Sentences with phrase «as objects in the world»

I am then self - consciously aware of myself as an object in the world, vulnerable to the interpretations of others.

If I were to conceive of both myself and the object as world - lines in space - time that intersect on the occasions when the object reacts against me, I would view myself as an object in the world of existents and there would be nothing external to me in the epistemological sense of an external world.

«The problem is that we can't see objects or conditions of the world directly, except through the light that falls on the eye — which is not the same thing as the objects in the world that reflect that light.

The intermediate layer of white, connecting color to canvas, also serves as bridge from painting as composition to painting as an object in the world.

Not exact matches

In an increasingly digital world, CDs have turned into MP3s, DVDs have become digital downloads, and now objects are available as files.

Assessing the size is also difficult: even though the perspective might be a factor here, the object seems to be smaller than the F - 16s, but probably much larger than a micro-drone as the bird - sized Perdix drones, 103 of those, launched from three F / A -18 F Super Hornets, took part in one of the world's largest micro-drone swarms over the skies of Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California on Oct. 25, 2016.

When you attend a meeting in VR, you are able to share the same sense of place with multiple others, interact naturally with 3D objects and speak one - on - one with others as you would in the real world.»

Mr. Swarovski has spear - headed the company's expansion over the past thirty years to become the largest manufacturer of cut crystal in the world, supplying the fashion jewelry industry, the fashion industry, the chandelier and art object industries, as well as manufacturing diverse consumer products sold under the company's own brand.

Change and time in our experience of the world are perceived as related to the differences between objects.

There can be no doubt that God makes decisions a propos of the disjunctive multiplicity of eternal objects; the difficulty is to establish in precisely what sense these divine decisions are distinguishable from the choices and calculations made by the Leibnizian deity Whitehead's dilemma seems to be this: on the one hand, the principle of classification is to be challenged by positing the primordiality of a world of eternal objects that knows «no exclusions, expressive in logical terms»; on the other hand, positing pure potentiality as a «boundless and unstructured infinity» (IWM 252) lacking all logical order would seem to be precisely that conceptual move which renders it «inefficacious» or «irrelevant.»

As Whitehead says in Science and the Modern World (p. 160), «Since the relationships of A [an eternal object] to other eternal objects stand determinately in the essence of A, it follows that they are internal relations.»

He then utilized terminology that for decades informed the basic stance of process theology on the nature of true power, though, as we shall see, that is open to challenge: God «persuades the world by an act of suffering with the kind of power which leaves its object free to respond in humility and love.»

In the real world, any object that provides no evidence for its existence is classified as imaginary.

Just as the seed must learn to see beyond the world of the seed, beyond the forms and objects found there, so reason must learn to see beyond its world, beyond its logic, beyond the forms and objects found in it, for its «Other» and Ground.

Vorhanden, which Heidegger uses of the peculiar mode of being characteristic of inanimate objects, as contrasted with responsible human Dasein, I have translated by «tangible», as in Bultmann the antithesis is not so much between Vorhandensein and Dasein as between the tangible realities of the visible world and eternal realities, very much like the Pauline contrast of kata sarka and kata pneuma.

too true; you're right, we are holistic people in a holistic world living holistic lives and political theory, religion, ethics, behavior, psychology, these and many others are all so inextricably intertwined with each other that it may be better to think of them as different views of the same object rather than distinct objects that are inter-related (using «object» here, of course, metaphorically)

I can therefore see an object in so far as objects form a system or a world, and in so far as each one treats the others round it as spectators of its hidden aspects which guarantee the permanence of those aspects by their presence.

Whitehead maintains that, in addition to the «real potentiality» of the given world, there is a «general potentiality» provided by the multiplicity of eternal objects as envisioned in the primordial nature of God's character (PR 65 / 102).

It considered the natural world to be an object, without subjectivity or rights, and certainly not as participating with humans in a single earth community.

Then a theological passage, «Eternal objects, as in God's primordial nature, constitute the Platonic world of ideas» (PR 73), is translated: God's primordial nature is an abstract structure of mathematical Platonic forms (PW 59/56).

Because Whitehead himself usually explains this operation by way of a common eternal object which is illustrated in all the actual entities of the nexus, the significance of a transmuted feeling as a feeling of physical community in the actual world is often overlooked.

This insight opens the way to a fresh look at that harsh separation of the world into an outer world in which objects interact inexorably by cause and effect, and an inner world in which we experience ourselves as active agents.

In the same spirit Santayana and Whitehead agree in objecting, like Nietzsche, to the idea that change in the natural world is controlled by «laws of nature,» viewing the laws rather as simply descriptions of what each unit to which they apply «decides» to do itself (RB 301 - 302In the same spirit Santayana and Whitehead agree in objecting, like Nietzsche, to the idea that change in the natural world is controlled by «laws of nature,» viewing the laws rather as simply descriptions of what each unit to which they apply «decides» to do itself (RB 301 - 302in objecting, like Nietzsche, to the idea that change in the natural world is controlled by «laws of nature,» viewing the laws rather as simply descriptions of what each unit to which they apply «decides» to do itself (RB 301 - 302in the natural world is controlled by «laws of nature,» viewing the laws rather as simply descriptions of what each unit to which they apply «decides» to do itself (RB 301 - 302).

Originally as the principle of limitation, the principle of concretion determined which of the eternal objects would be actualizable in the world, now each occasion actualizes itself in terms of God's gradation of values.

By this distinction of two modes of passivity — of receiving forms - Aristotle sets off the world of conscious experience from the world of nature, but in such a way that not only the objects but the very workings of nature are included as part of what is felt.

