Sentences with phrase «dualistic theories»

Niebuhr's antipathy toward any form of inherited sin reflected his fear that it would mitigate responsibility; hence he writes: «the theory of an inherited second nature is as clearly destructive of the idea of responsibility for sin as rationalistic and dualistic theories which attribute human evil to the inertia of nature» (NDM 262).

Yet for us this epistemological dimension of the redemption is not from the supposedly «incurably» dualistic nature of human knowing but from stubbornly dualistic theories of human knowing which over the millennia of their influence have whittled away wonder.

It is our duty to critique the dualistic theory and oppose the practices that follow from it.

Not exact matches

The misplaced concreteness of mind language and body language and the impossibility of interaction between domains whose very definitions preclude causal relations, become clear in the teeth of all the theories and institutions based on a dualistic ontology, e.g., psychiatry versus neurology versus psychoanalysis versus a holistic view of humanity.

If evolution is a fact and if the most basic meaning of evolution is that the complex forms of life emerge from the simple, how can the dualistic forms of evolutionary theory account for the emergence of the human mind from inert lifeless matter, the animate from the inanimate?

But with his theory of monads Leibniz stands in the dualistic line of Descartes inasmuch as he contrasts the monadic, subsistent soul not with a single body but rather with a multiplicity of equally subsistent monads.

This theory of prehension means the overcoming of the dualistic notion that there are some concrete facts which are merely public and others which are merely private.

Along with dualistic mythology several developments in scientific thought since the seventeenth century have contributed to the exorcism of mind from nature: first, there is the cosmography of classical (Newtonian) physics picturing our world as composed of inanimate, unconscious bits of «matter» needing only the brute laws of inertia to explain their action; second, the Darwinian theory of evolution with its emphasis on chance, waste and the apparent «impersonality» of natural selection; third, the laws of thermodynamics (and particularly the second law) with the allied cosmological interpretation that our universe is running out of energy available to sustain life, evolution and human consciousness; fourth, the geological and astronomical disclosure of enormous tracts of apparently lifeless space and matter in the universe; fifth, the recent suggestions that life may be reducible to an inanimate chemical basis; and, finally, perhaps most shocking of all, the suspicion that mind may be explained exhaustively in terms of mindless brain chemistry.

This distinction between what we might call contingent (polarity) and radical (dualistic) field theories is important if Gestalt is to find a rapprochement with the rest of psychology.

While Gestalt thinking about field theory has a tremendous amount to offer other psychological disciplines in softening their overly dualistic / objectivist / mechanistic perspectives, if it goes too far, it will fail to find «common ground», simply argue for one «side» of a duality over another, and stay on the outside, looking in with mutual judgment and rejection.