Sentences with phrase «philosophical views of»

Evident from the writings of Socrates and Lao Tzu, cultural divergences in ancient Western and East Asian philosophical views of the self are thought to have emerged early in human history (Markus & Kitayama 1991; Triandis 1995; Nisbett et al. 2001).

Human actions are dominated by the religious and philosophical views of each culture.

Once more, the difference runs as deep as the opposing philosophical views of the «world» that the two theologies hold.

A person's philosophical view of happiness and suffering, obligation and sacrifice, is where it all begins.

More adequate is the philosophical view of critical realism, which combines ontological realism, epistemic perspectivalism, and judgmental rationality.

The most important characteristic of afterlife derived from this philosophical view of the soul is that it is conscious.

The Conservative ex-minister, who currently holds the higher education portfolio in David Cameron's shadow Cabinet, takes a philosophical view of the rigours of being out of government.

Not exact matches

The process of developing criteria for The Long View began with a philosophical adjustment.

Rather than drone on about supply tightness and healthy demand (which we have discussed many times before here, here, here, here, and here), the point of this note is more philosophical and intended to offer insights into how to view the lithium space out over the next 18 to 24 months.

I understand «Pascal's Wager» very well, but it is taken from a philosophical (man's earthly) point of view, mine is not... mine is taken from a point of faith.

One of the glories of science is that people come together to do it who have all sorts of religious beliefs, philosophical views, cultural backgrounds, and political opinions.

Although at times Hartshorne has spoken as though his account of experience rested on some intuition of its essence as exhibited in his own experience, 2 his predominant view and his philosophical practice advance a concept of experience that is generated by dialectical argument rather than by appeal to direct introspection or intuition: «The philosopher, as Whitehead says, is the «critic of abstractions.»

In his fair and generally sympathetic review of my book Bergson and Modern Physics, David Sipfle raised some important and significant questions which clearly show how extremely complex the questions concerning the nature of time are and how difficult it is to agree on their solutions even for those who share a basic philosophical view.

Here is a splendid example of a seemingly strong (empirical) case for a philosophical view, a case which is nevertheless inconclusive, and indeed can be opposed by perhaps a still stronger though non-empirical case.

Though seminary faculties like to affirm, in principle, a relationship between Christian theology and the life of the church, academic theology tends to view the ministering congregation as an addendum to the really interesting issues of ethics, philosophical and political theology, or social policy.

The Folly of Scientism Austin L Hughes, a professor of biology at the University of South Carolina, has written a perceptive, thought - provoking article in The New Atlantis magazine, concurring with my own view of current philosophical trends in popular scientific presentations.2 One of these trends is «scientism», the view that science is the only source of truth and reality.

Maimonides is the first of them to ascribe specific philosophical views to Job and to the other speakers in the dialogue.

In the first draft of Catholicism, now published thanks to Fr Nesbitt as Matter and Mind, we find a fuller discussion than Catholicism offers of Fr Holloway's view of this philosophical movement and its challenge to Christian belief.

Pacioni himself tells us that throughout his book he has «tried to reconstruct the framework of Augustine's speculation in all of its most original philosophical traits, following philosophical and logical - linguistic suggestions performing a point by point analysis of the texts not only from a philological but also a historiographical, cultural and logical - formal point of view» (p. xix).

«The term can refer to theological accounts of the world as God's creation; or to philosophical reflection on the categories of space and time; or to observational and theoretical study of the structure and evolution of the physical universe; or, finally, to «world views»: unified imaginative perceptions of how the world seems and where we stand in it» (Tracy and Lash, vii).

Not knowing me personally or the philosophical path I've traveled down to reach my views, I will give you benefit of the doubt and chalk that comment up to ignorance (not saying this in the mean spirited sense).

For this reason I would engage now in more detail with his presentation of a prominent philosophical tradition from the point of view of the different one presented by the Faith movement.

And attempts to restore religious freedom to its proper philosophical place, as something like the sine qua non of freedom itself, presuppose just the view of human nature and reason that our post-Christian liberalism rejects from the outset.

He also offered the outlines of a philosophical and theological «new synthesis», which, in our view, meets all the CiV criteria we have just noted.

Above all, Heidegger's existentialist analysis of the ontological structure of being would seem to be no more than a secularized, philosophical version of the New Testament view of human life.

«2 Therefore, philosophy of religion must balance itself between the extremes of a philosophy that cuts itself off from religious experience and a religious stance that segregates itself from philosophical reflection.3 The search for a philosophy of religion is a search for total world - view in which the idea of God encountered in human history is thoroughly integrated.

In a recent interpretation of Hegel's philosophy of religion Emil L. Fackenheim rejects Kierkegaard's view that Hegel's philosophy is destructive of religion, and argues that Hegel seeks to penetrate «the relation between rational self - activity and religious receptivity to the divine and the relation of philosophical self - activity to both.

Process thought is usually defined in one of three ways: (1) as any view of reality that is dynamic and relational and based on the findings of modern science, (2) identified with «the Chicago School,» the University of Chicago Divinity School, both in its earlier phase of applying evolutionary theory to historical research, seeing religion as a dynamic movement that reconstitutes itself in response to felt needs, as well as its later philosophical phase, and (3) synonymous with the philosophy of Whitehead and Hartshorne.

