Hobbes vs. Rousseau on Man and the State

[@PrejoSunny]

An avid viewer and a catholic from india. These lectures are opening new avenues for my knowledge on philosophy and belief.

[@chissstardestroyer]

While I appreciate your input, as your fellow follower of, as we were known in our earliest times of Church history: "Follower of the Way"; I'd be curious as to your views on this: it is natural that man, if free to pursue wholesomeness without any interference from any and all authorities will naturally pursue living virtuously, but it is the mere *existence* of any so-called "superiors" that makes man have to devote all of his resources to fighting against them until the entire nature of power in society is dead forever, only to enable us men to pursue character and wholesomeness without any interference from any "higher power" nonsense. This's not pride, but humility, for only the lowest common denominator of being can possibly be permitted to remain in existence- as anything above it is automatically going to do it harm, whether it wants to or not. Tis its nature of the superior to do harm to the inferior, so for the inferior to be safe to pursue wholesomeness, it must completely eradicate the superior without gaining any superiority at all., but simply through sheer violence, brutality, abuse, and yes, the cold-blooded mass-murder of any and all superiors anywhere, or so subjugate them to the point that they cannot possibly think of oppression, for only when equality is the maximum anybody at all can possibly dream of can man be safe to behave himself without assault from without. And the tyrant within is the easiest to beat of them all: you can elect to starve him of his goals of dignity and position- even by simply negating all positions of rank, power, priveleadge, and the like- or you can overwhelm him and suffocate him, or you can simply (and this's the best solution, as it is the most permanent) slaughter him in cold blood as the egotistical aristocrat/monarch he is- and with that be done with it forever... best in all humility if it obliterates one's will to live for any time longer in that case: as it is by far the most thorough demise of arrogance and the idiocity of all pride. Simply put: tis far better the humility that through bringing one to hate God brings one to Hell for all eternity than the indulgence of pride that would lead one to coexisting with God and thus indulge in spiritual pride and merit mandatory self-murder for being contaminated by egotism.

[@arunjetli7909]

and how do they compare to evidence based Indic epistemology ?

[@arunjetli7909]

what new avenues?

[@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp]

@@chissstardestroyer Dearest, The God you have presented is the fruit of human imagination, Such were the gods of Greece, made in the image and likeness of man. They were capricious, vengeful, jealous… To use your language, they weren't just slightly proud, they were very proud. For this reason - according to Saint Paul - these gods corresponded to demons. The face of God that emerges from the Gospel, which is none other than the face of Christ who is God-made-man, that is, the face of God who has made himself visible, is completely different from the one you present. He is not a God who has a philosophy of life of his own. God "is the life". He is the One who possesses it in his own right and communicates it. Jesus said "I am the life" (Jn 14:6) and also said "I have come that they may have life and have it in abundance (Jn 10:10). There is no other source of life other than that of God. There is no other Creator other than God. The gods of Greece were not creators of man. But neither did they constitute the meaning of human life, the goal of human existence. God has no philosophy of life. As he himself is life, he has it on his own and communicates it to everyone and no one exists if he has not received existence from him ("everything was made through him and without him nothing was made of what exists" Jn 1:3), so God is the truth. There is no other next to him. God is light, which is to say: it is the truth. Jesus said: "I am the light of the world" (Jn 8:12). It is the source of all light: "Every good gift and every perfect gift comes from above and comes from the Father of light, in whom there is no variation or shadow of change" (James 1:17). Our relationship with God is not a relationship comparable to that of an employee with his boss, or, just to mention completely, oil with water (as it happens in a pharisaic posture) or water with wine (as usually happens in the postmodern pantheistic thought of becoming - Materialism or French Enlightenment, hard totalitarianism- or thought of being -. Idealism or German soft totalitarianism reformists winning European way). But it is like that of a ray of light with its light source. Like that of light with air. A ray does not exist by itself. It exists only because the sun gives it light. If an obstacle is placed between the ray and the light, the ray disappears. And he disappears not because the sun condemns him not to exist, but because an obstacle (the earth) has prevented the sun from continuing to pour life into him. As the sun is everything for the ray that emanates from him, so God is everything for us, who receive from him instant by instant existence, energy, and life. There is no other source of good from which we can draw except God. There is no other creator. God does not cast anyone to hell. He didn't create hell. The demons created him, and our pride creates him. Nor He wants it. Hell was created by the rebel angels themselves, namely the demons. This is how I created it: self-excluding from God, from Light, from life, from love. Similarly, men prepare for hell by excluding themselves from God, from Light, from life, and from love. God does not force anyone to worship him. He doesn't need our adoration. If that were the case, he wouldn't even be God. God is love (1 Jn 4:8). And it offers itself as a source of communion, of love, and of full love. Feel with what discretion God invites to communion with Himself: “Behold I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door for me, I will come to him and dine with him, and he with me" (Rev 3:20). There is no other supper than this one because it is the source of all suppers. Anyone who does not accept the invitation remains poor, indeed with nothing. Hell is exactly this stuff. God is the One who incessantly tells us that we need everything, even the air to breathe: "I am the Lord, your God, who brought you up from the land of Egypt: "Open your mouth, I want to fill it ”(Ps 81:11). Regarding the sin of pride, you certainly deserve a point because, beyond the more well-known expressions related to arrogance and bragging, it is a very subtle sin, because it mixes with the accomplishment of good. In everything we find reasons to be pleased with ourselves and with men. Let us not do wrong then in every confession to say: I have not always been in the presence of the Lord and I have been vainly pleased with myself. I assure you of a prayer today in front of the transient effigy of Our Lady of Fatima ("Madonna pellegrina") in Venice, one of the seven that travel around the world, and in front of the Eucharist, so that you may know the true face of God, that of Love, of the One who is knocking at your door to bring the Supper that he has prepared for you, of the One who gently says to you: "open your mouth, I want to fill it". I wish you all the best.

