Classically the human mind is divided into three core faculties: the Intellect, the Will, and the emotions/passions. In other words, all operations of man can be explained as the interactions of those three faculties. In the Anglican model, the total depravity, the 'total fall', refers to the total fall of the Will. In the Calvinist (and to some extent the Lutheran) model, the fall has affected the Will and the Intellect. This has (at least) three key ramifications: 1.) Knowledge of God To the Anglican, even the unregenerate can know God through his own faculties, on the basis of Intellect and Reason, although he cannot choose him (in his Will). To the Reformed/Calvinist, the unregenrate cannot even apply Reason to the things of God; therefore you cannot talk to the unregenerate, prove the existence of God, or discuss any issues of God in a rational manner with him. There is no apologetics, evangelism, or missions, in the Calvinist mind (which is why they had nearly nonexistent missionary activities, for centuries). To those who are already regenerate and in the body of Christ, no more apologetics is necessary. And to those who are unregenerate, since their Mind is also fallen, no apologetics is possible. Thus the Calvinist is incapable of talking to the society around him. 2.) Natural Law The Anglican tradition of natural law is second to none. 3.) Natural knowledge; philosophy, science Because the Calvinists believed that not only the Will, but also the Intellect is fallen, consequently only among the regenerate is the Intellect operating correctly again. Consequently to anyone who wasn't a Christian, no science, no understanding, philosophy, or natural learning is ever possible. Science would only be possible to a Christian, whose mind was working correctly again. Therefore the Calvinists will reject all natural knowledge from a source that isn't a Christian, even if it were provable, verifiable, had evidence, etc. This explains the drastic anti-science and anti-intellectualism culture prevalent among the Reformed/Calvinist circles. The clearest expression of these tendencies in modern times is the theologian Cornelius Van Til, easily among the most influential Calvinists of the 20th century. He literally taught that it's impossible to conduct apologetics to the society around us; and he taught that natural knowledge was impossible to anyone but the Christian. That's why his successors at Westminster Seminary, like Vern Poythress, are now beginning to spread this idea that there must be a Christian version of mathematics (as the only correct version), because the other versions, conducted perhaps by unregenerate or the non-Christians, is automatically tainted, incorrect, and unreliable. Similarly with logic: Poythress has released a book about "Christian logic", because following Van Til, he teaches that logic cannot communicate to nonChristians. Logical thinking from any nonChristian is automatically invalid and incorrect, and proving anything to a nonChristian is impossible. Needless to say, there is no "Reformed natural law" tradition. At all. The closest they come to it is in their admission that the natural law may be seen in the 10 Commandments. On the contrary, the Anglicans have always rejected these profane positions. The history and record of the Anglican luminaries in philosophy and apologetics is second to none. Anglican scientists historically were more successful than just about anyone at inventing and discovering things (Charles Babbage literally invented the computer in the 1800s, etc). The Anglican position is that knowledge is knowledge, regardless of whoever it comes from, because it is based on observation, facts, deduction, and evidence. It is rare to find an anti-intellectualist Anglican who is suspicious of people thinking "too much" (I've never encountered one). On the other hand I often encounter the Reformed and their little brothers the Evangelicals who are very suspicious of people "thinking too much" and in general distrust almost any heavy thought, from almost any quarter. There is a similar problem among the Lutherans, and it needs to be fixed and corrected. By the way the Eastern Orthodox are nearly identical to the Calvinists in their anti-intellectualism. Apologetics is nearly nonexistent in EO circles, and their philosophy is basically just the theories of Gregory Palamas. There's practically no history of logic, proof, demonstration, knowledge, evidence, or the scientific method, in the EO tradition, apart from a few exceptions like Mendel.