And
if dualism may seem to lead to some intellectual contradiction, Tillman says, well, what is faith if not learning to embrace paradox?
But
if the dualism is false, then not only the theistic formulation but also the atheistic position becomes irrelevant and insignificant.
Not exact matches
If we would like to copy the previous solution we will answer:
dualism.
We arrive at a more attractive scientific generalization
if we dismiss the apparent
dualism between perception of the sheer present and memory of the past, and adopt instead the view that only the past literally gets itself experienced in its concrete actuality (MMCL 444)....
If we are truly to overcome
dualism, we must recognize that every natural entity resembles human experience in some way, for there is nothing of which we can be more sure than that there are human experiences in the world.
The question still arises, how did gnosticism and
dualism infiltrate Christianity so easily
if they are essentially alien to it?
If God does not mirror the world and thereby unify it, we are left with a fundamental
dualism between different levels of being Contingent being would appear to possess its own arena and validity apart from God, making it independent of the Ultimate.
A Cartesian
dualism would follow
if it were held that some occasions had regional standpoints, and hence were extended, while others did not, Whitehead has not maintained anything of this sort, nor have I.
If we are to avoid
dualism — and that is also my desire (Here as elsewhere, I follow Whitehead.
If we would admit that the properties of the physiological and the psychological side were not the same, we would still have to do with a kind of
dualism, at least what Kim (1966) called a «dualistic materialism.»
If internal relations are based upon subject - object interaction only, then Whiteheadians have not really overcome a
dualism which may be used to justify treating others as means rather than ends.
Victorian
dualisms continue to be operative in a congregation
if members separate church life from daily life.3 It is dualistic to believe that American culture is secular but church members are sacred, as
if they do not live in «the world.»
There is still a subtle
dualism operative here that can be overcome only
if we recognize nature's inherent creativity even apart from us.
For,
if we can learn from animals something important about inanimate nature, we can do it only by rejecting both
dualism and materialism.
After all,
if we only seek to meet the spiritual needs of people, we have fallen into the ancient trap of
dualism (mentioned above), thinking that it is only the spiritual aspects of life that matter.
It is the
dualism of soul and body, spirit and nature, mind and matter that has made possible the shift of problematics from that of how to explain death
if everything is alive, to that of how to explain life
if everything is dead.
Within us, Bergson states,»... there is succession without mutual externality; outside the ego, in space, mutual externality without succession,» (TFW 108, italics mine; cf. also TFW 116, 227),
If Descartes»
dualism is famous for the problems to which it leads, how many more will result from Bergson's joint assumption of an unextended durational mind and a geometrical and static world?
If this were not the case, we would relapse into Cartesian
dualism, implying a suspension of brain activity while the conscious agent is working its magic.
And it's a harmful
dualism, even
if it takes the form of veneration.
I think
if any of us are self - critically examining ourselves, we may find some form of «
dualism» we hold, where the evidence is crystal clear to us, but we still deny all or parts of it (like Curry) for unrelated reasons (knowing that, or finding it after reflection of yourself means you converted from «
dualism» to «partitioning»).
If we limit our conception of a person's life to what is «storied» in words, ignoring the functional biological whole of mind and body, we may slip into the
dualism of Descartian philosophy.