[@chissstardestroyer]

@@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp I will not try to control you; I do not even *desire* to, but I sure didn't get anything from the greek pagans about god; rather I got as my sole source Catholic teachings, and His teachings of how God is conveyed to the people is where His word teaches man to hate God- and all superiors at all. Furthermore: the following line is complete and utter nonsense: "There is no supper, as it is the source of all suppers"; what nonsense at best! especially as supper is merely a dinner, a large meal, nothing but... dinner is merely a meal, nothing less, more, or different. So the whole premise of the bible is complete and utter nonsense, as His word completely contradicts objective reallity, which is subordinating oneself to *material existence*- and having any sort of mindset of immortality of even the soul is rooted in hubris in the extreme; same with any and all of the gospels' teachings: they are rooted in pride, and thus the followers need to die, and *especially* all superiors in the meantime!

[@borneandayak6725]

God bless to all of us who watching this video.

[@tracykirchhoffer1708]

Dr Peter Kreeft, you are quite brilliant as you convey key complex ideas of philosophers with such crisp clarity. What a gift you have and are for all who hear you. God Bless you and your work. Thank you.

[@bachamadu2076]

Thus far Dr. Kreeft's teaching has been on two antithetical school of thoughts but with these two, if i'm not totality wrong, they both are anti-Christian---one radical than the other, to be sure. And yet, we can't wait for Dr. Kreeft's explication.....wonderful, thoughtful, and intellectually engaging as always.

[@gethimrock]

Yes both are Enlightenment anti-Christian thinkers. Dr Kreeft has covered non Christians arguing before. They honestly represent the Democrats (Hobbs) and the Republicans (Rosseau) right now and both are wrong

[@ValsVersion]

They are also counter to our political theory and resulting government systems and Constitutional Republic. Think Rousseau and think the bloody French Revolution. Think Hobbes and think once the people give the Ruler power, they have no right to rebel. His social contract went like this , the people agreed among themselves to “lay down” their natural rights of equality and freedom to give absolute power to a sovereign. Think about the absolute. Think China and Russia.

[@oliverclark5604]

to bachamadu, yes, uncontrollable: "... oscillation between persistent forms of regressive 'familyism' on the one hand and an affirmation of radical individualism on the other that, in destroying the family reverses the progress of humanisation, heedless of the long-term consequences of so doing." (warning in the address of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia as delegate of Pope Francis as President of his Council for the Family at the UNO on the UNO "The International Day of the Family", 15 May 2014).

[@Impaled_Onion-thatsmine]

Yeah they control everything somehow after a period of democratic rule then he just offed himself leave the state on

[@jeffsmith1798]

One of the paradoxes of freedom is that it vanishes when absolute.

[@oliverclark5604]

to jeffsmith, It does not vanish not when it is in one's exercise of an absolute power of consecrated marriage, either celibate or male female, on the reference point of the two immediately successive marriages of Mary recorded at Lk 1:38 celibate vowed to man in Christ and Mt 1: 24 male female with St Joseph vowed to God of one's simultaneous authorisations of one's ensuring one's procreation process role gift as a helper of one's family within one's family and insuring one's need of union of one's identity with the identities of one's fellow family members.

[@ValsVersion]

I have not heard anyone explain this since college!!! Thank you! No one is taught this anymore and we are running headlong towards a Rousseauian nightmare

[@oliverclark5604]

Both and between Rousseauian and Hobbsean nightmares. Bishop Robert Barron's Word on Fire suffers an uncontrollable: "... oscillation between persistent forms of regressive 'familyism on the one hand and an affirmation of radical individualism on the other that, in destroying the family reverses the progress of humanisation, heedless of the long-term consequences of so doing." (Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, 15 May 2014, in his warning address as Pope Francis' delegate as President of Pope Francis' Council for the Family at the UNO on the UNO "The International Day of the Family").

[@ValsVersion]

I studied philosophy and political theory. I wish they would teach this. It was also taught in western civ honors. Spread the word.

[@faysal8597]

I’m Muslim & I love this channel. Superb lecture !!

[@iqgustavo]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:53 🏛️ Totalitarianism is a political philosophy where the ruler's will holds power, not objective law; it's subjective human will controlling all. 02:13 🌐 Hobbes and Rousseau represent different forms of totalitarianism: Hobbes advocates a hard totalitarianism based on fear, while Rousseau advocates a soft democratic totalitarianism based on free consent. 03:25 🏛️ Democracy and totalitarianism aren't contradictory; democracy answers the question of where public political authority lies, while totalitarianism answers how much authority it holds over human lives. 04:31 🗽 Advocates of soft totalitarianism, like Rousseau, emphasize freedom, but their focus on subjective will and emotions can lead to invisible, internal chains that restrict true freedom. 06:23 🔒 The relationship between freedom and power isn't straightforward; freedom can be dangerous, and both need careful consideration. Freedom shouldn't be equated with absolute good. 08:53 🤖 Hobbes denies the existence of spiritual elements and claims humans are driven by material forces. He advocates a hard totalitarianism rooted in fear and force. 10:56 ❓ The nature of Hobbes' belief in God is unclear, but his materialism extends across his philosophy, denying spiritual aspects, free will, and the soul. 14:35 🔀 Hobbes and Rousseau share an assumption of contrasting the state of nature with civil society, where both see politics as the savior or source of misery. 16:14 📜 Both Hobbes and Rousseau's philosophies prioritize political correctness and conformity, with Hobbes targeting the Roman Catholic Church and Rousseau emphasizing feeling and emotion. 18:48 🌐 Both Hobbes and Rousseau ignore the principles of the common good and subsidiarity, important in Catholic social and political morality, leading to extreme individualism or collectivism. 21:01 🛐 Both philosophers exemplify the death of God and the resulting abolition of human nature; their contrasting ideas contribute to totalitarianism's rise and societal changes. 23:19 👥 The absence of key Catholic principles contributes to both philosophers' inadequate treatment of the relationship between the individual and the collective. 26:32 🔄 The philosophical ideas of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Rousseau, Hobbes, and Marx raise the question of the direction humanity is headed in, and the emergence of new ideologies and leaders. Made with HARPA AI