As such it is to be distinguished from the perception of an object merely as passively situated in the external world and not experienced as affecting the sentienAs such it is to be distinguished from the perception of an object merely as passively situated in the external world and not experienced as affecting the sentienas passively situated in the external world and not experienced as affecting the sentienas affecting the sentient.

We should emphasize the unity of God and see the «natures» as abstractions, descriptions from particular viewpoints of how God as a whole functions in relation to the world and to the eternal objects.

Moreover, Santayana would agree with Whitehead's statement that» [an] eternal object is always a potentiality actual entities; but in itself... it is neutral as to the facts of its... ingression in any particular actual entity of the temporal world» (PR 44).

And this precisely is the facet of the object that extends beyond conscious experience, for it is doubtless true of any arising entity that it must take, and perhaps even take in, the world as it finds it.

Instead, they should be treated as adjectives describing the character of how God as a whole functions in relation to the world and to the eternal objects.

The conclusion I want to pull out of these considerations is this: if there is at least one actual entity in the world characterized by at least one eternal object, one specific form of definiteness, then this actual entity provides all the ontological ground required for the realm of eternal objects — an appeal to God is not necessary.11 And, indeed, in Whitehead, as in Aristotle, there is an eternity and an abeternity of becoming so that within the terms of the system it is inconceivable that there be any region of the extensive continuum, no matter how far it be extended fore or aft, where there is not a generation of actual entities exhibiting concrete forms of definiteness.

The realm of eternal objects is properly described as a «realm,» because each eternal object has its status in this general systematic complex of mutual relatedness (Science and the Modern World 231).

I attend to my perceiving, feeling, imaging, thinking and deciding, rather than to myself as acting in the world or as a social object.

Zen begins with the ordinary individual who is separated from his own true Buddha nature by the false dichotomies of a «Buddha» far back in history, or now in Nirvana; or, more existentially, man as separated from the world around him by a subject - object dualism.

This scale, consequently, can be of aid in categorizing men and animals as differing objects in a world of objects but not in discovering the uniqueness of man as man.

In this presentness it is no longer true (as it obviously is in the «having become» world of active subject and passive object) that the existing beings over against us can not in some sense move to meet us as we theIn this presentness it is no longer true (as it obviously is in the «having become» world of active subject and passive object) that the existing beings over against us can not in some sense move to meet us as we thein the «having become» world of active subject and passive object) that the existing beings over against us can not in some sense move to meet us as we thein some sense move to meet us as we them.

This means, as Whitehead puts it, that «a particular determination can be made of the how of some definite relationship of a definite eternal object A to a definite number n of other eternal objects, without any determination of the other n objects, x1, x2,... x11, except that they have, each of them, the requisite status to play their respective parts in that multiple relationship» (Science and the Modern World 237).

Ninian Smart has shown that although Western religious traditions have been predominantly numinous and Eastern traditions predominantly mystical, all the major world religions have in fact included both types of experience.18 Early Israel gave priority to the numinous; biblical literature portrays the overwhelming sense of encounter, the prophetic experience of the holy as personal, the acknowledgment of the gulf between the worshipper and the object of worship.

I do not think the proposition that future possibilities as causal in the present is contestable, though some will object to the use of the word God in relation to the reality of future possibilities and their lure upon the world.

Its object is not simply to understand the world but to respond to the power of God which is recreating it... Christian theology is prophetic only in so far as it dares, in full reflection, to declare how, at a particular place and time, God is at work, and thus to show the Church where and when to participate in his work.6

But if it should as objects for the contemplation of the intellect but its objectification in actions and deeds that become embodied in the flesh and blood life of the reader, it will in turn realize a new potentiality: the transformation of the reader's self and the world to which that self belongs.

And third, it assumes that time is distinct from the world, that time is a container, as it were, in which objects are placed.

The Enlightenment is white, male, European and rationalist, and is regarded as a key agent in perpetrating imperialism, colonialism, racism and the exploitation of the natural environment, The Enlightenment view assumes that we can possess knowledge based on publicly recognized fundamental principles that enable us to engage the world as an object of investigation.

But God as a physical entity was largely rejected by theologians and philosophers because they thought that God was not one object among other objects in the world.

5 This is a remarkable anticipation of Whitehead's view in Process and Reality that God's primordial ordering of the world's possibilities (the eternal objects) is the ultimate source of novelty in an emergent universe, except that Thornton understands these possibilities to be everlasting rather than timeless.6 This reification of what for Whitehead is purely possible, needing concrete embodiment in the actual world, leads Thornton to conceive of the eternal order as absolutely actual in its unchangeableness, identical with God.

The answer to John's questions is provided by McGuire when he writes, «Our very existence is constituted by truth,» and in explicating that» Schelling develops this insight in his identity philosophy by arguing for the Absolute as the unity that must necessarily precede the subject - object dichotomy of the finite world.»

God is understood as unchanging in his primordial nature which envisions the eternal objects and as changing in his creative response to the events of the world.

We live in a world in which women have been devalued to the point that they must wield their bodies as objects, making themselves vulnerable, for the sake of acquiring power or influence.

«The best view is by no means the closest view... we consciously stand back and create distance in order to look at the world, i.e., at objects as parts of the world: and also to be unembarrassed by the closeness of that which we wish only to see; to have the full liberty of our scanning attention.»

Not sin, for it is thought of as a universal human attribute; nor forgiveness, for it is conceived as a mere event in the world of external objects, on which man by his very theories and proofs exercises judgment, asserting that divine forgiveness can and must be thus and so.