man as idoeology of the state, state as ideology of man

Fourth Letter on the aesthetic education of man (excerpt):

"Every individual human being, one may say, carries within him, potentially and prescriptively, and ideal man, the archetype of a human bing, and it is his life's task to be, through all his changing manifestations, in harmony with the unchanging unity of this ideal. This archetype which is to be discerned more or less clearly in every individual, is represented by the state, the objective and, as it were, canonical form in which all the diversity of individual subjects strive to unite. One can, however, imagine two different ways in which man existing in time can coincide with man as idea, and, in consequence, just as many ways in which the state can assert itself in individuals; either by the ideal man suppressing empirical man, and the state annulling individuals; or else by the individual himself becoming the state, and the man in time being ennobled to the stature of man as idea."

As Schiller relates the the ideal in an optimistic light, as it were to drive us towards the moral realm through intellect and reason, I tend to disagree in the sense that ideologies set up false expectations and disallow potential development through experience and "listening."* Rather than trying to move man upwards from the ground (by his own power) we ought to begin unerstanding man through transcended (holy) spirit. By God alone may we be lifted up (in Christ alone there is freedom) and in order to do so, we must deny our self first and recognize our need of redemption. Schiller relates to the conditions of nature and the sensuous as driving forces that suppress and deny man their inherent freedom. To this I would say that man's understanding of freedom is primarily a historical understanding, instead of an eternal one. We think freedom means the ability to do and act as our free will desires- what a worldly misunderstanding! Freedom is a certainty that we are redeemed, covered and lifted from eternal condemnation. I can wake up an be sure that God is still on the throne- what freedom! Schiller understands freedom as coming out of nature- perhaps through a varied form of natural selection so it seems through his third letter. If nature were to be the origin of man, and freedom the origin of man then it seems a bit counterintuitive that nature would now seem subject as well as man and yet we continue to deny a power outside of these two things, unless of course we call it the "moral realm." What a disintegration of God, ironically thorugh reason which Schiller attributes the capacity for freedom. Without God it seems reason becomes a tangled mess with loose ends all over the place.