Claim. Cognition and dominion (practice) form two reciprocal circuits of give-and-take between humans and all things — cognition the circuit from object to subject (identity-maintaining four-position foundation), dominion the circuit from subject to object (developmental four-position foundation) — with neither possible without the other.
Elaboration. Lee argues that cognition cannot be understood in isolation from practice/dominion: ‘Cognition is closely associated with dominion. There is no dominion without cognition, and there is no cognition without dominion. Cognition and dominion form reciprocal circuits of give and take action between human beings and all things’ ((4) Result).
The distinction between the two circuits is structurally precise: cognition forms an identity-maintaining four-position foundation (collating content/form of subject and object yields a unified judgment — no new being produced), while dominion forms a developmental four-position foundation (exercising creativity over all things produces new beings, akin to God’s original creative act). The directionality is opposite: cognition flows from object to subject (we receive information); dominion flows from subject to object (we shape and rule).
This move agrees with Marx and Mao that cognition and practice are inseparable (‘On this point, Unification Thought has no objection’), but radically reinterprets the telos. Lee writes (Critique of Sensory Cognition, Rational Cognition, and Practice): ‘Practice, as advocated by Marxism, is ultimately directed toward revolution. Contrary to this, however, Unification Thought asserts that neither cognition nor practice is ever carried out with revolution as its objective, but rather, they are carried out in order to actualize the purpose-of-creation. The purpose of creation is actualized when God exercises dominion over human beings with love, and human beings exercise dominion over all things with love, whereby joy is realized in God and human beings.’ Both cognition and practice are ‘carried out for the purpose of obtaining joy through love.’
The theological substitution is the heart of the critique: where Marx makes class struggle the criterion of truth, Lee makes love-grounded dominion the criterion of cognition’s purpose. The structural form (cognition-practice cycle) is retained; the content of practice is replaced — from revolution to creational dominion. This converts an inherently agonistic epistemology into a teleological one grounded in created harmony.
Worth a thread once a counter atomic exists on whether the love-dominion telos faces its own version of the problem Marxists identify — i.e., whether ‘dominion with love’ adequately handles cases of human exploitation of nature that the framework presumably condemns.
See also. ut-cognition-as-collation-not-reflection-or-synthesis, ut-subject-object-necessary-relationship-grounds-cognition, two-stage-structure-and-unity-of-theory-and-practice