Sentences with phrase «philosophical knowledge of»

While this framework does claim to render possible the absolute value of a philosophical knowledge of external reality, it might be objected that it goes too far.

To speak about God the Holy Trinity in the midst of the modern world, we have to speak also, in part at least, about human philosophical knowledge of God, about God's simplicity, eternity, immutability, infinity, and so on.

And, clearly, it is philosophical knowledge of reality that is most in need of defense in our time.

Not exact matches

Experientialism is defined as «the philosophical theory that experience is the source of knowledge.»

With a solid philosophical foundation in Eastern Idaho practicality and a comprehensive knowledge of the investment universe, Larsen Financial truly represents the convergence of Wall Street and Main Street.

The whole «Tree of Knowledge» part of the Garden story remains a philosophical debate within religion.

The good news is that there are other kinds of knowledge beyond scientific knowledge... and there are long philosophical tracts dealing with the existence of God (both pro and con).

Since God is internally related to the world, divine knowledge is an immediate, sympathetic awareness (see, e.g., Hartshorne, «Philosophical and Religious Uses of «God» «in Process Theology: Basic Writings, edited by Ewert Cousins, page 109; also see Schubert Ogden, «The Reality of God,» p. 123 of the same volume and Jantzen 1984, 81 ff.).

In Richardson's book there are seven chapters ranging from an examination of Newman's early philosophical stance, the influences that formed him and led him to coherence in the development of his approach to knowledge and commitment, to his teaching on apprehension, assent, inference and the illative sense.

By contrast, those responsible for ruling, the «philosopher kings,» were to be «cultured» in a way that formed in them the «philosophical virtue» that was grounded in knowledge of the Good itself and not, as were the guardians» virtues, simply trained into them by custom and practice.

But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of self - consciousness and self - awareness, of moral conscience, of liberty, or of aesthetic and religious experience — these must be analyzed through philosophical reflection, while theology seeks to clarify the ultimate meaning of the Creator's designs.

Lewontin, a Marxist whose philosophical sophistication exceeds that of Sagan by several orders of magnitude, came to see the issue as essentially one of basic intellectual commitment rather than factual knowledge.

Kierkegaard often employs story to carry some of his major philosophical themes, such as the contrast between experiential and theoretical knowledge.

To attempt to justify this by transforming the epistemological problem of «uncertainty» into an ontological fact is simply a way of mobilizing the present limits of scientific knowledge in order to assert an arbitrary philosophical thesis.

I have yet to see where you have offered any shred of your wisdom or knowledge of Greek philosophy or any other philosophical schools, for that matter.

Gods will is for us humans today to evolved to a level of conciousness that will prepare us for the challenges of our future survival, Scientists now predicts of hardships in the future due to over population and changes to the natural environment.and that is happening now with activists through out the world are reminding us of protecting nature.That is why we need a phsychological revolution to hasten the evolution of consciousness that will address the problems.Ideological and philosophical enlightenment had the past great minds to develop ideas and belief because God sent them to reality in their times.Abraham, Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, and many other religious leaders to teach humanity the doctrines that God willed to be appropriate and applicable in those periods of their existence, Also great philosophers in another dimension of social involvement were born to interprete and connect philosophically as the second element of our conscience, Kant, Marx and countless of them also were born.To complete the triangular structure or dimension of our conscience is knowledge.

In philosophical theology, where the primary facts are the hard - core common - sense facts, the facts are already «known» unconsciously, in the sense of being presupposed in practice; but rational reflection can lead to the conscious knowledge of such principles.

Sounds like you only base your criticism on one religious / philosophical branch of the tree of knowledge.

«His work in philosophy forms part, and a very important part, of the movement of twentieth - century realism; but whereas the other leaders of that movement came to it after a training in late - nineteenth - century idealism, and are consequently realistic with the fanaticism of converts and morbidly terrified of relapsing into the sins of their youth, a fact which gives their work an air of strain, as if they cared less about advancing philosophical knowledge than about proving themselves good enemies of idealism, Whitehead's work is perfectly free from all this sort of thing, and he suffers from no obsessions; obviously he does not care what he says, so long as it is true.

