Sentences with phrase «objects have sense»

This means that intentional objects have sense only in the context of a larger world - horizon which is not due to subjective constitution.

The first object has a sense of potential energy and growth.

Not exact matches

Lyasoff added that one major challenge would be to secure reliable technology to ensure the «autonomous taxis» can sense and avoid other objects.

When you attend a meeting in VR, you are able to share the same sense of place with multiple others, interact naturally with 3D objects and speak one - on - one with others as you would in the real world.»

As Trapani explains: «The intellect [for Maritain] is a superior, intuitive, immaterial knowing power that operates together with the instrumentality of the senses in a diversity of ways, and, having being as its proper object, it puts us in direct contact with reality itself.»

There can be no doubt that God makes decisions a propos of the disjunctive multiplicity of eternal objects; the difficulty is to establish in precisely what sense these divine decisions are distinguishable from the choices and calculations made by the Leibnizian deity Whitehead's dilemma seems to be this: on the one hand, the principle of classification is to be challenged by positing the primordiality of a world of eternal objects that knows «no exclusions, expressive in logical terms»; on the other hand, positing pure potentiality as a «boundless and unstructured infinity» (IWM 252) lacking all logical order would seem to be precisely that conceptual move which renders it «inefficacious» or «irrelevant.»

We have already recognized the sense in which eternal objects are internally related: the more general or abstract function includes the less general as a constituent or term.

This is the sense in which «a fact can harbor potentiality» (Adventures 138): All objects that exist are actual either (1) as determinate, satisfied processes physically felt, or (2) as indeterminate objects created in the present and conceptually felt in the present — by what Whitehead would call Valuation (also Reproduction and Conformity) and Reversion — as the present whole weighs somewhat general and indeterminate alternatives for its satisfaction.

Such an object has a sacramental character in the broad sense.

Because of God's transcendence it would be mythological to refer to God's action in terms appropriate only to objects available, in principle at least, to ordinary sense perception.13 This especially means that one can not speak of God in terms of the categories of time and space; 14 i.e., whatever is predicated of God can not apply only to some particular time and space, but must apply equally to all times and spaces.15 Thus the implication of Ogden's criterion for non-mythological language about God corresponds to his statement of several years ago, that «there is not the slightest evidence that God has acted in Christ in any way different from the way in which he primordially acts in every other event.

This passage makes it clear that experience is constituted by a combination of sense perception and memory, and that it has for its object the discernment of similarities held in common by a series of individuals.

Because a sense - datum is an eternal object (61), S and T have conceptual feelings of one and the same eternal object.

with complete consistency, accords priority to actual entities is that it is only actual entities which are agents, in the primary sense I have endeavored to elucidate, all other entities being «agents» or «efficacious» only either as factors in actual entities, i.e., as contributory to the «act» of actual entities (e.g., eternal objects, prehensions, subjective forms, propositions) or as derivative from actual entities (e.g., nexus, societies).

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.»

Heidegger and Whitehead both see that subjective experience has wrongly been envisioned in past philosophy in terms of models derived from objects of sense - experience.

Each sense has its peculiar object, but the sense of being affected by the object is an integral and basic part of sensing in general — at least in its more basic forms.

Where sensing differs from any purely physical process is that on the sentient, as such, the agent - object has a twofold effect: the sense organ is not merely physically altered, but is also mused to the psychic activity of sensing.

According to Aristotle, sensing is a way of having the object within.

In this presentness it is no longer true (as it obviously is in the «having become» world of active subject and passive object) that the existing beings over against us can not in some sense move to meet us as we them.

So the point of Whitehead's example in the above passage would be that in talking about the membership of the complex structured society which is a total man, in the ordinary sense of the term, one is referring not to a subordinate society, such as the enduring object which is the life, or soul, of the man, but to all the individual actual occasions in all the subordinate societies and subordinate nexus which make up the man.

Secondly, we discover a sense of newness with which the world of objects is viewed a sense of having discovered reality.

since the Sun is the biggest object in our solar system, it makes sense that it would have the strongest gravitational pull, just as it makes sense that we weigh less / have less gravity on the moon since it is not as large or as dense as the Earth.

One final comment: The assumption of protopsychic matter is no more revolutionary than our epistemological knowledge that all objects which we see have no color, because color only arises in sense cells and brain.

Ninian Smart has shown that although Western religious traditions have been predominantly numinous and Eastern traditions predominantly mystical, all the major world religions have in fact included both types of experience.18 Early Israel gave priority to the numinous; biblical literature portrays the overwhelming sense of encounter, the prophetic experience of the holy as personal, the acknowledgment of the gulf between the worshipper and the object of worship.

