Your heart and agenda draw my applause and support. However, I chafe at the absence of aspects of theology that are missing in the conversation.
Unfortunately, the Neo Scholastics took the church off the reservation into quasi materialism, the slippery slope built by the realism/ materialism of Aristotle. The manner in which the Patristic Tradition was abandoned and replaced with Trad views of Scholasticism caused harm that lingers.
Benedict XVI did much to repair divergence from valid theology but he was pushed aside before he could complete his work. In essence, he took us back to the early theologians, such as Origen and Augustine, and their marriage of philosophical Idealism (Neo Platonism) with Christianity.
It is only in this marriage that we arrive at a philosophy/theology that can combat the impending materialistic ruin. Likewise, a better understanding of what later became called Gnosticism broadens the discussion of Christian Reality.
Without a very deep understanding of soul / spirit / body, there is very little hope of combatting the Marxist Materialism that drives the evils you point out. A robust theology cleared of errors that have accumulated is needed to make your conversation impinge sufficiently to execute a turnaround.
“A strong and determined minority” Let us open up our imagination as to what this could turn out to be.
Imagine society as being run by individuals, wherein each finds their place. To rise and meet power, one must escalate to the individual. I will characterize this escalation as intimacy, and even by degree. I'll use it as a multiplier. Another multiplier I'll use is the number of occurrences. Two people rising to intimacy to share a common concern will be the basic unit, and there are the two multipliers - this could happen both intimately and millions of times at a time. This could all bubble up into what the people would organically do. It could become an organized national movement.
In relation to pre-modern, modern man is arranged differently. We went from local, mostly rural, to not knowing people where we reside, but branching out into thousands of infospheres online. The intimacy multiplier appears to be notably affected. If it can't get off the ground with the other multiplier, that being how many intimate sharing occurrences there are, then this activity won't bubble up, such as to manifest as a national movement.
The late 18th Century is far different than today. I'd like smart people to get the chance to seriously consider the difference. I applied 18th Century tactics to modern problems, and made a substack for talking about it. This includes applying "pre-modern" solutions. Here's an overview, Cheers:
Thank you Dr. Kheriaty for more important education we all need to hear.
Very good, but too short.
Enjoyed the discussion. Thank you.
Always enjoy listening to Dr. Kheriaty! So smart, informed, balanced, logical, ethical, etc. etc. etc.
Your heart and agenda draw my applause and support. However, I chafe at the absence of aspects of theology that are missing in the conversation.
Unfortunately, the Neo Scholastics took the church off the reservation into quasi materialism, the slippery slope built by the realism/ materialism of Aristotle. The manner in which the Patristic Tradition was abandoned and replaced with Trad views of Scholasticism caused harm that lingers.
Benedict XVI did much to repair divergence from valid theology but he was pushed aside before he could complete his work. In essence, he took us back to the early theologians, such as Origen and Augustine, and their marriage of philosophical Idealism (Neo Platonism) with Christianity.
It is only in this marriage that we arrive at a philosophy/theology that can combat the impending materialistic ruin. Likewise, a better understanding of what later became called Gnosticism broadens the discussion of Christian Reality.
Without a very deep understanding of soul / spirit / body, there is very little hope of combatting the Marxist Materialism that drives the evils you point out. A robust theology cleared of errors that have accumulated is needed to make your conversation impinge sufficiently to execute a turnaround.
“A strong and determined minority” Let us open up our imagination as to what this could turn out to be.
Imagine society as being run by individuals, wherein each finds their place. To rise and meet power, one must escalate to the individual. I will characterize this escalation as intimacy, and even by degree. I'll use it as a multiplier. Another multiplier I'll use is the number of occurrences. Two people rising to intimacy to share a common concern will be the basic unit, and there are the two multipliers - this could happen both intimately and millions of times at a time. This could all bubble up into what the people would organically do. It could become an organized national movement.
In relation to pre-modern, modern man is arranged differently. We went from local, mostly rural, to not knowing people where we reside, but branching out into thousands of infospheres online. The intimacy multiplier appears to be notably affected. If it can't get off the ground with the other multiplier, that being how many intimate sharing occurrences there are, then this activity won't bubble up, such as to manifest as a national movement.
The late 18th Century is far different than today. I'd like smart people to get the chance to seriously consider the difference. I applied 18th Century tactics to modern problems, and made a substack for talking about it. This includes applying "pre-modern" solutions. Here's an overview, Cheers:
https://markgmeyers.substack.com/p/now-and-for-the-future