What ratio argument was this, I replied.

They replied, the ratio of your likes to your comments.

Wow, that must mean any criticism of Trum is invalid and worthless because they have less likes than the total number of comments? Good social ratio! Good Trum Supporters!

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/china-the-techno-totalitarian-leviathan/
* * *
I had read about some of the Social Credit system, but Dreher’s warning is well taken, and will certainly not make much impression outside of the conservative circle, despite the former cries of the Left about “Big Brother” when the government was run by anti-Communists and Republicans.

Well said.
Lewis was definitely not looking to found a new politics (there is, ultimately, only the same-old same-old kind), but to explain somewhat the state of mind that underlay his conversion to Christianity, as he recognized that in Christ he had found the Joy that he had been searching for.

“So that in the first place, I put for a generall inclination of all mankind, a perpetuall and restlesse desire of Power after power, that ceaseth onely in Death.” – Hobbes

I actually believe he may be correct, but the Jewish Torah and Christian doctrines (I am not familiar enough with other faiths* to comment) are always pushing back against that inclination, and trying to turn it to better paths than those that lead to Fame and Conquest.

Thanks for your commentary; it was a pleasure to read.

*Sadly, much of the Muslim world insists on following the Hobbesian pathway, although I understand there are some Islamic sects that are less doctrinaire about it than others.

There’s the difference, I guess.

Hobbes is at the beginning of his enterprise, namely, to establish a novel basis for human government or politics generally speaking. He’s examining human nature (of a sort, namely of a low and solid sort) in order to fix an acceptable universal condition upon which to found a lasting polity.

What’s Lewis doing? Looks very different doesn’t it? Yes, he’s concerned with a universal kind, a very high kind as opposed to a low, but not for the purpose of founding a new politics. Or am I mistaken?

Anyhow, that seems something we should bear in mind.

One is at the beginning, the other, it seems, is at the end. One is aiming at the low and common, the other at the highest and, presumably, rarer thing.

Reading there (what you’ve provided) I’ll say I’m somewhat minded of my own occasional, infrequent experiences of the sublime (though infrequent, nevertheless an example just today: hearing for the first time Jessye Norman’s performance [Masur/G. Leizsig] of R. Strauss “Vier Letzte Lieder”). It’s a transportation for me usually ending in tears of joy, but not a Christian such thing as I understand it.

Hobbes above, on the other hand, explicitly rejects Aristotle’s elevation of philosophic contemplation as the pinnacle human good (“Felicity of this life, consisteth not in the repose of a mind satisfied”). Owing to Aristotle’s un-Greek monotheistic first philosophy (called Metaphysics), I might surmise something comparable in this of Lewis’ “Joy” to be rather more “like” unto Aristotle’s view than my mere transport in works of great beauty, say, than it is like Hobbes’ “restless desire” described.

Too, I’ve heard our own modern ways (assuredly not attributing to Lewis) described as “the joyless pursuit of joy”. (Nothing to do with Lewis) It’s a thing of thought. Perhaps a prejudice in me. Still, something of this does seem to have arisen after Hobbes’ teachings took hold. Or so we see folks lament.

It is difficult or find words strong enough for the sensation which came over me; Milton’s ‘enormous bliss’ of Eden (giving the full, ancient meaning to ‘enormous’) comes somewhere near it. It was a sensation, of course, of desire; but desire for what?…Before I knew what I desired, the desire itself was gone, the whole glimpse… withdrawn, the world turned commonplace again, or only stirred by a longing for the longing that had just ceased… In a sense the central story of my life is about nothing else… The quality common to the three experiences… is that of an unsatisfied desire which is itself more desirable than any other satisfaction. I call it Joy, which is here a technical term and must be sharply distinguished both from Happiness and Pleasure. Joy (in my sense) has indeed one characteristic, and one only, in common with them; the fact that anyone who has experienced it will want it again… I doubt whether anyone who has tasted it would ever, if both were in his power, exchange it for all the pleasures in the world. But then Joy is never in our power and Pleasure often is.”
– C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life

