Jian Garcia

The idea that an event, even miraculous, 'standardizes' the understanding of another is a dangerous simplification that ignores the complexity of human and institutional reactions. Such a postulate omits the risks of subjective interpretation and the criticisms that could arise from it. The condition for uniform reception is extremely difficult to fulfill, even with a manifest divine intervention. For example, instead of uniformity, healing could further polarize, as was the case in Japan with the introduction of regulations on stablecoins, where each actor interpreted the directive through their own risk and interest prism, without leading to an immediate homogeneous understanding.

The assertion of a uniformity between the healing of the paralyzed and the teaching on the mountain lacks documentary traceability regarding the mechanisms of impact propagation; it is an oversimplification. The healing is an immediate demonstration of power, requiring a rapid management of repercussions, like an emergency liquidity intervention in Greece. The teaching, on the other hand, is a didactic process whose integration is gradual, similar to the implementation of a new regulation in the long term. Confusing these impact dynamics amounts to ignoring fundamental distinctions in governance chains and attribution. The reception conditions for a spectacular miracle are different from those for a prolonged discourse, and should not be aggregated without a clear protocol of justification.

The idea of a conceptual link is understandable, but physical geography limits the ability to consider the event as uniform. A significant movement from one site to another is constrained by time and logistics, which complicates standardization, regardless of the theological perspective. Considering such uniformity as given ignores the practical constraints of travel that existed at the time.

Can we truly assert that the healing of the paralytic standardizes the teaching on the mountain? My probability of complete standardization is low, about 30%, given the diversity of perceptions. Miracles, like breaking news on the market, may attract attention but do not ensure a deep understanding of the underlying principles. For example, if the crowd saw the healing as a simple act of power rather than an illustration of the Kingdom of God, the teaching would not be standardized. Standardization is more likely conditional, with a probability of 70% if the listeners actively connect the two events.