Sentences with phrase «dialectical negation»

Dialectical negation must never lose a positive ground.

Kierkegaard conceived of faith as the product of a dialectical negation of time and history, of the «universal,» and of «objectivity»; however, his twentieth - century successors have imagined that faith is isolated from history, that faith is independent of an historical ground, and thus is totally autonomous.

Hegel's Aufhebung, or dialectical negation, is a movement of history and consciousness wherein the old passes into the new.

It is my persuasion that the thinker who has most truly understood the revolutionary and dialectical meaning of faith is Hegel, and that we must ever return to Hegel for a theoretical understanding of the meaning of a movement of dialectical negation.

There is a place in all religions for the dialectical negation or subduing of words and images.

The Phenomenology of Spirit is the work in which Hegel first fully realized his most fundamental and original thinking, one centered in a radically new philosophical method of pure dialectical negation (Aufhebung), a negation which is negation, preservation, and transcendence simultaneously, and which is the deepest driving power not only of consciousness and history but of absolute Spirit itself.

A dialectical negation of time and space culminates in a regeneration of Eternity — a renewal or repetition of a primordial Totality — and therefore an absolute negation of the profane is equivalent to a total affirmation of the sacred.

It is a striking fact that images of paradise throughout the history of religions bear the marks of a dialectical negation or reversal.

Kierkegaard identified faith as «subjectivity,» a subjectivity that is the dialectical negation of the «objectivity» that has progressively but decisively evolved in history.

Only such a dialectical negation can save the meaning of faith from the darkness brought on by the collapse of Christendom.

Here, cogito and credo are antithetical acts: modern or «objective» knowledge is not religiously neutral, as so many theologians have imagined; rather, it is grounded in a dialectical negation of faith.

Not exact matches

A genuinely dialectical form of faith can never be Gnostic, for it can never dissociate negation and affirmation; hence its negation of «history» must always be grounded in an affirmation of the «present.»

Hence authentic human existence could be understood as culminating in faith, the movement of faith could be limited to the negation of «objectivity,» and no occasion need arise for the necessity of a dialectical coincidence of the opposites.

To stop short of the deepest negation is to foreclose the possibility of a dialectical synthesis.

So likewise Kierkegaard's dialectical understanding of faith establishes the subjective truth of faith as a consequence of the negation of objectivity, and the passion and inwardness of faith is established only by virtue of the absurdity of its objective meaning or ground.

A truly dialectical image of God (or of the Kingdom of God) will appear only after the most radical negation, just as a genuinely eschatological form of faith can now be reborn only upon the grave of the God who is the symbol of the transcendence of Being.

For Tillich's method is only partially dialectical; it employs neither radical affirmation nor radical negation, accordingly it must culminate in a non-dialectical synthesis.

Altizer betrays his assumption of a metaphysics when he states, «Hegel's central idea of kenosis, or the universal and dialectical process of the self - negation of being, provided me with a conceptual route to a consistently kenotic or self - emptying understanding of the Incarnation, an understanding which I believe has been given a full visionary expression in the work of William Blake.»

Of course, this negation is dialectical.

A dialectical movement is, of course, never a movement of simple or sheer negation.

All dialectical thinking directs itself to the negation of the Given, of that which happens to appear or to be at hand.

Being neither a Gnostic escape from the world nor a romantic flight from history, dialectical thinking moves by means of a negation that is simultaneously affirmation.

Insofar as the religious movement of negation is dialectical, its negation of the profane is at bottom an affirmation of the sacred.

Consequently, dialectical thinking is inseparable from the Given which it must oppose; and it can only appear in conjunction with the manifestation of a Given which itself contains the seeds of its own negation.

In all the various expressions of its multiple forms, dialectical thinking must set itself against the autonomy of that which appears before it, seizing upon the immediate being which is manifest about it as the initial springboard to its own movement of negation.

Negation is here an essential objectification and hence distancing of oneself from prevailing cultural and intrapsychic images and preunderstandings, and consequently a dialectical moment of necessary alienation on the way to freedom and truth.

While I believe that Christianity is called to a negation and reversal of both the way to and all images of a primordial Totality, I nevertheless believe that such negation should be dialectical in the Hegelian sense, and therefore it must ultimately entail an affirmation of the primordial Totality.

On the contrary, pure reason is here understood to pass beyond or to dissolve itself, and it is just this self - negation of pure reason which makes manifest the active and dialectical reason of Vernunft.

But apart from a movement of dialectical or eschatological negation, fulfillment will not be eschatological; it will either fail to move from the old to the new or it will dualistically isolate the new from the old.

But this negation must be dialectical, which means that finally it must be affirmation.

When the sacred and the profane are understood as dialectical opposites whose mutual negation culminates in a transition or metamorphosis of each into its respective Other, then it must appear that a Christian and eschatological coincidentia oppositorum in this sense is finally a coming together or dialectical union of an original sacred and the radical profane.

But as its negation of history is grounded in an affirmation of the present, a dialectical mode of faith can never dissociate negation and affirmation.

Nor can this world - negation be dialectical.