Not exact matches
It is the distance
between the abstract concept and concrete
reality,
between reason which as such can
grasp expressly only what is universal or the universal in the individual, and freedom which concerns and brings about the individual as such.
In this way the ontological argument, by drawing out the presupposition of metaphysical understanding, indicates that the choice before us is
between holding that there is a God and that «
reality» makes sense in some metaphysical manner, whether or not we can ever
grasp what that sense is, and holding that there is no God and that any apparent metaphysical understanding of
reality can only be an illusion which does not significantly correspond to the ultimate nature of things — unless this «nihilism» be regarded as a kind of metaphysical understanding instead of its blank negation.
For the moment, I wish only to stress the relationship which exists
between the divine
reality and the finite creatures in the world, whether or not this relationship is always fully
grasped and given the correct interpretation.
Even though these attempts at typification do not yet lead to consolidated results — Whitehead tries above all to define common sense as a «middle» level
between the mathematized natural scientific and the individual emotional
grasps of
reality — he acquires in this phase several fruitful insights which will also leave their mark on his mature cosmology.
Walter Kasper sees the problem as that of explaining «the relationship of the visible form of the Church to its hidden nature, which can only be
grasped in faith», the relationship
between its spiritual
reality and its institutional form.
Although strikingly heterogeneous, the affinity
between the two artists lies implicitly in their shared interest in invoking an aesthetic experience by employing «low resolution» both as a visual device and as a perceptual agent, rendering an embodied looking / seeing, seeking to
grasp the technological and psychological intricacies of
reality.