[I, seat of choice3V, parallels thinkgroup3V and thinkdivine3V.
My choice2V and something (revealing desire)2H parallels sinful and virtuous acts2.
Something1V parallels consciencespecified1V.
Thought experiment3H parallels lawessential3H.
Me1H parallels dispositions1H.]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[The thought experiment where ‘I choose something’ is visualized as an intersection in a previous blog.
I can draw parallels to the intersection that comprises the message underlying the word ‘religion’.]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Now, allow me to consider the intersection.
Is the intersection more convenient for exploring Schoonenberg’s comments on freedom?
I think so.
If these two nested forms intersected, two permutations are possible.
This is the one I select:
The content level becomes the horizontal (not vertical) axis.
The situation becomes the vertical axis.]
[Look at the interscoping nested form.
Where does the collective enter into the picture?
It does through the thought experiment3a.]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Consider the idea of stealing apples.
How about voting for a sovereign who promises take apples from others and giving them to me?
What if I vote to take wealth from others but not myself.
How is that different from theft?
Here is a choice (a vote, expressing a value) that virtually situates something (a promise, expressing a desire to get something for nothing).]
[Of course, canning applesauce is not sinful, but you, dear reader, may conjure more lurid examples.]
