So, I’m riding down the road with my sister the other day and she says: “I really wish they planted more flowers along the roads. That would be pretty.”
My sister has cooties but she loves me anyway, so I said: “Nah…you don’t want that. That would really clog up traffic and crush the American auto market.”
“Clog up traffic,” she said as she rolled her eyes. “American auto market…?”
“Well, the flowers would bring the bees, and the bees would bring the birds, and the birds would bring the cats, and the cats would bring the dogs, and pretty soon we’d have a whole bunch of Asians all over the roads in their Lexus.”
It is my keen eye for logical interrelation that makes this blog possible; a skill that I relentlessly exploit for my Never-To-Be-Kantian disinterest.
My keen eye notices that women do not really want “a guy that can make them laugh.” If that were true, Robin Williams would be the quintessential rock star and I of course would be much closer to my s a ed mo ive.
Ooppss…hang on a sec…go a reapply my pros hetic index finger.
Leprosy is such a debilitating disease.
Anyway…where was I?
Oh, yes… my ability to see those relationship thingies. I have some wonderful posters helping my keen eye spot all sorts of these inter-relatablenesses.
After all these years of saying that the pretense of Church Force is bad, and turning humans out to pasture with the horses, it has been pointed out that the source of leprosy is daring to utter such spiritual treason.
Many average readers don’t know Immanuel Kant’s contribution to the Arena of Ideas. He advocated that man’s highest and purest moral action was essential disinterest. This philosophical premise is why most people start their criticisms with some variation of “I’m an outside observer and therefore my comments carry more authority.” Western culture has been so infused with the assumption that disinterest is a purifying agent and self-interest is a corrupting agent, that we accept such comments without second thought.
Demagogues of Dictated Good love this assumption because it gives them the power to play King of the Moral Hill. These demagogues stand steepling their fingers, looking around their pious nose saying, “Why, you have self-interest. You are selfish and you cannot be moral in your life, nor can your ideas be true. I am pure because I have only interest in the barest of facts, the rawest of data: data that cannot be construed to advantage anyone.”
Demagogues are accustomed to compliant folks. So pointing out that their objectivity ISN’T really objectivity but its own brand of self-interest usually brings on the bluster and fuss and rail and accusation and recrimination.
My keen eye notices that this show of moral indignation is to cover the fact that their self-interest has been revealed. And for good reason, because saying that one does not have self-interest but in fact does…is also called lying.
And how can one play King of the Moral Hill if such an obvious lie can be pointed out with consistency?
Jack beat Jill up the hill
To fetch a Miter and Simar
Jack fell down and broke his stigmata
And Jill must come groveling after
What do the demagogues of dictated good do when called to account for lying?
I notice they bluster and rage and foment about indwelling sin, and pervasive depravity. “Why, how dare you say we are wrong…” “We are all sinners….” “We all know the limitations of being human…” “We may have done some bad things, but the WAY you talk about it is more wrong….” “Where is your brotherly love…?” Since we are all such lowly sinners full of “indwelling sin,” pointing out moral failing is…uh… unhelpful at best and sinful spiritual treason at worst.
Dang it! Pros he ic again…Now I go a clean up the crumbs. Uno mommen o.
Boy, that vacuum is noisy.
I was talking about…ahhh…yes, those relationship thingies. Okay…Moral Relativism via “indwelling sin.”
So… let’s see. A blog with snarky comments that says tyrants basing their Church polity on lying, and manipulation, and fear, and theoretical guilt, and collectivism is bad. However, tyrants actually PRODUCING destruction are not so bad–just the natural course of sinners in this world, so just forgive and forget.
The sense of proportion is what again?
- A handful of snark on the right hand and Destroyers wrecking spiritual and physical carnage on the left.
- Satirical Blog bad. Destroyers mere lowly sinners in need of grace, bad in theory but not in practice.
- Sarcastic comments a more serious moral failing than a church covering up a recidivistic child molester’s conduct, or priests who molest little boys.
This, in my never-to-be-Kantian disinterest, is moral relativism on parade. This is the destruction of proportion, and values, and judgment. This is the reduction of human conduct to its lowest common denominator. Its function is to cloud, and disguise, and justify any action the Demagogues of Dictated Good want to perpetrate.
Dear Extraordinary Spiritual Tyranny reader, here is the relationship thingy: the source of moral relativism grows directly from the soil of “indwelling sin,” and “pervasive depravity.”
Mark the source well, dear extraordinary reader. You will see this justification advocated relentlessly in the days to come to cover a multitude of tyranny.