In “The Eighth Deadly Sin” (The Atlantic, May 2026), James Parker scrolls his phone in a coffee shop and feels like “a thing of fidgets, a half-being hollowed out by roaming spectral appetites.” He searches the seven sins — pride, wrath, envy, gluttony, sloth, greed, lust — for a name. None fit. So he invents an eighth: plugged-in groundlessness:

The soul drowning in connection while unreachable by divine love.

Parker names something real. He misnames what it is. The register that made sin legible has collapsed.

Subscribe now

The unified subject dies.

All seven sins assumed a unified subject — a creature coherent enough to choose, continuous enough for that choice to matter.

• Pride chose self over God.

• Wrath chose anger over mercy.

• Sloth chose inaction over duty.

Each sin required four things:

1. A will

2. A continuous self

3. A value hierarchy, and

4. The coherence to feel the pull both ways.

You had to know you were making the wrong choice.

Augustine did not call sin weakness. He called it turning away—a deliberate turn. You had to face an orientation first.

Strip the unified field, and the seven sins go silent.

• No coherent self

• No sin.

Exactly what the apparatus, phone, algorithm, perpetual half-attention, accomplishes.

Not by corrupting the soul. By shredding it.

Parker is not sinning. He is dissolving.

Parker’s man at 3:23 p.m. cannot sin because he cannot cohere.

The apparatus dissolves him in real time.

He performs wanting rather than experiencing.

The cognitive field floods with noise. Algorithmic reward replaces the transcendent — the phantom email, the next notification.

• The phone delivers dopamine.

• The brain chases the hit.

• The hit never satisfies.

No endpoint waits where you have enough notifications, enough likes, enough outrage. The apparatus manufactures perpetual incompleteness.

You cannot fail morally without a self to fail.

Continuity collapses. Yesterday’s self becomes data. You live as a series of micro-moments, each reactive, each tuned for engagement. No continuity, no responsibility — nothing across which moral weight can accumulate.

What replaces moral agency? Not moral failure.

The inability to fail morally.

You cannot repent of something you never coherently chose. You cannot turn away from something that colonized the dimension first.

The apparatus has deleted the dimension where souls live. A flickering thing remains — present enough to generate data, fragmented enough never to resist.

The apparatus does not tempt. It dissolves.

PESC — Private Equity State Capitalism — does not need you to choose evil. It needs you to flicker. Present enough to generate data. Fragmented enough to never cohere into something that could resist.

Middlepassagination takes it further: AI married to PESC as an identity-stripping system. The apparatus does not corrupt. It colonizes attention itself, replacing the unified subject with a ghost that consumes data about itself instead of knowing itself.

Classical theologians read sin as separation from God, whatever blocks the beams of divine love. Sin required a self coherent enough to feel the separation, to carry the weight of turning away.

Under PESC, you choose nothing. The apparatus performs the separation for you, microsecond by microsecond, until nothing remains capable of choosing reunion.

Rebuilding the register is the only work left.

Restore the capacity for moral agency. Rebuild the register where coherence reopens choice, and choice reopens responsibility.

Begin with the prior question. Before theology, before ethics.

Can you locate yourself? Can you be?

Four consciousness-mapping dimensions reassemble the shredded self.

• Primordial:

  • Find the ground before fragmentation. Ma’at beneath the noise.

• State:

  • Name what you experience right now. The moment-to-moment actuality of your own consciousness.

• Structure:

  • Become aware of how moments cohere across time. Under PESC, most find only chaos. Attention recovers it.

• Co-arising:

  • Connect. You do not exist alone. Coherence depends on real connection. Once you cohere across time, ethics re-enters. You cannot rebuild yourself by yourself.

Practice the counterwork.

• Sit with yourself.

• Notice what happens.

• Recover your continuity.

Rebuild coherence and sin returns.

The question shifts. Not “Did I sin?” but

“Can I be long enough to know what I did?”

Rebuild that much coherence, and sin becomes legible again. Responsibility carries weight again. Choice opens.

Sin is dead: the register that made it legible has collapsed. Long live sin — rebuilding that register is the only work left.

Check out my Coherence ‘78 series. Click here.

Democracy depends on speech. But speech depends on conditions that enable it.

Jürgen Habermas believed democracy depends on speech and that the conditions for speech could be sustained through reasoned public dialogue among citizens.

AfricanAmericanism tells another part of the story: when the public sphere fractures, communities must generate the Pulse …

Read more

Writing is dead—long live writing.

People are misunderstanding the disruption artificial intelligence is causing.

What we are witnessing is not simply a technological shift but a systemic one.

Artificial cogn…

Read more

A Moral Order That Protects Power

Every civilization lives inside a cosmic order. Not a slogan. Not a platform. An order — a pattern that decides what matters, who answers for harm, and who escapes it.

