Yes, that's not bad at all. I also agree with the following explanation by Arthur C. Custance, a 20th century author. He was a "science isn't inconsistent with faith" guy, and I believe he was Anglican:
"Total Depravity is not intended to signify that unregenerate man is wholly evil in everything he does, but rather that nothing he does is ever wholly good. In so far as motive determines the moral character and spiritual significance of an act, every deed has something of sinfulness about it because man's will is fatally corrupted by his fallen nature. Not all motives are equally sinful, but no motive is wholly pure. Hence, from a moral and spiritual point of view, human activity is always poisoned as to its motive, to a greater or lesser extent. This fundamental impurity of motive is the reason for saying that man is totally depraved. This depravity is reflected in man's entire impotence towards any spiritual good; in this respect unregenerate man is not merely sick but dead. Consequently the salvation of man is altogether a work of God, initiated and carried through by Him without the help of man, man being able neither effectively to resist nor to assist the elective purposes of God directed towards his salvation."
This appears to be at least consistent with what we actually see in the real world, since we know that lost people DO things that are normally considered "good".
And as to Free Will, I think it's helpful to return to the phenomena once in a while and to realize that the notion is not a slam dunk. I simply cannot think that Luther and Calvin are, uh, totally depraved -- or significantly more depraved than I am, if left to my own devices. So I don't see Calvin is obviously perverted in his account of things. Maybe wrong, but not setting out to do evil.
Right, and we remember that total depravity only applies to unregenerate man. After regeneration, we still suffer from a remnant of the old man, but it is no longer total depravity.
There is no question of choice. We embrace the answer and try to understand it and to work it out and live with it because our chance of choosing between this futile effort and that equally futile effort is swallowed up in the freedom of the truth.
Yes, that's an excellent way to look at it. I agree.
Yu have no idea how good I feel reading that.
No. "Totally depraved" would mean that someone can do nothing good at all, even with help, not just partially good and partially evil. This world does not leave us the choice of "absolutely perfect" or "absolute evil". More correctly, the definition should be "partially depraved", since our motives are very rarely totally evil.
The world is not black and white. There is a lot of grayness in this life, even amongst those who claim to be led by the Spirit of God.
Regards