Although his way of working this out may not appeal to us, with our quite different scientific knowledge, and our own philosophical idiom, the point here is that Aquinas, like the other theologians of the great Christian tradition, was no «spiritualist», denying or minimizing the material world and the physical body and their ways of working.

I can not discuss them all here, but the following references are a start: Theodore de Laguna, review of The Principles of Natural Knowledge in Philosophical Review, 29 (1920), 269; Bertrand Russell, review of Science and the Modern World in Nation and Athenaeum, 39 (May 29,1926), 207; Charles Hartshorne, Creativity in American Philosophy (New York: Paragon House, 1984), 5,32,279 - 280; and even though Stephen Pepper believes both Whitehead and Bergson are mistaken in their views, he believes they are extremely similar: see Pepper, Concept and Quality: A World Hypothesis (LaSalle: Open Court, 1967), 340 - 341.

His idea of a «new synthesis», proposed mainly in his book Catholicism: A New Synthesis and developed in his many theological and philosophical essays, was an attempt to grapple precisely with the issues we have spoken of: the post-Cartesian «turn to the subject» (that is: the loss of faith in the objectivity of knowledge and the subsequent exclusive concern of philosophy with the self and the subjective idea as the norm of «truth») and the philosophy of evolution with its implications for a dynamic rather than a static universe.

While well - acquainted with the tradition of philosophical reflection on the soul and its relationship to the body, Fr Selman's knowledge of recent scientific research relevant to his subject appears less impressive and his terminology, and even some of his ideas and arguments, can therefore appear outdated or irrelevant.

From a philosophical perspective, there are numerous other options, including middle knowledge, and knowledge of counterfactuals, and even the omniscient knowledge of all possible future events without knowledge of which future event will actually occur.

This decisiveness and completeness of acceptance is prevented when we become entangled with questions about how it is related to scientific knowledge and philosophical speculations.

Consequently, our acceptance of supernatural faith (by grace alone) is in harmony with modern historical reasoning and philosophical reflection on the ordinary human transmission of knowledge.

In that case science must provide answers, but to do this, it must invoke scientism, a philosophical doctrine which asserts arbitrarily that knowledge comes only through the methods of investigation available to the natural sciences.

Josiah Royce with a quite different philosophical orientation from Ritschl expressed the same truth when he described the Church as the community which is sustained by its memory of the atoning deed of Jesus.21 What is supremely important here is that knowledge of God's forgiveness does not depend upon a private and subjective illumination of the individual believer alone.

(See W.D. Hudson, «Discernment Situations: Some Philosophical Difficulties,» Scottish Journal of Theology, XIX (Dec. 1966), pp. 435 - 45, for some criticisms of these knowledge claims.)

p. 144, quoting Ellul: «The Hebrew Bible (even the wisdom books) is not a philosophical construction or a system of knowledge.

The more limited a sphere of knowledge is, and the more peripheral its philosophical significance in relation to man, the less directly, therefore, it concerns man himself and what essentially defines his own existence, the more readily of course the teaching of the faith can be viewed as a mere norma negativa in regard to that science.

The sophisms of the substantiality of the «I» even today retain a particular luster, along with the Nietzschean and Freudian critiques of the subject; it is not without importance to find the root and philosophical meaning of them in the Kantian dialectic; this latter has condemned in advance any claim to dogmatize on personal existence and knowledge of the person; the person is manifested only in the practical act of treating it as an end and not merely as a means.

We are urged to believe various doctrines concerning the incarnation, the atonement, and the resurrection of Christ for which philosophical evidence or argument is quite inadequate, on the grounds that in these religious matters human knowledge can never suffice.