[@ganpati.143-]

💎 ❤

[@freda7961]

Please, it would be great if there is a subtitle/caption, that’s not just auto-generated. As there appears to be a script being read, this would be easy to do. At any rate, big thanks for the lecture, Dr. Kreeft. Please do more.

[@RichardIjaz-hv8gn]

Thank you for sharing your wisdom. Your lectures make me think

[@oliverclark5604]

'Do-ing' making you 'think" and/or 'be-ing' having faith as in the keeping/allowing of their inseparability and qualitative equality in uncertainty of belief, then true belief.

[@elizabethhobson7939]

I thoroughly appreciate this. Dr Kreeft delivered such a useful mountain top view of the subject, and with such charm. I am just gearing up to write an essay comparing Hobbes and Rousseau, and absolute rule, and this presentation has helped me to centre my thinking (which was otherwise based on disconnected excerpts) and invigorate my enthusiasm for what I’m doing. One quick point though: I do dispute the suggestion that libertarians are pro-abortion as a rule. Abortion is clearly an affront to the non-aggression principle that is widely accepted by libertarians, and ultimately people cannot live free if they are dead! Ron Paul is a particularly excellent source of pro-life argumentation from a libertarian perspective.

[@michaelsjourney777]

brilliant brilliant brilliant. thank you !!

[@cyrusparvin6819]

I like the lecture but found the music and sound of water distracting. Perhaps I'm only speaking for myself but I do not think that the people who choose to listen to these topics need their mood influenced.

[@MartinDrummond-x6q]

What is the sonic wallpaper supposed to add?

[@Neworldisordered]

I’m Homo sapien (w bit of neanderthalensis) & I love this channel. Superb lecture !!

[@keenanweind1780]

It was Lord Acton who said that "Power tends to corrupt..."

[@arunjetli7909]

This time the Prof makes sense as he clarifies consciousness

[@nathanngumi8467]

Word. Very engaging episode!

[@chissstardestroyer]

Regarding the novel "Brave New World" by far the best works of fiction are also works of prophesy: cautionary tales/warnings of what we'd do to ourselves if we persist on the current course.

[@oliverclark5604]

to chisstar..., "do" as quantity of action is not consequence of "persist" as quality of being.

[@chissstardestroyer]

@@oliverclark5604 That's not even close to valid.

[@daniellamunoz8894]

Another glaring flaw with contractualists I would gloss over as a student was the simple truth that there was no such thing as a "state of nature" as either Hobbes, Rousseau or Locke conceptualised, at best we could argue that Adam and Eve lived in the true state of nature in the garden and it appears it was nothing like any contractualist thought of. Their political philosophy depends entirely on the supposition of those state of natures and what follows are brilliant works of fiction, but fiction nonetheless.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@arisnotheles but not of "setting rule and measure ... for the other virtues [as] guide[d by] prudence" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994, n.1806). "rule" of progress in union of identity and "measure" of process of procreation role gifts.

[@danrocky2553]

These are the best 🎉❤

[@johnmartin4650]

Thank you Mr K…..another great presentation…..God bless Mr K

[@dynamic9016]

Thanks..

[@BrianBenson-rc9mu]

Thanks for this video. A good way to continue searching for the truth is reading "Work of Human Hands" by Fr. Anthony Cekada.

[@Louis.R]

CORRECTION: "power corrupts... etc" at 6:00 is from Lord Acton, not Edmund Burke

[@oliverclark5604]

to Louis.R, but not absolute power exercised by family members and their helpers in covenant, non-presumed reciprocity joined in consecrated marriages, either male female vowed to God or celibate vowed to man in Christ, on the reference point of the two consecrated marriages of Mary recorded at Lk 1:38 and Mt 1:24, of their simultaneous authorisations by these family members of their ensuring their procreation role process gift and their insuring their need of progress in union of their identities with the identities of others in their families.

[@Louis.R]

@@oliverclark5604 be careful not to confuse power with authority

[@oliverclark5604]

@@Louis.RThanks. Should it be: "... in [not "of"] their insuring their need ..."? Hence does it correctly read '... authorisation ... of their ensuring ... and authorisation in their insuring as simultaneous authorisations ...'

[@antoniomoyal]

Brilliant as alwsys

[@ThomasMusings]

Some great zingers here!

[@kithsirinonis7900]

this shows that we are basic units of making a great nation buy our small input in the true potential, i agree socrates and Jesus was the trend makers for todays world in a positive way.