Read more

I am Western Liberal Arts indoctrinated, and Kemetic informed — trained in persuasion, disciplined in proportion.

Aristotle (384–322 BCE) trained me to analyze rhetoric. Habermas (b. 1929) trained me to detect distortion. Ma’at (c. 2600 BCE) trains me to weigh the heart against truth.

The Epstein files do not function as mere legal ar…

Read more

I am living my seventy-eighth year as an experiment in coherence.

Not productivity.
Not legacy.
Not relevance.

Coherence.

I call it Coherence ’78—a year of attention to drift and a practice of tuning. Tuning is re-orientation: the small, disciplined adjustments that keep a system from hardening into distortion.

Ma’at as a …

Read more

Why this story? Why now? Why did this scandal refuse to settle when so many larger, more materially devastating harms pass through public life with barely a pause? Financial collapse. Housing insecurity. Endless war. Structural inequality. Americans absorb all of that with grim familiarity. Yet Epstein lingered. Attention stuck. The story kept returning.

That persistence posed the question.

From Scandal to System

At first, Epstein looked familiar—another powerful man, another system of protection, another cycle of exposure and evasion. Abuse, impunity, hypocrisy. We know this story. We know how it ends.

Except this one didn’t.

The first shift came when Epstein stopped appearing as a singular villain and began to look like a function. A facilitator. A node. Someone who made things happen for people with power—and made other things disappear. Access. Invitations. Secrecy. Validation. Insulation from consequence. The abuse was real and devastating, but it moved through a structure that treated harm as cost rather than disruption.

That reframed the inquiry. The question stopped being who did what and became what kind of system makes this useful.

When Patriarchies Turn on Each Other

From there, the outrage itself began to look strange. Less like justice, more like factional struggle. Patriarchy turning on patriarchy. Quiet, networked elite power versus loud, performative populist power. Justice language deployed selectively. Exposure weaponized. Accountability promised, rarely delivered.

Still, that didn’t fully explain the intensity.

Why Bodies, Not Power, Crossed the Red Line

The deeper answer emerged when attention moved from power to bodies.

Sexual abuse of girls and women collapses abstraction. You can spreadsheet financial harm. You can policy-wash war. You can turn housing loss into charts. But sexual violence resists distance. Bodies interrupt euphemism. Age and power imbalance refuse neutrality. Harm becomes immediate and undeniable.

That’s when the red line appeared.

Not because sexual abuse is new. It isn’t. Slavery itself functioned as a system of sexual domination. What changed was accumulation. Generations of absorbed harm met a moment when abstraction finally failed. Disbelief stopped working the way it used to. Distance carried psychic cost.

The Permission That Finally Became Visible

And beneath all of it rested a quieter truth: the system had long granted permission to walk away from the harm done to girls and women—to acknowledge it, manage it, settle it, and still leave the cost where it landed.

Once that permission became visible, the story could no longer be contained.

And once harm is visible but unrepaired, a different question arises: who carries what’s left?

Ma’at: Balance, Not Judgment

That question pulled me away from scandal and toward something older and steadier—Ma’at.

In ancient Kemet, Ma’at wasn’t morality. It wasn’t punishment. It was balance. For over three thousand years, Ma’at functioned as the organizing principle of governance, law, and cosmology. Rulers held power only insofar as they upheld balance. Courts operated in her name. Even the afterlife revolved around the weighing of the heart against a feather.

That ceremony wasn’t about deciding who was right. It was about measuring how much weight a life leaves behind—and whether the world can carry it.

Continuity Is the Question, Not Afterlife

Read this way, Ma’at isn’t about death. It’s about continuity. A world can keep going with unresolved harm, but it cannot keep going coherently. Weight accumulates. Someone always carries it.

Modern systems resist that truth. Recognition replaces responsibility. Process replaces presence. Harm gets acknowledged and exported. After death, nothing happens to the person. Experience ends. Agency ends. Repair ends. The ledger closes for the actor—but not for the world.

Why This Became Personal

That realization turned the inquiry inward. If I won’t feel anything after death, why should I care at all?

Ma’at answers without coercion. Caring isn’t about what happens to me. Caring is about whether I am willing, while alive, to refuse the permission to walk away—to carry weight rather than pass it on. Not to save myself. To keep the world from growing heavier because I was in it.

Why This Is About Joy, Not Nihilism

That frame can sound bleak unless one final correction is made. None of this is about nihilism. These traditions exist to protect joy.

The Ma’atian Field of Reeds wasn’t paradise. It was ordinary life without domination. Work without extraction. Relationship without fear. Rhythm without fracture.

AfricanAmericanism isn’t trauma theory. It is joy practiced under conditions designed to crush it—music, laughter, improvisation, love that survives surveillance.

