Author: Curt Doolittle

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANCIENT ARISTOCRATIC AND MEDIEVAL CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY (IMPORTANT)

(FWIW: In a previous post, I stated the abrahamic sequence in both supernatural and pseudoscientific frauds and sophistries. I was not trying to attack christianity per se.)

RESPONSIBILITIES
TLDR; “Persists Today: Masculine National Political vs Feminine Global Social”

1) Greco-Roman Era Responsibility (Nationalism)

Civic Engagement, Military Service, and Public VirtueCivic Engagement: In the Greco-Roman world, active participation in public life was considered essential for the well-being of the state. This included involvement in political discourse, governance, and public decision-making. The idea of ‘civic virtue’ was crucial, where citizens were expected to contribute to the common good and engage in matters of state.
Military Service: Military prowess and service were highly esteemed. Being a soldier or a military leader was not only a duty but a significant source of honor and prestige. This emphasis on military capability was rooted in the frequent wars and conflicts of the period, where strength in arms was essential for survival and expansion.
Public Virtue: Public virtue in this context meant living in a way that benefitted the polis or the republic. It included qualities like courage, discipline, and loyalty to the state. The ideal citizen was one who placed the interests of the community above personal desires.

Roles and Responsibilities of Various Social Groups

Free Male Population: The privileges and responsibilities of civic engagement and military service were largely reserved for free males. This group was considered the backbone of society, actively participating in governance, public debate, and defense.
Women: In general, women in the Greco-Roman world were excluded from public life and political activities. Their roles were primarily domestic, focusing on managing the household and raising children. While women of higher social standing could wield influence indirectly, direct participation in civic affairs was limited.
Children: The role of children was to be educated and prepared for their future roles as citizens (for boys) or as keepers of the household (for girls). The focus was on inculcating virtues that would make them effective members of society once they reached adulthood.
Slaves and Lower Classes: Slaves had no political rights or social standing and were considered property. The lower classes, although free, often lacked the means or the social status to participate fully in public life. Their contributions were more economic (through labor) than political or military.

Measurement of Individual Worth
In this societal structure, a person’s worth was significantly measured by their ability to contribute to the state’s military and civic life. Honor and social standing were closely tied to public service and martial achievements. This value system reinforced a societal hierarchy where the upper classes, especially those capable of military leadership or political influence, were highly esteemed.

2) Christian Era Shift in Responsibility (Globalism)

The good:
– Role of Free Will: While a european disposition proior t christianity, but upon introduction of the abrahamir religion it survived, so contrary to Islam, the concept of free will in Christianity underlines the importance of individual choice and moral responsibility, countering the notion of evasion of responsibility.

The Bad:
– Personal: Emphasis on spiritual equality and salvation for all
– Anti-Political, Universal: Universal moral responsibility irrespective of class or status
– Emphasis on Faith over Works: In some Christian teachings, salvation is said to be attained through faith rather than deeds. Leads to a belief that actions are less important than faith, potentially diminishing the sense of personal responsibility for one’s actions.
– Charity and Assistance vs. Systemic Change: While Christianity strongly advocates for charity, the focus overshadows the importance of addressing systemic issues, leading to a limited engagement with broader social responsibilities.
– Divine Forgiveness and Absolution: The concept that sins can be forgiven through confession and penance might lead some to believe that they can evade responsibility for their actions, as long as they seek forgiveness.
– Doctrine of Original Sin: Implies that individuals are powerless to overcome their sinful nature without divine intervention, reducing the sense of personal moral agency.
– Eschatological Beliefs: Belief in an imminent end of the world (eschatology) leads to a lack of concern for long-term solutions, under the assumption that worldly conditions are temporary and of lesser importance.
– Delegation of Responsibility: The delegation of moral authority to church leaders leads to a dependency on clergy for moral guidance, diminishing individual responsibility in moral decision-making.
– Undermining Political Virtues: Marginalization of traditional civic virtues in favor of spiritual virtues
– Anti-political, Social, Feminine: Responsibility in a religious context implies adhering to divine commandments and moral teachings. In Christianity, this includes both personal conduct and responsibilities towards others and the world.

Individual Responsibility in Greco-Roman vs. Christian Contexts
– Responsibility in the Greco-Roman world: Public life, civic duty, military valor: Masculine Eugenic. Evolutionary.
– Christian redefinition of responsibility: Spiritual well-being, charity, humility: Feminine Dysgenic. Stasis to Devolutionary.

So, masculine national political social economic familial responsibility vs Feminine Globalist interpersonal self focus.

Had christianity not been monopolistic and not had poltical amibitions it could have integrated into the traditional civilization without creating a dark age of ignorance supersition and destroying the political and economic and aesthetic virtues of the ancient world.

Cheers.