What Lynch is driving at with his insistence
on the analogical imagination, which finds in the images of limitation «the path to whatever the self is seeking: to insight, or beauty, or, for that matter, to God,» is directly related to what I have called metaphor as method.
Not exact matches
All accept the Qur» an and the sunnah (Muhammad's example) as foundational but differ
on the importance of consensus in collective scholarly reasoning (ijma) and individual
analogical reasoning (qiyas).
On the contrary, we can now envision all trees as
analogical actualities, as transcendent symbols that participate in the reality that they signify, as having likenesses to us despite their differences from us, and thus as linking natural things with both human and divine things — and perhaps also with things demonic.
A recently completed book
on systematic theology (The
Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism [Crossroad, 1981]-RRB- defends a second, less obvious but no less genuine notion of the kind of publicness that systematic theologies actually achieve.
A full defense of this intuition as true (i.e., as «public») demands the kind of argument and modes of reflections which I have attempted in my recently completed work
on systematic theology (The
Analogical Imagination).
That was the strategy behind my book
on fundamental theology (Blessed Rage for Order) and my book
on systematic theology (The
Analogical Imagination).
What is at least
analogical in the scheme is the idea of prehension as dependence of an actuality
on other actualities, or of participation, feeling of feeling, experience of experience, together with sense of futurity.
If,
on the contrary, they are taken strictly, in any one of the senses they have when applied solely to entities within a single logical type, he is equally justified in holding that they are then used in the same sense, and, therefore, are literal, not
analogical, even when applicable to God.
For one thing, he is far more explicit in acknowledging that the whole superstructure of nonliteral predication, whether symbolic or
analogical, rests
on a base of strictly literal metaphysical claims.
You seem to «privilege» your sense of rationality and logic — and cast the irrational and illogical (probably not
analogical because you may incorporate analogy into your sense of «logic» but it's illogical, descriptively) I actually see my rationality and logic (such as it is — hardly syllogistic) as always in the service of my attitude, outlook, frame of mind — which is to say, my illogical and irrational belief & bias system — and my unconscious, of which my consciousness is merely tip - of - the - I's berg, or as some linguists said: a snowball
on the tip of the iceberg.
Hence, the possibility of the
analogical method rests
on the principle that in the concepts of rapport and adverbial response, ontology and epistemology meet.
On the power and significance of story, see James Barr, «Story and History in Biblical Theology,» in The Scope and Authority of the Bible (London: SCM Press, 1980), 1 - 17, and Tracy,
Analogical Imagination, 275 - 81.
Classical discussions of the symbolic and
analogical character of religious language were dependent
on the metaphysical assumptions of Platonism or scholasticism, which can no longer be presupposed; more recent interpretations often hold that religious images are only symbols of man's subjective life.
My thesis is that the many visions of perfection are more or less the same or at least
analogical, and therefore if each Faith keeps its ethics of law dynamic within the framework of and in tension with its own transcendent vision of perfection, the different religious and secular Faiths can have a fruitful dialogue at depth
on the nature of human alienation which makes love impossible and for updating our various approaches to personal and public law with greater realism with insights from each other.
Such language is therefore neither symbolical nor pictorial, though it is certainly
analogical (
On the subject of analogy cp.
In conjunction, it becomes extremely difficult to change the minds of people who are fixed
on conclusions inferred through
analogical reasoning, even if it is rational for them to soberly reconsider.
By reconciling imagination and reason, separated since the famous Discourse
on Method of Descartes, Varela and Simon refresh the
analogical thinking so precious to Leonardo da Vinci who says to us: «As the bolt rises which we screw in the nut, also will go up the helix which we screw in the air» The practice of the debate proposes a scenography of alive metaphors in a space of artificial intelligence.
This almost
analogical overall specification extends to the
on - demand AWD systems which operate smoothly and efficiently.
24 hour reception, luggage store, 24 hour room service, Internet facilities, safe, laundry service, shoe - shine, check - in from 2 pm, check - out by noon, shopping arcade, hairdresser, tobacconist, babysitting service, Internet centre, Wi - Fi in public areas and meeting rooms,
analogical Internet in rooms, Broadband Internet in the rooms, Experience Spot, video
on demand, wedding services, banquet services, Business Centre, 24 hour medical service, public telephone, major credit cards accepted, car rental, valet parking service, free garage and car park (non-surveillance).
It would be nice to have a moratorium
on all such
analogical arguments, though obviously that is unlikely to happen.
Where is the real line
on abstract /
analogical reasoning and problem solving / negotiation / persuasion skills?