For Wilson these roots and some of this knowledge are themselves guided by what he believes are the universal and eternal principles of Darwinian evolutionary theory Wilson never acknowledges that, by relying on that theory and by generalizing it, he subscribes to principles that transcend particular histories just as surely as do the ideas of the theological and philosophical transcendentalists.

In spite of all our modern sophistication, scientific knowledge, technological expertise, philosophical wisdom and traditional forms of spirituality, it is from these basic instincts for survival and regeneration that the new path of faith will come.

He also says that, for any knowledge of God beyond «the bare outline of the dimensions of his being,» we must look to empirical science and theology.6 This, says he, is the reason why purely philosophical theology can say nothing about such pivotal religious doctrines as sin, grace, and forgiveness.

In Adamson's account, Augustine's legacy looms largest in this era because he had the courage to announce a redefinition of philosophy that required «self - knowledge as involving not just duality but trinity,» and a resistance to any remnant of paganism — that is, anything that does not lead us «away from sin and self - interest to a truly «philosophical» way of life.»

Thus the fundamental category of ontology, that of something, is a philosophical category insofar as it brings into play a relationship both of sameness and of difference with respect to knowledge of what it denotes.

Hence, insofar as instantiations of Spirit, namely, ontological totalities of various kinds up to and including the universe as a whole, are structured like Whiteheadian societies, then absolute knowledge such as Hegel envisions as a result of his own philosophical system is metaphysically impossible.

Actually not every thing is equally related to the concept of knowledge and to know - ability, even though ii is also true that precisely as something and as an object of knowledge it must somehow enjoy equal status with everything else with respect to conceptual comprehension.5 The differing internal relations of the objects of knowledge to the concept of knowledge establishes the relevance of these as philosophical objects.

There is a principle, one too often ignored in its philosophical value, which underlies the research of all the sciences, and the interpretation, especially the mathematical interpretation, of all knowledge gathered by the «exact sciences».

In the philosophical tradition the metaphysicians have usually taken one of two opposing routes to the knowledge of what it means to be.

This is the way followed by some thinkers, for example, A. N. Whitehead in a series of books, The Principles of Natural Knowledge, The Concept of Nature, and Science and the Modern World; by Milic Capek in his The Philosophical Impact of Contemporary Physics; and by C. F. von Weizsäicker in his recent Die Einheit der Natur, as well as other books of his — this list is intended as illustrative, not exhaustive.

Barth claimed that such knowledge was impossible and an obstacle to true knowledge by faith (the analogia fidei), because it tempts us to substitute a philosophical construction for authentic revelation of the living God.

I know the types of theology above are not comprehensive, and are also based on Greek philosophical ideas for the arrangement of knowledge.

The Universe, known and unknown, is possibly not the most used definition of God, at least in the western world... but it is the Pantheistic version that jives so much more with science and is not a misappropriation of the smaller definitions of God, merely an unfamiliar definition to those with less knowledge of various more advanced religious and philosophic thought, within and outside those religions... The idea of Pantheism also thoughtfully considers why there is, rather than ridiculing, such a wide range of philosophical and ritual beliefs from a scientific perspective... without having to classify large groups of people, as senseless idiots from one end or destined for hell from the other.

Far from claiming to be Kantian, Bergson at least claims to be diametrically opposed to the necessary relegation of human knowledge (either scientific or philosophical) to the sphere of the merely phenomenal.

The following mediation of the knowledge of this philosophical development enables us to understand why Whitehead, in a series of theoretical starting points, their rejections, and theoretical improvements, reluctantly abandons both hitherto plausible starting points from commonsensical thought and the dominant conventional forms of thought in philosophy.

Such, then, is the object, method and limit of philosophical knowledge.

The extremes of the spectrum axe probably marked by those who totally reserve the term «knowledge» for philosophical claims while relegating science to the realm of the conventional and the fictional, and those who run philosophy out of court while proclaiming that science is the measure of all things.