Sentences with phrase «by eternal principles»

The essay clearly draws the battle lines: the ambitious, narrow, worldly scholars who refuse to address the large human questions and seek only fame in the modern academy versus the religiously faithful who stand by the eternal principles even at the expense of their careers.

There are both conservative and progressive «simplifiers» who would decide the question what is best to be done here and now by eternal principles instead of by prudent practical considerations.

Not exact matches

The Incarnation is not finally conditioned by the contingency of sin, for what happens at the Incarnation is that the selfdistinction of the eternal Son from the Father, which is the ontological principle of creation and its history, itself takes «historical form» and so achieves its full extension.

They say then that it is more simple to believe at once in the eternal pre-existence of the world, as it is now going on, and may for ever go on by the principle of reproduction which we see and witness, than to believe in the eternal pre-existence of an ulterior cause, or Creator of the world, a being whom we see not, and know not, of whose form substance and mode or place of existence, or of action no sense informs us, no power of the mind enables us to delineate or comprehend.

To pick out just three: that which Deleuze theorizes as «the virtual» bears a certain similarity to Whiteheadian pure potentiality; likewise, the elements of the virtual, namely, what Deleuze calls «Ideas,» play a role comparable to that attributed to eternal objects; finally, the factor in the Deleuzean system which corresponds most closely to Whitehead's notion of creativity — that ultimate principle by which the production of novelty is to be thought — goes, for Deleuze, under the name of «productive difference,» or «Difference in itself?»

This is God as the principle of limitation and the organ of novelty who achieves these ends by his ordered envisagement of the realm of eternal 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.»

Already in the earlier books it is clear that God functions as principle of limitation by ordering the eternal objects.

By denying that the value in nature is static, Camus wishes to insure man against the possibility that a theocracy, for example, could assert rules based upon «eternal principles» to suppress freedom.

By the «ontological principle,» the system of eternal objects, or possibles, must be grounded in some actual existent, in this case God's mental pole, or God's primordial nature.

In order to interpret this core - principle of revelation, we must understand its essential presupposition; namely, that events are present «in» other events - present not just abstractly (through «eternal objects»), i.e., mediated by the «general,» but as singular events that effect their further history by their unique concreteness (PR 338).12 Whitehead recognizes precisely this constellation when he says:» [T] he truism that we can only conceive in terms of universals has been stretched to mean that we can only feel in terms of universals.

By Christ he meant the principle of New Being, which is the eternal principle of God's self - revelation, which his contemporaries recognized in Jesus.27

That aspect could be provided by the principle of limitation, for it limits the scope of eternal objects to those which could possibly ingress into actual occasions (SMW 178).

The mental pole starts with the conceptual registration of the physical pole.10... The mental pole is the subject determining its own ideal of itself by reference to eternal principles of valuation autonomously modified in their application to its own physical objective datum.11 (PR 248.21 - 24,.34 - 41a, D in F)

The justification for any relevance extending beyond actuality would have to depend upon the internal relatedness of the eternal objects ordered as a realm, The occasion incorporates these new elements in forming its «ideal of itself by reference to eternal principles of valuation.»

Each actual occasion prehends the space - time continuum in its infinite entirety; that, says Whitehead, is nothing but an example of the general principle (also illustrated by prehension of qualitative eternal objects) that «actual fact includes in its own constitution real potentiality which is referent beyond itself.»

By the ontological principle, there must be an eternal actual entity whose active character that realm expresses.

History does not evolve as a continuous process determined by eternal rational principles.

By virtue of the ontological principle, «eternal objects» are not actual.

Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question «Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?»

This principle does not hold true of the eternal objects; some of them can be dismissed completely by negative prehensions.

For Wilson these roots and some of this knowledge are themselves guided by what he believes are the universal and eternal principles of Darwinian evolutionary theory Wilson never acknowledges that, by relying on that theory and by generalizing it, he subscribes to principles that transcend particular histories just as surely as do the ideas of the theological and philosophical transcendentalists.

Thus there is a polarity in this concept of God: he is both abstract and concrete; he is both «eternal» and «everlasting»; he is both himself and yet endlessly related; he is both transcendent and immanent; he is both the chief principle of explanation and yet participant, working with, and influenced by, all that is to be explained.

The apparent incoherence introduced into Whitehead's thought by the application of the ontological principle to the role of the eternal objects can be removed.

According to the ontological principle, eternal objects can not be effective for actual occasions except by the decision of some actual entity.

Using these as an explanation would only risk doing what John Dewey urged us to renounce — the kind of pseudo-explanation that «only abstracts some aspect of the existing course of events in order to reduplicate it as a petrified eternal principle by which to explain the very changes of which it is the formalization» (4:11).

He focuses on the emergence of novelty as it precedes and is presupposed by all conscious reflection and decision, whereas I am speaking of new possibilities introduced by highly reflective consciousness.53 However, I do not wish to press any claim beyond this: Whitehead should not preclude in principle the possibility that a temporal occasion may have toward some eternal object the kind of relation God has toward all.

That Whitehead sometimes thought of the initial data as having the virtual unity of a unified datum is indicated in this discussion of the fourth categoreal obligation: «The mental pole is the subject determining its own ideal of itself by reference to eternal principles of valuation autonomously modified in their application to its own physical objective datum» (PR 248 / 380F).

For Whitehead, God first functioned as «the principle of limitation,»... In Process and Reality, the eternal objects are organized together and given their respective «relational essences» by the primordial or non-temporal activity of God.

Cobb says,»... the way in which God functions as the principle of limitation is by ordering the infinite possibilities of the eternal objects according to principles of value.

I am told by preachers that I need to practice this old testament «principal», and I am told it is an eternal principle, yet all these others I just listed never did it, and now I'm expected, or rather COMMANDED to do it, or I'm under a curse if I don't.

''... There is what I call the American idea... This idea demands, as the proximate organization thereof, a democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; of course, a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of God; for shortness» sake, I will call it the idea of Freedom...»