[@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp]

Carl Schmitt has illustrated, perhaps in an unsurpassed way, the legal-political perspective of Thomas Hobbes and how it is the basis of every form of "legal positivism". Hobbes' Leviathan is God, man, animal, and machine at the same time. The initial error of modern political thought, was to entrust the same foundations of the political community to the consensus agreement. This is exactly what Hobbes did, according to the interpretation given by Schmitt: “This pact does not concern an already given community, created by God, nor a pre-existing natural order; rather the State - as an order and as a collectivity - is the result of the human intellect and of the human creative capacity, and derives its origin only from the pact”. It should be noted that according to Hobbes pacts could also be made in the state of nature, but they would have been anarchic social pacts, while the Leviathan originates beyond these pacts, it is not constituted through the agreement, but beyond it and therefore it is something incomparably superior. For this superiority, the Leviathan is like a God on earth, given its functional artificiality it is a machine, and since Descartes had said that man is an "intellect in a machine", Hobbes' Leviathan is the great man who coincides with the big machine. This leads to state neutrality with regard to content. If the State is "magnum artificium," then it is a technical-neutral instrument whose value lies in being a good machine "independent of any content of political ends or beliefs, and acquires neutrality with respect to the values and truth proper to one technical tool". Schmitt rightly distinguishes between "tolerance" and "neutralization": in the former, the state tolerates evil because it feels invested by the good, but in the latter, the state is neutral with respect to both good and evil. In neutrality, "auctoritas" and "potestas" coincide. Isn't it true that the current laws against life presuppose this conception of power and law? Even today we are faced with a "neutral" state and a machine that is as effective as it is formal and purely procedural. However, one aspect must not escape Schmitt's analysis of the Leviathan. Men are forced to invent the Leviathan given the desperate situation in which they find themselves in the state of nature. Only a desperate man can place himself in the hands of a power that is God, man, animal, and machine. Hobbes's modern political and juridical thought was born not only from the desperation of seventeenth-century man in the face of religious wars, but from the desperation of man alone and naked in the state of nature, the man so desperate to be able to enjoy peace to the point to entrust its implementation not to a "Defensor pacis," as the work of Marsilio from Padua, still sounded in the fourteenth century, who also began this long process of "reductio ad unum" by the State, but to a "Creator pacis," which precisely the Leviathan is. That man is desperate, given that the God-State that guarantees him peace cannot guarantee him hope. With the State-machine of Hobbes the "neutrality" is lucidly and tragically founded, according to which the "State has its own order within itself and not outside itself". It can demand unconditional obedience and if today the State does not allow conscientious objection - as I recalled at the beginning - it is because the Leviathan cannot admit a "right of resistance", of which conscientious objection is nevertheless an expression.

[@oliverclark5604]

to Paolo Gasparini, you state: "The initial error of modern political thought, was to entrust the same foundations of the political community to the consensus agreement." How do you view the statement in Vatican Council 2, "Declaration on Christian Education", GE, 1965, 3: "... those others to whom the parents entrust some share in their duty to educate ..."? How and why is the word "entrust' used deceitfully or in error in both these statements?

[@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp]

@@oliverclark5604 Thank you for the question. A profound question indeed. To educate, it is necessary to understand our time well. In my opinion, the devil is playing on two tables in the world today. I will leave aside the Russian world, which involves political messianism aiming to replace the Third Rome with the First, Orthodoxy with Catholicism, and ethnic nationalism that destroys nations under the pretext of a "messianic," neo-Constantinian role of Russia towards the West, which has fallen into slavery to the sexual revolution and atheism. The second table where Satan is playing is the West, dominated by "gay nihilism" (Augusto del Noce), which has now become the prevailing thought in the media, governments, education, biomedicine, business, and law. To confirm the diagnosis I have just formulated, I turn to an intervention that I translate from Italian by Arnaud de Lassus, presented at the European Congress "For Life" held in Rome back in April 1980. It was based on a shocking book published in France the previous year, written by a Freemason doctor named Pierre Simon (the name was evidently chosen intentionally to go from the Gospel to paganism, from Peter to Simon). The book was withdrawn from circulation shortly afterward, after about a year. This character is the paradigm that helps us understand the enthymeme, the hidden thought that lies deeply in the minds of those in power even today, in politics, in the judicial courts, in schools, and in Big Tech. It is a thought that is Hegelian, pantheistic, Gnostic, and anti-Christian, much like the underlying thought of the "Russkiy Mir." Today, more than ever, it is essential to remind Catholics and all people of goodwill of the urgent and imperative duty to combat the revolutionary barbarism we have encountered with the sexual revolution of the '60s, the years of the Second Vatican Council and Humanae Vitae, before it irreparably subverts the natural characteristics of the human person. We already sense this with the transhumanist movement and the gender propaganda (whose beginnings can undoubtedly be traced back to the Pill, where sex is essentially experienced and understood in a homosexual way - Elisabeth Anscombe - and whose final outcome is the utopia of immortality: see the recent article at the following link [link provided]). Returning to the book "De la vie avant toute chose," it contains a chilling description, given through the words of an unquestionably authoritative figure in French Freemasonry, a former Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of France, about the new model of society that the Masonic sect is preparing for those nations and international organizations that have fallen under its harmful influence. The function of contraception, abortion, and everything that constitutes the sexual revolution in this subversive itinerary aims to reduce marriage to a "social convenience," to free the family "from ties of blood" in order to build the "new society" without family, fathers, mothers, where the State would take care of the few children still brought into the world. I earnestly urge the Christian community and Christian parents to preserve their children from an aberrant and shameful future, the foul stench of which we are already beginning to taste through the animalistic and Gnostic view of life and "education," even through public proclamations of truth. The term "crusade" is not too strong to designate the vigorously pursued enterprise that led France into contraception and abortion. From 1950 to 1980, Pierre Simon played a leading role in this crusade, and he characterized its success in these terms: "In a few millennia, when the body of a woman is exhumed, the spiral will be the sign of our era: it does not putrefy." Who is Pierre Simon? He writes, "My mother had a deep faith that contrasted with my father's vigorous atheism. Thus, in me, these two currents met: Judaism and rationalism, tradition, and free thought. I measure the power of this fundamental alliance. My entrance into Freemasonry will one day be a way to assume its legacy." Pierre Simon has a triple career: professional (as a doctor), Masonic, and political. Pierre Simon is twice the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of France, and his Masonic affiliation seems so significant to him that he does not hesitate to write: "My true being is no longer my body but my lodge." "Freemasonry is my way of understanding things." Throughout Pierre Simon's journey, an inspiring thought emerges, which implies a conception of life, human nature, good and evil, science, and religion; in short, a particular worldview. Referring to a Masonic order and tradition, Pierre Simon observes the conflict between two worldviews: one scientific-Masonic (which he seeks to triumph) and the other of Christian inspiration, which science would render outdated: "The controversy surrounding the Veil law [on abortion] is the clash between two worlds." "The solutions provided by traditional morality can no longer satisfy us. They rest on a sacralization of the principle of life, which is superstitious in essence and fetishistic in development." And it is science that accelerates the transition from obscurantism (Christian) to progress (Masonic): "This end of the century has opened a revolution: the irruption of metaphysics into physics, thanks to the electron microscope." "The so-called 'painless' childbirth, contraception, abortion, and new avenues of research [...] change both beings and the nature of their relationships, and thus these innovations have been accompanied by upheavals of values, cultures, and entire societies." "The conflict between contraception and the socio-religious values of the past is inevitable." "Liberating contraception has broken down the walls of traditional fate. Its disappearance opens a free field in which the new morality must be established, the one in which, as in initiatory research, man reaches his origins in his brain, body, and heart." Pierre Simon refers to a radical change, new conceptions of life, nature, morality, and family: "The third function of contraception is the modulation of the new family model." "The institutionalized regulation of births leads to a mutation of morality." "It was certainly about defining a new sexuality, the creation, at the limit, of a new human nature, and a new conception of life. We will discover that nature, life, are more than ever a human production." Where does this theory that defines life as a relationship come from? Pierre Simon says he borrowed it from Jesuits: "At this point, a new convergence with the Church takes place, this time not with the official Church, but with teams of Catholic theologians, doctors, biologists, and researchers. Father Bruno Ribes was then animating the Jesuit magazine 'Etudes.' We owe him numerous fundamental reflections on life." The quality of life is more important than life itself: "Regarding the fundamental problem, it is an option between a philosophy of life and a philosophy of the person. Is life the supreme value, or can it be compared with other values: freedom (for the mother), quality of life (for the unborn child)? [...] Modern civilization, as it is in a condition - and increasingly will be - to control the biological process, will refer less to the physical fact of life than to the human person."

