immoral actors.  The practitioners of concupiscence_2b, like crooked lawyers, struggle with self-justification_1c.  The self-justified_2c, like opportunistic legal theorists, strain to defy right reason and divine law_1c.  They offer better alternatives_2c.  They_3coffer them_2c in droves.  A multitude of alternatives_2c swarm with betterness.

Kanzelberger writes, “Purposeful evil is not a matter of ignoring the moral context of courses of action, but a semiotic disorder involving… a fictive construction… that functions as… an imagined future.”

0064 You mean, like that approaching cloud of legal locusts?

Imagine a world where the rule of reason_2c and the divine laws_1c are partially, then totally, eclipsed by a swarm of organizational objectives_2c, each declaring its own righteousness_1c, each supported by its own theoretical imperatives_1c and each relying on the power of the state to enforce its dictates.

Imagine a world where certain words_1a are made flesh_2a, and this winged flesh_2a fills the air with what is happening_3a, so that all things and events_2a actualize theory-distorted subjectivities_1a.  

Imagine a world where our phantasms_2b are not grounded in truth, but in the projection of meaning_2b into once truth-filled speech-alone words_2a.

0065 Surely, we have eaten from the tree of the knowledge of good an evil.

Like locusts.

There will be hell to pay.