What Is Here Meant By Manners

By MANNERS, I mean not here, Decency of behaviour; as how one man should salute another, or how a man should wash his mouth, or pick his teeth before company, and such other points of the Small Morals; But those qualities of man-kind, that concern their living together in Peace, and Unity. To which end we are to consider, that the Felicity of this life, consisteth not in the repose of a mind satisfied. For there is no such Finis Ultimus, (utmost ayme,) nor Summum Bonum, (greatest good,) as is spoken of in the Books of the old Morall Philosophers. Nor can a man any more live, whose Desires are at an end, than he, whose Senses and Imaginations are at a stand. Felicity is a continuall progresse of the desire, from one object to another; the attaining of the former, being still but the way to the later. The cause whereof is, That the object of mans desire, is not to enjoy once onel y, and for one instant of time; but to assure for ever, the way of his future desire. And therefore the voluntary actions, and inclinations of all men, tend, not only to the procuring, but also to the assuring of a contented life; and differ onely in the way: which ariseth partly from the diversity of passions, in divers men; and partly from the difference of the knowledge, or opinion each one has of the causes, which produce the effect desired.

A Restlesse Desire Of Power, In All Men

So that in the first place, I put for a generall inclination of all mankind, a perpetuall and restlesse desire of Power after power, that ceaseth onely in Death. And the cause of this, is not alwayes that a man hopes for a more intensive delight, than he has already attained to; or that he cannot be content with a moderate power: but because he cannot assure the power and means to live well, which he hath present, without the acquisition of more. And from hence it is, that Kings, whose power is greatest, turn their endeavours to the assuring it a home by Lawes, or abroad by Wars: and when that is done, there succeedeth a new desire; in some, of Fame from new Conquest; in others, of ease and sensuall pleasure; in others, of admiration, or being flattered for excellence in some art, or other ability of the mind.

(Thus the modern political thinker making his progress away from the ignorance of the ancients.)

And how much “progress” was there between the beginning of human history and 1000 AD? 1900 AD?

I’m sure your theories of “progress” would be very interesting to the Incans, the Aztecs, the Mayans, and the Muslim world which was once virtually equal to or superior to Christendom and is now…well, just take a close look.

But even if you want to cling to a childish faith in “progress,” it still matters how it happens. There is no Progress Fairy. If things get better it is because human being made them better, usually by defeating other human beings who wanted to make thing worse.

Hell, just look at right now. There is a global movement going on that wants to seize control of civilization and daily existence and REDUCE human freedom, opportunty, and prosperity in the name of “saving the planet.”

Let’s dumb it down. Is this the best possible world you can imagine? Is it impossible to conceive of anything better? Of course not. Why aren’t the people of China or sub-Saharan Africa as rich and free as citizens of the United States?

Or try this: How different would the world be if Hillary had won in 2016? That’s just one election and yet only three years later it would have led to a measurably, though not radically, different world.

Mike

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/china-the-techno-totalitarian-leviathan/

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/09/24/planned-parenthood-advised-hollywood-over-150-movies-shows-since-2014-director-says/

DS based its story on a WaPo article which it rightly calls a “hagiography” of the primary PP advisor to Leftywood, but it might be worth reading to see the length and breadth and depth of the moral rot in American popular culture.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/09/23/feature/planned-parenthoods-woman-in-hollywood/

Other avenues of appeasement for those who are rich and fear exposure (literally) include the airwave infotainment business.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/10/the-impact-of-ronan-farrows-new-me-too-allegations-towards-nbc/

“If Ronan Farrow’s new book is to be believed, Harvey Weinstein at least stalled the revelations of his misconduct by successfully pressuring a network of complicit media powerbrokers. The Hollywood Reporter walked through some of the book’s most explosive allegations about Weinstein and his reported enablers, heavily implicating leadership at NBC News. (The network denies wrongdoing.)

According to THR, which was given an early look at “Catch and Kill,” Farrow reports that Weinstein remarkably sought to leverage his personal knowledge of Matt Lauer’s alleged misconduct to ensure NBC stopped Farrow’s investigation into his own behavior.
…
But “Catch and Kill” is asking us again to ponder the moral bankruptcy of our elites, particularly in the news media, and still in the midst of a populist moment. In this case, it’s not about a president or former vice president and Ukraine: the allegations are about rich and powerful Americans protecting rich and powerful American predators.

By the way, all this is unfolding at a time when elites insist every day on moralizing from their corporate pulpits. We would be deeply unwise to underestimate the effects stories like these have on public trust in institutions and their leaders.”

* * *
EDIT seems to have come back from vacation while I was out on my autumn hiatus.