"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4
Those of dialectic 'reasoning' ("self" 'justification') make man's/the child's carnal nature the foundation from which to think and act, thus they depend upon man's/the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., the affective domain in order to initiate and sustain the 'change' process. While the father judges the child based upon the child's performance, he does not pry into the child's "feelings," he just deals with them (at his discretion) when they are expressed. On the other hand those of dialectic 'reasoning' must know (must gain access to) the child's/man's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., the child's/man's "private convictions" in order to initiate and sustain the process of 'change,' i..e, in order to turn the child/man into Pavlov's dog, one of Skinner's rats or one of Thorndike's chickens, i.e., into an animal, subject to stimulus-response only, i.e., manipulatable—only in this case, because man/the child "lusts" after the approval (affirmation) of others, turning him into a "socialist" animal. The praxis of dialoguing our opinions (how we are "feeling" and what we are "thinking" in the 'moment—revealing our desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., our "self interests"), in a "group meeting," to a consensus (common-ism), and putting that consensus (our common desire for pleasure and dissatisfaction, i.e., resentment, i.e., hatred toward restraint, i.e., toward the father's/Father's authority) into social action (affirmative action) accomplishes the deed.
Our desire for approval (affirmation) from others (especially from those we like, have something to gain in initiating and/or sustaining the relationship, or have something to lose in losing the relationship) and our effort to avoid the pain which comes from being rejected is so strong in us we are more than likely willing to 'justify' setting aside or compromising our position or belief in order (as in "new" world order) to attain "group consensus"—a "feeling" of "oneness," i.e., acceptance, i.e., affirmation. One "youth group," "cell group," "group grade," "group psychotherapy," consensus meeting (all being the same in method—the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., to a "feeling" or "sensation" of "oneness") alone can have a long lasting (if not permanent) affect upon anyone participating, 'changing' how they perceive and respond to themselves, others, and the world around them, including how they perceive and respond to authority—disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, defying, and/or attacking authority from then on.
By adding the affective domain, i.e., our "feelings" of the 'moment' (our desire for approval, i.e., affirmation) to the cognitive domain, i.e., to knowledge, i.e., to deciding what is right and what is wrong, knowledge, i.e., right and wrong become subject to our "feelings" of the 'moment,' the environment or situation stimulating them, and anyone who is manipulating the environment or situation, i.e., who is "helping" us decide what is important and what is not important information, i.e., what is "appropriate" what is inappropriate "information" in our making a decision, i.e., in our coming to a consensus—with approval from others (affirmation) and approving (affirming) others being the key ingredient—making being "positive" and not "negative," i.e., our "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., our desire for approval and our fear of being rejected (by "the group," i.e., "the people," i.e., "the community," i.e., "the collective") the foundation from which to determine right from wrong in our thoughts and actions, negating belief and faith, i.e., respect for the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to his/His commands, rules, facts, and truth in the process. In this way socialism swallows up individualism, making all individuals subject to (of and for) "the people" and all "the people" subject to (of and for) that which is of man's/the child's, i.e., the individual's carnal nature, i.e., that which is antithetical to the father's/Father's authority.
The facilitator of 'change's motto is: Don't fight against the father yourself (he might isolate and defeat you), convert his children in the consensus meeting and they will fight against him instead—when they get home. There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 2: Affective Domain, p. 83) Karl Marx put it this way: "Not feeling at home in the sinful world [because their parent's/God's commands, rules, facts, and truth inhibit or block them from "building relationship" with the other children of the world—based upon their common "self interests," i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment'], Critical Criticism [the children questioning and challenging their parent's authority, i.e. using dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. "higher order thinking skills" in determining right from wrong—basing right and wrong upon their carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment'] must set up a sinful world in its own home [take the process back into the home, pressuring the family to be "rational"—making sensuousness , i.e. the child's/man's "feelings" of the 'moment' the "drive" and "purpose" of life]." "Critical Criticism [children 'justifying' their carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., thinking and acting according to their impulses and urges of the 'moment'] is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without [is antithetical to, i.e., is hostile toward the father's/Father's authority]." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family)
George Hegel, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud had this one theme in common, the 'liberation' of the children of the world to be "of and for" themselves alone, negating the father's/Father's authority in the process. Karl Marx: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly [Holy] family, the former must be destroyed [Vernunft, annihilated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4) Sigmund Freud: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization) George Hegel: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he learns to 'liberate' himself from parental authority, becoming himself again, as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact or truth came into his life—carnal, i.e. of the world only]." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
"Kurt Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs [rejection of their parent's and God's authority, i.e., 'liberation' of their carnal thoughts and carnal actions] by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Irvine D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
Just once is enough, as two in the garden in Eden 'discovered.'
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2017