Sentences with phrase «datum as the unity»

Not exact matches

Thus relational power is here understood as the ability (1) to be affected, in the sense, especially, of being open, sensitive, receptive, and empathic; (2) to create oneself out of what has been experienced by synthesizing that data into an aesthetic unity; and (3) to influence others by the way in which one has received and responded to their influence.

The first category imposes a compatibility so strict as to insure a virtual unity of data, an objective unity which is necessary to protect the underlying unity of the subject during all phases of concrescence.

For a while there, it appears as though Whitehead may have fashioned a theory of a virtual unity» unifying the initial data received into an objective datum to which, perhaps, conceptual feelings could then be applied.17

Once the unity of the original datum was given up, prehension could be interpreted in terms of physical feeling as one element in concrescence which could now be reordered in its final phases.

As long as Whitehead had confidence in the adequacy of his early theory of prehension (in SMW), the datum theory of an occasion's unity helAs long as Whitehead had confidence in the adequacy of his early theory of prehension (in SMW), the datum theory of an occasion's unity helas Whitehead had confidence in the adequacy of his early theory of prehension (in SMW), the datum theory of an occasion's unity held.

Consider his description of «the actual world of any actual entity as a nexus whose objectification constitutes the complete unity of objective datum for the physical feeling of that actual entity» (PR 230D).

For Whitehead, Creativity is the ultimate presupposition or given operation which describes the universe as a harmonizing of data into a novel unity.

And a second objection would have to be made that what is really the first datum is the unity of a relation between a person inquiring, in the perspective of a limitless horizon of inquiry, and an object that manifests itself as sensibly perceived a posteriori and is received within the horizon but can not be derived from it.

That is, one would need the capability to organize a diversity of data in harmonious patterns while building up a richer and richer variety in as coherent a unity as possible.

But these mediate the unity only since, in their perishing as a datum, they pass along to other occasions, as a lure for the development of the latter, the complexity achieved with them (i.e., within the concrete individual occasions) and the integration of their relative actual world.

This has two unfortunate results: it makes the regnant society, or as we would perhaps more loosely say, «the mind,» into an «ego» — in which case the self becomes less a «lived - body» than a Cartesian cogito — and it gives the presiding occasion of the regnant society the impossible, or at least, improbable, job of coordinating all bodily data all the time, pre-reflectively and reflectively, into an organizational unity.

It is a process of «feeling» the many data, so as to absorb them into the unity of one individual «satisfaction.»

After its world, its subjectivity, this room for development, has been exhausted, after the achievement of its subjective aim, which is its supreme concretion and unity, it is now to be regarded as occurring in various other processes of concrescence as objectified, as a datum.

Since there are now many feelings, there are many objective data, but as compatible, they form a «virtual unity» which can perform the same role as the original datum in providing the ontological basis for the concrescence.

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).

In a world of data - dentites and troubling socio - political times, Washington's works act as metaphors for broader realities and underlying universal connections where differences of race, creed and gender are displaced in favor of unity and a singular pluralism.

The strict agreement between the A1B field, as a standard, and the others is quantified in Table 10.5, by the absolute measure M (Watterson, 1996; a transformation of a measure of Mielke, 1991), with unity meaning identical fields and zero meaning no similarity (the expected value under random rearrangement of the data on the grid of the measure prior to the arcsin transformation).

But as long as this debate is nothing but an argument of one set of statistical assumptions vs another, with no emphasis on the collecting of data, defining a measurable causal mechanism, or bringing their theories into unity with the existing and indisputable laws of energy and thermodynamics, then you are all equally guilty of convoluting the truth and corrupting the true scientific process.