[@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp]

"Just as in the case of abortion, we must turn to the definition of life, as mentioned at the beginning of this work. This definition ultimately rests on the possibility of surpassing the limits of the primitive world to achieve the full development of its potential. Let's face it: does a Mongoloid fit into this framework?" "To me, the issue of life must be illuminated through integration into the human community." Life, "no longer a gift from God but a material to be managed." "Life, the daughter of Time, is in perfect harmony with the findings of a science that prioritizes notions of structure, organization, and system in physics, biology, and sociology, making form a more fundamental reality than matter. Life is linked and intertwined with Time, the Architect of the Universe." Time, the "Great Worker of Nature, creator of the DNA molecule and all things," will also be deified. "Now society surpasses transcendence. Consciousness arises from its collective being." "[Men] will embark on the same path illuminated by a single transcendence: social transcendence." In this religion of Time, Life, and Society, sexuality will be sacred: "By restoring sexuality to its relational, anthropological, and ethnological dimensions, we recognize its sacred character and re-sanctify it in the cosmic sense." "The questioning of consumer society and the increase in productivity will lead to a significant reduction in working hours." Sexuality and eroticism require free time, and this time will be granted to everyone. Happiness will be without Marx and without Jesus; marriage will become a social convenience. Its problem: not to encroach on sexual life. The lover will succeed the parent. This is the society project towards which liberal democracies are leading us. "I visited clinics in the United States where women undergo intrauterine aspiration every twenty-eight days of their cycle. If a fertilized egg is found in the cavity, it will be aspirated and mixed with the menstruation induced in this way. It is, in a sense, a service station." "The pill is already outdated: it is a product of the 1940s, the equivalent of the radio inserted into the buffet compared to the transistor. I mentioned menstrual aspiration and its philosophical implications. The life of prostaglandins stagnates, while other techniques (especially in the United States) are glimpsed, aiming to induce blood loss on dates predetermined by the calendar: menstruation or expulsion of the fertilized egg? It cannot be said." With such techniques, "Menstruation and abortion will be indistinguishable, and any law aimed at suppressing the latter will be obsolete before being voted on. Such a disruption will have considerable philosophical implications, and this should make our parliamentarians modest." "With the pill, one has a normal sexual life without procreation; with artificial insemination, procreation will take place without a sexual act." "Sexuality will be dissociated from procreation, and procreation from paternity. The entire concept of the family is about to collapse: the father is no longer the parent but the one who raises the child." In the family "freed from ties of blood," who will play the role of the "ideal but vaguely defined impulses butler, a sort of guardian of the harem who will watch over the house"? Certainly the State; this State that, in our case, already has an excessive tendency to replace the fading paternal power. Therefore, after reading the book "De la vie avant toute chose," a very different image comes to mind than that of the Pacific Islands. It is an image of a society without family, without fathers, without mothers, where the State would take care of the few children still brought into the world; a society of perfectly atomized individuals, where life will be managed as a material. By whom? Always by the State. Above all, it is a society without God, where there will no longer be any ties with God, because the family is the only place where one has access to unconditional Love, to the Trinitarian God. I conclude this brief overview of the methods employed by Pierre Simon with this note for action, which underlines one of the essential qualities of this driving team: tenacity, a sense of milestones: "Forward on the Long March!" "A long march in which tactics are paramount. One must proceed step by step, with precision and meticulousness. Every false step reveals itself." The long march lasted thirty years, from 1950 to 1980. One of the weaknesses of Masonic power is precisely that it often has nothing more to propose than shameful crusades, such as contraception and abortion, mud and blood, gender and euthanasia; in a word: nothingness. Nothing that can truly seduce the spirit and enthuse the heart. In the wake of the Second Vatican Council, St. Paul VI, St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and Pope Francis, we have infinitely better things to propose in the education of the youth and the well-being of society. The moral relativists should come to terms with this because, in the end, the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph, as the Madonna said in Fatima.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp In uncertainty (cf. Luke 1:29-45), "those who believed were of one heart and mind" (NIV Act 4:32) in the education of the believing conscience [including of "the youth and the well-being of society"]" (Pope St John Paul 2, 'On Catechesis in Our Time", Catechesi Tradendae, 1979, 16). "The long march" was between the consequentialism in ethics from St Paul (1Cor7:25-34: 'consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is a higher vocation than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God') to Pope Benedict XV1 3 February 2011, "Introduction to the Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church" asserting "you all know how the community of believers has recently been wounded by the attacks of evil, by the penetration of sin inside, even into the heart of the Church". However it was not "recently ... penetration ... inside" as in error asserted by Pope Benedict XV1, but both in the Church penetrating society and vice versa since St Paul. On 4 July 2011 the Geneva Swiss Hydron (sub-atomic particle) Collider proved the prediction in 1964 of quantum physicist, Peter Higgs, of reciprocity between the meon and nuon as inseparable and qualitatively equal. Pope Benedict resigned on 13 March 2013. Pope Francis from his inauguration homily on the Feast of St Joseph, 15 March 2013, when supported by sufficiently immediately present moment Real Presence in Eucharist and Marriage from both sides (cf. Exodus 17:11-13) kept/allowed the inseparability and qualitative equality of Eucharist and Marriage. This was kept/allowed by Pope Francis particularly on or just after 10 June 2021 on a sufficiently immediately reference point of this inseparable and qualitative equality given him from 1964 to 31 March 2021 by family members of the consecrated male female marriage of Colin Clark, awarded a Papal Medallion by Pope St Paul V1 for contributing to Pope St Paul V1's Encyclical "Of Human Life", Humanae Vitae, 1968, 12, marriage has: "Two Inseparable Aspects: Union and Procreation". Pope Francis then regressed without sufficiently immediately support (cf. Exodus 17:11-13) on 15 March 2023 in his General Audience at KZbin Podcast time 26:55 to purporting presuming in error in his succumbing to the groomed by diseased family member 'familyists' occult as hidden, incest connected as substitute mate, non-economic false "higher vocation" status inducement of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God. Are we there on the left- hand side and the right-hand side (cf. Exodus 17:11-13) inseparably and qualitatively and quantitatively equally to support Pope Francis out of his regression?