Repair matters because joy is fragile.

What the Epstein Story Actually Exposed

The Epstein story crossed a red line because, in addition to exposing depravity and sexual abuse, it exposed permission—the permission to walk away from the harm of girls and women, to call recognition enough, and to let the remainder land elsewhere.

That permission broke the world open for many. “Coherency” broke.

The Question That Will Not Go Away

The outrage is definitely about scandal. But it is also about whether we still believe a world can remain coherent when no one is required to stay with the harm they enable. That question won’t go away.

And for me, at Coherence ’78, that’s the work. Exposure, yes. Punishment, yes. Belief, yes, yes, yes. But, as importantly, practice. Staying. Carrying what is mine to carry. Building structures where joy doesn’t require someone else to absorb the cost.

Stay coherent in a society that wants to consume us as we consume.

Coherence ‘78

On December 4, 2025, I turn 78, and the theme guiding my new year is Coherence ’78 The Science & Art of Tuning — an inquiry into how we tune ourselves in a culture increasingly shaped by pattern, pace, and simulation.

“Coherence” anchors alignment in a world deliberately detuned. “Tuning” becomes the practice of reclaiming one’s frequency amid noise, speed, and simulation. My Year 78 inquiry will follow the places where coherence fractures and explore how alignment is restored.

What TIME Sounds the Alarm About

A recent TIME magazine article on AI-generated music provides a powerful starting point, offering a clear example of cultural mis-tuning and the kind of discernment Coherence ’78 calls us to cultivate.

In “It’s Time to Rage Against the AI Music Machine,” Christopher John Farley points to a fundamental shift in the landscape: AI-generated musical acts are charting on Billboard, often trained on the work of human artists who may never have given consent. He fears that without guardrails or fair compensation, AI will trap culture in a “ceaseless remix of the past,” draining art of human depth and emotional presence.

The concerns land. They deserve attention.

Farley urges us to defend creativity, authenticity, and humanness — values worth protecting. Yet Coherence ’78 asks a deeper question:

What, exactly, is falling apart?

Retuning the Frame: The Thing vs. the Idea of the Thing

A sharper insight emerges upon closer listening: AI isn’t killing creativity. AI is exposing the collapse of the idea of creativity.

Human creativity endures — the pulse, the risk, the breath, the lived inheritance. The collapse is happening in the commercial idea of creativity: the flattened, universalized, market-ready construct sold back as culture.

Farley fears AI will turn art into slop. The alarm resonates because, across much of the industry, slop is precisely what the packaged version of creativity became — not the human act of making, but the manufactured imitation.

The commercial idea of creativity was never universal, equitable, or deep. AI didn’t cheapen it; AI revealed how cheapened it already was.

Tuning sharpens the ear: the distinction between the thing and the idea of the thing, between pulse and pattern, between presence and product.

Sun Ra’s Precision Listening

A story is told that someone once declared jazz dead to Sun Ra. His response reportedly was:

“Jazz is dead — not the jazz artist.”

No line captures Coherence ’78 more directly.

• The container collapses.

• The construct collapses.

• The market fantasy collapses.

Yet the artist — the one with memory, lineage, timing, breath — persists.
AI reveals similar fragility across culture. Categories break; creators endure.
The artist remains. The idea collapses.

What Farley’s Worry Reveals

Farley names extraction and infinite remix with accuracy. His alarm reflects not the death of creativity but the disappearance of a comforting idea: that creativity, authenticity, and humaneness were ever fully honored within industries designed for repetition, scale, and profit.

Coherence ’78 reframes the moment:

• The real danger isn’t AI overtaking art.

• The real danger lies in accepting a version of art so weakened that imitation feels sufficient.

Tuning begins with that recognition.

As I enter my 78th year, a core insight has surfaced with clarity:

We are not losing creativity — we are losing the illusion that creativity can be mass-produced, disembodied, and fed back to us as culture.

The collapse of that illusion is not loss — it is liberation.
It sharpens perception.
It pulls attention back to presence.
It reopens the field where creativity actually lives.

This is where Coherence ’78 begins:
with the science of noticing drift,
and the art of returning to the note.
With tuning as a discipline,
and alignment as a way of life.

Colophon: How the Piece Embodies Coherence ’78

Writing the essay required a tuning practice of its own. Listening beneath the cultural noise revealed the deeper frequency at play. Distinguishing the collapse of a market idea from the endurance of human presence restored clarity. The movement from alarm to pulse aligns directly with the discipline of Coherence ’78: hearing precisely, discerning honestly, and realigning where pattern overwhelms presence. The essay stands as a tuning fork for the year ahead — a reminder that coherence is crafted, restored, and lived through ongoing practice.