Sentences with phrase «human relations between»

Not exact matches

Happiness has been explored in terms of the relations between humans and their past, the objection goes, while the relation of human action to the future has been ignored.

Since political principles identify the proper relations between humans, and since these relations are not constitutive of happiness, freedom has meant the absence of authority or coercion, i.e., the liberty to pursue happiness without human interference.

Flannery O'Connor's novel The Violent Bear It Away does suggest a more satisfactory relation for human beings between the ordinary and the transcendent though it is, on the face of it, a very strange one indeed.19 Her novel is about a fourteen - year - old boy, Francis Tarwater, who, after the death of his great - uncle, a self - proclaimed prophet, goes to his uncle Rayber in order to fulfill the Lord's «call» that he, Tarwater, baptize Rayber's young idiot son.

This is, obviously, based on a dualistic view of the relation between human beings and animals.

For a Whiteheadian it is more natural and correct to speak of the relation as between human beings and «other» animals; for humanity is one species of animals.

Idolatry leads to pride, which is very destructive and terrible in perverting relations between human beings.

In fact, theologians who write about ecological concerns are united in their opinion that a holistic view of reality is basic to a responsible relation between humans and nature.

Psychoanalysis gives special emphasis to the reciprocal relations between bodily, rational, and spiritual functions in the human personality.

Their approach is something like this: Since there are revolutions in the world, and since, from a human point of view, they may seem to be legitimate, is it not possible to develop a theology of these revolutions and to discover a relation between them and Christianity?

I believe it is authentically Christian thinking to single this out for special focus and to imply it in the fresh application of the relations between God and the world, among human beings, and between human beings and other creatures.

• the capacity to reach objective and universal truth as well as valid metaphysical knowledge; • the unity of body and soul in man; • the dignity of the human person; • relations between nature and freedom; • the importance of natural law and of the «sources of morality,»... • and the necessary conformity of civil law to moral law.

Thus the relation between a democratic constitution and the preconditions of its positive law would be analogous to that between the human and variable canon law and the divine structures of the Church.

Babylonia, situated on a broad low plain between the rivers at their widest points, was very fertile and had developed an advanced culture as early as 3500 B.C.. From this region comes the famous Code of Hammurabi which, dating from long before the time of Moses, shows high ethical discernment regarding the establishment of justice in human relations.

True, the right relation between the hierarchical ministry and the laity can never be completely regulated by institutional and legal methods, but involves also an element of human freedom as well as of the spirit of the Church.

One possibility is that we are simply using this current language to speak of the importance of the church's developing its doctrine of nature more fully and in ways appropriate to our new understanding of the relation between human beings and the natural world.

This applies to the relations among human beings, the relations of human beings to the rest of the world, and the relations between God and the world, if these are allowed at all.

Now, Gudorf contends, present inroads on this tradition insist that: «1) bodily experience can reveal the divine, 2) affectivity is as essential as rationality to true Christian love, 3) Christian love exists not to bind autonomous selves, but as the proper form of connection between beings who become human persons in relation, and 4) the experience of bodily pleasure is important in creating the ability to trust and love others, including God.»

Appraisal, he tells us, involves discerning (1) the ontological features of the human, especially in its relation to the divine, (2) what is «enduring, true and real» about the tradition, (3) what this truth implies for concrete «choices, styles, patterns and obligations» of life, and (4) the connection between these different levels of truth in the tradition and concrete situations that we confront in our everyday life.

The Basingers believe «that most influential classical theists — e.g., Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin — have affirmed I - omnipotence»; they go on to say that «unfortunately, Plantinga, himself, has not explicitly acknowledged the fact that his analysis of the relation between divine sovereignty and human freedom is basically an attack upon, not a defense of, the view of omnipotence that most classical theists seem to hold.»

To this useful image Marian Evans contrasts Dr. Cumming's God, who «instead of sharing and aiding our human sympathies is directly in collision with them; who instead of strengthening the bond between man and man, by encouraging the sense that they are both alike the objects of His love and care, thrusts himself between them and forbids them to feel for each other except as they have relation to Him.»

In this context a relation between human person and divine creativity, although complex, becomes a meaningful question to consider.

Now the dynamics of the global market will dominate the relation between the natural life and the life in the human society.

This is clearest of all in ethics, which is essentially the study of the relation between the «is» of human nature and the «ought» of human possibility.

It is rather the «impact» of the relation in the present moment between the human I and that non-human existing being which has become real for him as «Thou».

Also in the face of the ecological disaster created by the modern ideas of total separation of humans from nature and of the unlimited technological exploitation of nature, it is proper for primal vision to demand, not an undifferentiated unity of God, humanity and nature or to go back to the traditional worship of nature - spirits, but to seek a spiritual framework of unity in which differentiation may go along with a relation of responsible participatory interaction between them, enabling the development of human community in accordance with the Divine purpose and with reverence for the community of life on earth and in harmony with nature's cycles to sustain and renew all life continuously.

