This treatise serves as a compelling critique of the Calvinistic perspective, as it challenges the notion that man has lost his innate moral capacity. The author posits that man possesses moral capability due to the inherent obligation to select the noblest objective. Essentially, the author argues that the more one comprehends this responsibility, the greater their potential for obedience. Thus, the ability to adhere to moral principles is a testament to man's inherent capacity, which differs significantly from the semi-pelagian viewpoint, rendering it rather unorthodox.Initially, it is worth noting that Charlie is endeavoring to articulate this moral capability in a manner that renders these metaphysical actions in human beings pleasing to God, based on the intricate workings of human moral faculties. Our assertion here is that man lacks an inherent source to assert moral aptitude through comprehending his duty. Man relinquished his comprehension of his duty during the original transgression.Charlie argues that intellect encompasses more than just knowledge of one's obligations. It involves finding satisfaction in doing what is good and right. In humans, the intellect allows us to comprehend spiritual goodness through our desires. It is within the intellect that we recognize the motivation to obey. However, when sin entered the world, humans became ignorant of spiritual goodness. This resulted in a loss of both desire and understanding of our obligations. Ultimately, this concept of human nature and our inability to do good is primarily influenced by our perception of ourselves rather than the tasks we are obligated to perform.Charlie appears to believe that humans have the capacity to perceive themselves as capable of doing good based on their inherent obligation to do so. However, Charlie is mistaken in equating the failure to fulfill this obligation as evidence of mankind's inability to perform any good action. Rather, this misconception stems from a flawed belief in a deity who assesses individuals on a scale relative to their efforts. It is important to acknowledge that this notion is not a genuine capability, but rather an unjust doctrine.