[@donalfoley2412]

OK. Sorry. It wasn’t Burke who said that thing about power but Lord Acton, very much later, but very much in the liberal catholic tradition but still a major misquote.

[@Luwi-Molefe6850]

Lord Acton greatly admired the political thoughts of Burke, and Burke had earlier said, "The greater the power, the more dangerous the abuse". I suppose, Dr Kreeft, being who he is (a great teacher) wants to remind us that Lord Acton is not the origin of the dictum but Burke.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@Luwi-Molefe6850 One's exercise of an absolute power of one's simultaneous authorisations of one's ensuring one's procreation role gift as a helper of one's family within one's family and one's insuring one's need of union of one's identity whether consenting to be joined in a consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ or a consecrated male female marriage vowed to God as inseparable and qualitatively and quantitatively equal in uncertainty of belief out occults the occult as hidden, incest connected as substitute mate, grooming by diseased family member 'familyists' for their families economic advantage by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud of their psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members with a false, non-economic status inducement of "a higher way of love" (in error purported presumed in his role by Word on Fire founder, Bishop Robert Barron, mid-2022 in his interview by Lex Fridman on "Christianity and the Catholic Church" at KZbin podcast time 51:46) of consecrated celibate marriage to consecrated male female marriage.

[@zhaoxiaoying9894]

❤❤❤

[@donalfoley2412]

Lord Acton, not Burke!

[@donalfoley2412]

Power tends to corrupt.

[@bman5257]

I noticed that too.

[@Luwi-Molefe6850]

Burke said it in similar words, " The greater the power, the more dangerous the abuse"...And Lord Acton admired the political ideas of Burke, which makes it more likely that the original is in Burke.

[@stephencotter538]

❤

[@dwl3006]

Imagine how clueless you have to be to even suggest that Hobbes was stupid.

[@jhljhl6964]

Why doesn't he address the persecution of Christians by muslims?

[@oliverclark5604]

or of muslims by Christians?

[@yadidlechem2357]

This lecture is spot on. With collectivism we live in Hobbes utopia.

[@oliverclark5604]

to "yadidlechem", "collectivism" of persistent forms of regressive 'familyism' in Hobbes' utilitarian falsely purported presumed thinking utopia on the one hand in uncontrollable "oscillation" (Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, 15 May 2014 as delegate of Pope Francis in his warning address at the UNO on the UNO "The International Day of the Family") with an affirmation of radical individualism on the other in Rousseau's falsely purported presumed having faith utopia as neither in uncertainty keeping/allowing their inseparability and qualitative equality; that is, covenant, non-presumed reciprocity, as belief.

[@craigbennie1]

There is no difference between Freedom and Power as in the freedom and power to enslave. Or if you like, a trifecta may be conceived with the will to enslave. We see that Freedom, Power, and Will combine to manifest a society of good and evil of which a fair balance ought to be the collective goal toward the achievements of equalities of good and evil popular sentiments. Let the Good be good and the Evil be evil so perhaps a clear distinction may be marked out between the dichotomy as the herdsman should like in a convenient separation of goats from sheep.