John Calvin under Augustine's influence explicitly says that God wills every event.17 The criticism we are making of St. Augustine can be made from more than one philosophical point of view.

In what is to follow I will examine those strands of Craig's philosophical argument for the view that the universe began to exist which seem to be the strongest.

Consequently, the system ideal, like the notion of personal identity sketched in (ii), is perhaps better viewed as a regulative principle guiding philosophical reflection than as a philosophical reality that we can appropriate and elucidate in the present.

If the divine is now used to give the view a supposedly greater philosophical coherence, then I inevitably reach the sort of conclusion implied by Hartshorne's bodily cells with their «little experiences or feelings.»

Say what one will about the dubious quality of Heidegger's judgment here, the problem for his interpreters seems to remain one of demonstrating that his later philosophical views are any less dubious than his earlier ones — especially as they are rooted in the manner in which he lived.

The third trend is characterized by (1) a clearer methodological consciousness concerning the field, purpose, and method of the sociology of religion; (2) a profounder understanding of the nature of religious communion; (3) a rapprochement between students of religion from theological and philosophical points of view, and of students of society.6 Outstanding are the works of Raoul de la Grasserie and H. Pinard de la Boullaye, S. J., of Roger Bastide and Robert Will.

Yet this view of nature is in fact derivative from an expressly Christian view of the world expressed in philosophical rather than in exclusively theological or scriptural terms.

Biologists as basically different in their philosophical and biological views as W. H. Thorpe and Jacques Monod agree that the origin of life is a difficult, and thus far intractable and unsolved, problem.

But in most philosophical discussion, he observes, realism usually means a commitment to the correspondence theory of truth, the law of the excluded middle and a nonepistemic view of truth.

It is, in particular, the second of evangelicalism's two tenets, i. e., Biblical authority, that sets evangelicals off from their fellow Christians.8 Over against those wanting to make tradition co-normative with Scripture; over against those wanting to update Christianity by conforming it to the current philosophical trends; over against those who view Biblical authority selectively and dissent from what they find unreasonable; over against those who would understand Biblical authority primarily in terms of its writers» religious sensitivity or their proximity to the primal originating events of the faith; over against those who would consider Biblical authority subjectively, stressing the effect on the reader, not the quality of the source — over against all these, evangelicals believe the Biblical text as written to be totally authoritative in all that it affirms.

A general review of the endnotes from Gunter's paper reveals a fair number of sources who will corroborate the claim that Bergson's scientific views are nor only not outdated, but go very» much to the heart of current scientific methods and insights, but particularly, see A. C. Papanicolaou and Pete A. N. Gunter, eds., Bergson in Modern Thought Towards a Unified Science (New York: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1987), and for important background on how Bergson came to be seen as dated when he was not, see also, Milic Capek, Bergson and Modern Physics, (cited above) and The Philosophical Impact of Contemporary Physics (Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1961), and the volume edited by Gunter, Bergson and the Evolution of Physics (cited above).

At the risk of even greater brevity but in the hope of a clear capsule view, I set forth my own model: fundamental theology is that discipline which consists in philosophical reflection upon the meanings present in our common human experience and in the Christian fact.

Hegel offers such a view at a level of considerable philosophical abstraction; millenarian believers offer another, very different, version of such a view.

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.

The condition requisite for healing it always this about - face, and from a purely philosophical point of view it might be a subtle question whether it is possible for one to be in despair with full consciousness of what it is about which one despairs.)

In this paper I shall develop a view of perception from the partial theory to be found in Whitehead's early philosophical writings and defend it against objections which led Whitehead himself to replace it later with a somewhat different theory.1 Development of the Early Theory The first phase or moment of perception is sense - awareness (CN...

This overweening confidence grew out of a theology which had a superficial view of man's sinfulness, which identified the Kingdom of God with current political and philosophical ideals, and which pictured man as having a «spark of the divine» in him and thus capable of his own salvation.

(New York: Philosophical Library, 1950) traces the history of panpsychism and presents Hartshorne's view of it.

It deals with Christology and the doctrine of God, as well as prayer, the resurrection, heaven, etc. and it provides a general introduction to Whitehead's thought.128 The Task of Philosophical Theology by C. J. Curtis, a Lutheran theologian, is a process exposition of numerous «theological notions» important to the «conservative, traditional» Christian viewpoint.129 Two very fine semi-popular introductions to process philosophy as a context for Christian theology are The Creative Advance by E. H. Peters130 and Process Thought and Christian Faith by Norman Pittenger.131 The latter, reflecting the concerns of a theologian, provides a concise introduction to the process view of God together with briefer comments on man, Christ, and «eternal life.»

«6 Indeed, during the decade following publication of Whitehead's major philosophical works, a variety of theologians, both in the United States and in Great Britain, were responsive to the new views articulated by Whitehead and made considerable use of many general features of his philosophy in constructing their own theologies.

The contributions of Christian, Hartshorne and several others to the current philosophical development of process theology are probably best viewed in the context of certain important problems of process theism.

Since 1950, philosophical discussions of Whitehead's view of God have been influenced primarily by Charles Hartshorne and William Christian.50 Hartshorne has continued to develop and apply the doctrines of panpsychism and panentheism explained in Part One.