Had Dr. P. possessed «judgment» in Sacks» sense, he would have had some feeling for the concrete, the personal, the particular, and for apprehending perceptual objects as wholHad Dr. P. possessed «judgment» in Sacks» sense, he would have had some feeling for the concrete, the personal, the particular, and for apprehending perceptual objects as wholhad some feeling for the concrete, the personal, the particular, and for apprehending perceptual objects as wholes.

With this method, we have not simply done away with linguistic clutter, we have made the positive assertion that the ultimate «simple» or constituents of things experienced are neither the objects of common sense nor the «scientific» objects of physical theory (electrons, quarks, and the like).

In a stroke, then, Russell is able to dispense with Meinong's ontological conundrum and the ontological argument, while providing as adequate an account as anyone has ever been able to offer of how normal human perception and sense data relate to the «objects» of physics.

1Whitehead concentrates on the sense of sight, which provides the most detailed information about distant objects, but would wish to extend his account, with suitable modifications, to other senses.

It would make more sense to reconceive initial subjective aims in terms of propositional feelings.9 The indicated logical subjects of the proposition can specify the standpoint (PR 283) whereas a pure eternal object can not.

It voices precisely that sense of difference in which anti-Semitism through its whole long course has found its real origin and provocation and which to this day continues, among the ignorant or bigoted, to make the Jewish people an object of suspicion and persecution.

A common sense approach would have been to say that now that we understood that human thought and feeling are part of nature, we should no longer suppose that nature consists only of material objects in relative motion.

And what I most object to is NOT that someone is quoting the Bible at me, but that the individual's (or group's) interpretation of the Bible is not up for discussion — since anyone who reads the Bible differently must not love God or have a good sense of reason (and / or faith).

I feel a sense of awe and humility when I look at it; I would even consider it a sacred object even though I am not a religious person.

That Judaism has no such theology is due not to any incapacity or lack of development in its thought, but to the fact that Judaism has from the beginning a different conception of God; He does not in any sense belong to the world of objects about which man orients himself through thought.

This death, although in one sense simply an element in the life of Jesus, has always been the object of special attention, both in theology and devotion, and undoubtedly has a place of special significance in the event to which we find ourselves looking back in memory and faith.

Each can be made a center of attention and recognized by sense - objects (muscle and brain tissue have color, shape, etc.).

Indeed, to be an object has normally meant to be an object of human sense experience, especially visual and tactile experience.

This limitation of objects to what functions in human sense - experience has rendered the reality of God highly problematic, and in late modernism, belief in the objective reality of God has been viewed as somewhat eccentric.

The sense of the kind of object to which the surrender is made has much to do with determining the precise complexion of the joy; and the whole phenomenon is more complex than any simple formula allows.

... I have felt A presence that disturbs me with the joy Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime Of something far more deeply interfused, Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns, And the round ocean and the living air, And the blue sky, and in the mind of man; A motion and a spirit, that impels All thinking things, all objects of all thought, And rolls through all things.

If this were so, we might suppose the senses to waken our attitudes and conduct as they so habitually do, by first exciting this sense of reality; but anything else, any idea, for example, that might similarly excite it, would have that same prerogative of appearing real which objects of sense normally possess.

The predicate of a proposition loses much of its generality which it otherwise has in the strict sense of being an eternal object.

The belief that the feelings that the objects of sense experience arouse in us have no continuity with what is felt contributes to a sense of isolation or alienation.

If we were to say in what sense the Psalter may be said to be revealed, it would certainly not be so in the sense that its praise, supplication, and thanksgiving were placed in their disparate authors» mouths by God, but in the sense that the sentiments expressed there are formed by and conform to their object.

Nor was escape possible by making them mere thoughts in mind, since this would sacrifice the reality of the objects thought, an objective reality not to be accounted for by the ever - changing sense world.

Consequently, there seems to be no other alternative than to consider these references to God as the non-temporal actual entity and developments concerning God as the conceptual valuation of eternal objects as mutually contemporar3; that is, in the sense that they must have been composed from the same conceptual perspective.

In his letter of December 10, 1934 Brightman shares Hartshorne's worry, «that other selves are merely inferred but never given,» and goes on to present his own empiricist colors «I'd like to be able to make sense out of the idea of a literal participation in other selves... whenever I try, I find myself landed in contradiction, in epistemological chaos, and in unfaithfulness to experience...» Brightman's argument is that any «intuition» (for him a synonym for «experience»), «is exclusively a member of me,» but the object of that intuition is «always problematic and distinct from the conscious experience which refers to it.»

In the general theory of relativity it has, as von Weizsäcker has said, become a «physical object in the full sense of exercising action and suffering effects.»

If you are in a rubber life raft and survival of the group is paramount, then it would be completely moral to throw the guy overboard who keeps attempting to pop the raft and drown us all, and not a single other person in the raft would object for they would understand that that guy must have lost use of his senses and had abandoned his humanity.

Through its fusing of the field of force with space it has turned space into a physical object in the full sense of exercising action and suffering effects....