[@countvlad8845]

I wouldn't say freedom is our absolute. Absolute freedom is not freedom but anarchy. Freedom, like love, is a gift from God. But if you make freedom or love into a God then you've made it into a monster (a takeoff on C.S. Lewis).

[@oliverclark5604]

to "countvlad", Why could C.S. Lewis not see the later invalidity of his marriage to Joy Gresham after his admitted utilitarianism for obtaining residency status for her in purporting presuming been joined in a civil marriage with her? Is any takeoff on C.S. Lewis reliable?

[@countvlad8845]

@@oliverclark5604 I don't know anything about his personal life. Sorry.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@countvlad8845 Do you know of the dialogue between Lewis (d. 1963) and Tolkein (d. 1973) and the finding on 4 July 2011 at the Swiss Hydron Sub-Atomic Particle Collider of the Higgs Boson particles, nuon and meon, and their relationship as predicted by their UK university colleague, quantum physicist, Peter Higgs, in 1964?

[@countvlad8845]

@@oliverclark5604 The short answer is no.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@countvlad8845 I am careful in how I reference Lewis.

[@windsornotincanada]

This was interesting until belief based thinking skewerd the ideas.

[@oliverclark5604]

The debate on where and how much: democracy and totalitarianism, power resides well explained by Peter Kreeft has its answer in the consecrated family members of spouses consenting to be joined in consecrated marriage exercising an absolute power of their simultaneous authorisations of their applications of their ensuring their procreation role gift as helpers of their family within their family: common good, and their insuring their need of union of their family member identity in need of union: subsidiarity. Hobbs and Rousseau did not have, as nor did Thomas Malthus in 1796, international statistics on marriage/population and eucharist/food supplies. Nor has the roman catholic church role group fully understood this relationship in the understanding of which it could then, as it then must, require from all respect for what it considers to be its rights which in saving the family, will save society itself. Word on Fire founder, Bishop Robert Barron, and Pope Francis have recently in error purported presuming "a higher way of love" (Barron, mid-2002, interview with Lex Fridman, "Christianity and the Catholic Church", KZbin podcast time 51:46) or "higher vocation" (Pope Francis, 15 March 2003, General Audience, KZbin podcast time 26:55) of consecrated celibate marriage to consecrated male female marriage. In seeking to sustain what he considers to be his rights Pope Francis on 16 June 2016 stated that :the great majority of sacramental marriages are invalid" and on 10 June 2021 that there is a "worldwide catastrophe" in the context of sexual abuse as are invalid marriages and their consequences. Peter Kreeft well explains the errors in the thinking or having faith of Locke, Hobbs and Rousseau. He does not provide a proof of the inseparability and qualitative equality of "the common good" and subsidiarity". The obstruction to providing this proof is occult as hidden, incest connected as substitute mate, grooming by diseased family member 'familyists' for their families' economic advantage by tax-exemption embezzlement and lower insurance costs by fraud of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members with this non-economic, false status inducement of "a higher way of love" (Bishop Barron, mid-2022) or "higher vocation" (Pope Francis, 15 March 2003). Withstanding the extreme tensions caused by this occult, incest connected inducement of church and state helpers of the family within the family requires this exercise by consecrated family members of consecrated marriages of an absolute power of their simultaneous authorisations of their applications of their ensuring and their insuring. This exercise can and must be on the reference point of the two marriages of Mary (Lk 1:38 and Mt 1:24) in the keeping/allowing by Mary of their inseparability and qualitative equality as well as quantitative equality or on a reference point of a consecrated marriage that is on this reference point of Mary. Not until 1921 with collection for the first time of international statistics on population/marriage and food supplies/eucharist by the League of Nations was it possible to prove the relationship between marriage and eucharist as inseparable and qualitatively equal. This relationship is foreshadowed in the "I am who I am" revealed to Moses, the multiplication of the loaves and fishes (Jn 6) and in the "fulfilment ... believed that there would be" by Mary (Lk 1:29-45). The relationship of role 'do-ing' gift process and identity 'be-ing' need of progress in atomic physics as inseparable and qualitatively equal was predicted in 1964 by physicist Peter Higgs and proved at the Geneva Hydron Collider on 4 July 2011. Two of the reference points connecting Pope Francis to the reference point of Mary was of two members of the family of a catechist on and from 1946 by the father and 25 February 1991 by his son in these two members of this family keeping/allowing in uncertainty of their belief of the inseparability and qualitative equality of marriage and eucharist variously at both their local level of church and state and at the levels of the UK and Vatican church and the Australian and Vatican state and the UNO. This keeping/allowing in uncertainty of belief by this catechist and his father, economist and statistician, Colin Clark, awarded a papal medallion by Pope St Paul V1 for his help in the writing of his Encyclical Letter, "Of Human Life", Humanae Vitae, 1968, 12: marriage has: "Two inseparable aspects: union and procreation", as documented variously at all these levels, out occulted the occult, incest connected disconnection of eucharist and marriage. In sufficiently immediately present moment Real Presence on or just after 10 June 2021 Pope Francis on these reference points as combined kept/allowed in uncertainty of his belief this inseparability and qualitative equality as of his ensuring and his insuring on his exercise of an absolute power of his simultaneous authorisations of his respectively ensuring and his insuring in the cases of: 1. ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu, alleged embezzlement of his tax-exempt procreation role gift charity donations, 2. the Italian state Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill as an unacceptable risk of fraud on his identity as consenting to be joined in a consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ on the reference point of Mary through the reference points of this father and his son. On 15 March 2023, Pope Francis in his General Audience recorded at time 26:55 of the KZbin podcast regressed to "higher vocation" for lack of a sufficiently immediately present moment Real Presence "stone" (Exodus 17:12) to sit on to "steady" him in his "hands" being held up from either side in this "great battle ... between heaven and hell." as described by another son of Colin Clark in his email, dated 17 June 2006, to this consecrated son of Colin Clark in asking him to: "Speak up. It is your right" as both of them in roles as beneficiaries of the estate of their mother (d. 2000) herself the beneficiary of the estate of her husband, Colin Clark (d. 1989). It is only in uncertainty of belief that this out occulting can occur of occult, incest connected false purporting presuming separation of thinking (Hobbs) and having faith (Rossseau).