At the same time, he criticizes Buber in a way that no careful reader of I and Thou could possibly do, suggesting that for Buber the I - Thou relation is uniquely between man and God and not between man and man and within the larger human community.

The difference between I - it and I - Thou is not carried over from the German to the English in translation, but the difference is important in indicating the two stages of Buber's insight into man — first, that he is to be understood, in general, in terms of his relationships rather than taken in himself; second, that he is to be understood specifically in terms of that direct, mutual relation that makes him human.

Furthermore, it is obvious that this shift in strategy has been facilitated by his change of view on the relation between the historicity of natural processes and human affairs.

Another point about the common tradition that requires note if we are to make progress toward sorting out the relation between authority and office is that, within it, authority is a term that is applied in a proper sense only to persons, either the divine Persons of the Trinity or human persons who act on God's behalf.

When the I of the I - It relation comes in between man and God, this glance is no longer possible, and, as a result, the image - making power of the human heart declines.

The idea is that God, the eternal King of the Universe, intervenes in human «affairs to set up a certain enduring relation of a unique character between Himself and those men who will accept His terms.

No evidence of the human origins of religious belief will upset the religious believer, because he can always appeal to a very convenient, and convently mysterious, relation between God and a defective humanity.

Conflicts of doctrine about human nature between investigators in different disciplines must then be ascribed to errors in inquiry, or to an epistemological imperialism that arbitrarily limits the admissible perspectives, or to an incorrect analysis of the relation of the several perspectives to one another.

«The fundamental convictions as to relations between the human and the divine are sometimes different [from the American religion] among Catholics, Lutherans, and Jews in America, but nearly all else who are believers are American Religionists, whether they are capable of knowing it or not.»

Highly significant for Christology are these two quotations from Hartshorne's The Divine Relativity10 In the first he refuses to allow «paradox» to cover up illogicality: «A theological paradox, it appears, is what a contradiction becomes when it is about God rather than something else...» In the second he applies this to the relation between God's power and our human decisions: «For God to do what I do when I decide my own act, determine my own concrete being, is mere nonsense, words without meaning.

But Whitehead does not agree that there is a radical difference between our relations with other human beings and with the rest of the world.

Perhaps to a greater degree than we care to admit, the principle of the relation between order and in - equality may function in the organization of life at the human level.

Instead, it's about the human tendency to forget what Chesterton called the «sharp distinction between the science of mental relations... and the science of physical facts.»

Rather, it is in the very manner in which he develops and emphasizes the distinctiveness of the Christian story — focusing on its own internal criteria for truth without reference to publicly accessible criteria of common human experience and rational inquiry — and the relation between the church and the world.

What is the relation, if any, between the human sense of mystery and the Christian's belief in a special historical revelation?

God's operation in regard to the human soul loses its predicamental, intra-mundane appearance when it is recognized as exemplifying the concept which we have attempted to work out as appropriate to the relation between God and finite beings in their activities and change.

A religious insight has profound political significance when it makes the difference between a fragmentary adherence to democracy and its practice in human relations.

So far our comments have been largely a contrast of stances toward human existence: a plea for a more truly dialectical, less dualistic understanding of the relation between form and energy, a plea for a similar openness toward the past, a question about the future to the effect that the incompleteness of the present ought not to frustrate Dr. Altizer into insisting that the total reversal promised by the glimpsed eschatological future be the only standard or norm of faith.

In Roman Catholicism, for example, one goes from the official condemnation of the «modernists» in an early part of this century to what might be appropriately described as the dominant position today, found in Pope Pius XII's Human generis (1950), which, concerning the relation between evolution and creation, accepts evolution yet insists on the special, «second» creation of the human Human generis (1950), which, concerning the relation between evolution and creation, accepts evolution yet insists on the special, «second» creation of the human human soul.

Faith and its opposite Unbelief presuppose a universal spiritual dimension of human selfhood in which the self sees itself as poised between the world and God i.e. at once as an integral part of the world of matter and the community of life governed by the mechanical and organic laws of development respectively on the one hand, and having a limited power to transcend these laws through its spiritual relation to the transcendent realm of God's purpose on the other.

Hitherto the Western industrial culture has dictated the relations between life in nature and life in human society, both capitalist and socialist.

A second problem for a realistic substantialism has been that it has difficulty accounting either for human thought or for the relation between human thought and the material substances.

Perhaps the pivotal point of relation between higher learning and religion lies somewhere between the deepest human sense of the limits of our knowing and the cultivation, in the midst of such chastening wisdom, of the spiritual virtue of hope.

An act of human perception (in the primary mode) provides an example of causation which can be generalized to the relations between other actual entities.

The primacy of practical reason and of the summu bonum or supreme aim or purpose, has some validity, but should not be allowed to belittle theoretical reason, nor should the relations between human and divine values be allowed to reduce God to a mere means for the production of human good.