[@dansal3799]

I love this guy, but I am disappointed that he confuses the American and French revolutions as having the same foundations, and seeking the same ends. The founding fathers believed, as Aristotle did, that we are political creatures. So they believed that our political nature was informed by our human nature, which they also believed bore natural witness to an objective moral law (conscience); their view of human nature was very Edenic, that we had a corrupted nature, but one which still was capable of great and good things (they did not take the simplistic vision of Roseau or Hobbs that human nature was absolutely corrupt or absolutely good.)

[@chissstardestroyer]

There never was any aristocracy, nor monarch at all; only the grass-roots elements of society: baseline human beings; and they and they alone have absolute say over the consent of the government, whereas the government has no basis for any intrusions against the individual at all; save for one detail: to protect another individual: to be a peacemaker alone is the sole task of the governing body in the domestic: and only to *serve* the people; fail to serve everyone beyond the maximum level a deity can do, without the ability, and the government must die and not be replaced- for the safety of all.

[@oliverclark5604]

to "chissstar...", Family members and helpers of their families, both church and state, on the reference point of Mary in her keeping the covenant, non-presumed reciprocity of her consenting to be joined in two immediately successive consecrated marriages (celibate, Lk 1:38 and male-female, Mt 1:24) exercise an absolute power of their simultaneous authorisations of the family members' ensuring their procreation role gifts as helpers of their family within their family and insuring their need of union of their identity as family members consenting to be joined in consecrated marriages whether male female vowed to God or celibate vowed to man in Christ in keeping/allowing the covenant, non-presumed reciprocity; that is, inseparability and qualitative equality, of this 'do-ing' process role and this 'be-ing' progress in identity. This is seen for example in Pope Francis on or just after 10 June 2021 on this reference point of Mary by his ensuring his procreation role gift charity donations alleged embezzled by ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu, and simultaneously his insuring his need of union of his identity as a consecrated celibate vowed to man in Christ at unacceptable risk from the Italian state Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill. By simultaneous authorisations by Pope Francis on or just after 10 June 2021 of criminal indictments for this alleged embezzlement presently continuing been heard in his Vatican state court and of a protest note by his Vatican state Secretariat of State to the Italian government against this Italian state Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill then defeated in early November, was proved the absolute power exercised by Pope Francis in his keeping the inseparability and qualitative equality; that is, covenant, non-presumed reciprocity, of his process procreation role gift and his progress in union of his identity with the identities of his fellow consecrated celibate family members.

[@chissstardestroyer]

@@oliverclark5604 First of all, the pope's capacities exist only as, and I repeat *only* as basically high-priest, he is, as a priest, prohibited from political office; but he sure is able to speak out on issues of morality, and this bill you mentioned clearly would refer to an issue of *deep* moral implications. As for such status issues: there never was any hierarchy of aristocracy nor monarchy, aside from that is consented to by the governed, as anything else is categorically unsustainable. So thus the citations are not only null and void, but blatantly false in and of themselves.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@chissstardestroyer What of the Pope's "conceptions" not just his capabilities?

[@chissstardestroyer]

@@oliverclark5604 Huh? Do clarify.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@chissstardestroyer Quantities (conceptions) not just qualities (capabilities). Existence not just essence. Doing not just being. Conscience (see together) not just consent (feel together).

[@hrabmv]

haha Hobbs is stupid but honest :))....loved😂 it

[@thomaseastmond7184]

I suppose us Mormons are Hobbsians.

[@Elvengem]

the ten commandments are written naturally in the heart of mankind.We are created in a good God's image as the bible also teaches.Therefore man is naturally good but can so often become corrupted if they become uncaring.

[@rerguti14]

The world is being run by undercover Hobbs subscribers ☹️

[@oliverclark5604]

to "rerguti14", Undercover Hobbs subscribers in their process roles in uncontrollable "oscillation" (warning by Pope Francis' delegate, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, as President of his Council for the Family in his address at the UNO on the UNO "The International Day of the Family", 15 May 2014) with undercover having faith progress Rousseau subscribers.

[@romanyrose4074]

Christian apologetics masquerading as "objective" analysis of various philosophies and philosophers. Cherry picking is a sin Dr Kreeft. Your bias is obvious.

[@mariusciobotaru3]

To say that Rousseau is a totalitarian is a radical misunderstanding of Rousseau's political philosophy. The will of the people cannot be tyrannical by definition. Democracy is the opposition to tyranny. The General Will is the source of political legitimacy.

[@ianmccrane6755]

The will of the people in 1855 Georgia was that black people should be enslaved. According to Rousseau that is not tyrannical. I suspect those subjected to that experience might disagree.

[@mariusciobotaru3]

@@ianmccrane6755 The popular will can be a political justification for mistreatment of certain groups until the internal contradictions between the Ideal and the Real are solved through reform or revolution, and our institutions extend our sympathies to those groups through the formulation of a set of universal laws (equally applied to everyone). That is not tyranny. At least not in the traditional sense of the word. Tyranny is when one or a small group of people can impose their will upon an entire population.