In terms of the distinction Whitehead draws between a subordinate nexus and a subordinate society, I would classify
the soul as a subordinate nexus.
Not exact matches
If we view the
soul as an effective social system for the procurement of intense experience, we can legitimately apply to it Whitehead's statement in «Immortality» that «the more effective social systems involve a large infusion of various soils of personalities
as subordinate elements in their make - up — for example, an animal body, or a society of animals, such
as human beings» (IMM 690).
This self love is sin.God never forced chaos on us.we gave in to satan's lies about evil being an inherent necessity.Jesus said he was the way, the truth and life.He was the life (love) that everyone craves for, he is the truth which meant that his love was our only need and he exposed the lies of satan that we could attain bliss on
subordinating people to our cravings.Sinning people don't accept a God who requires us to renounce ourselves because they are not convinced of God's love being enough for them and they are afraid to destroy their identity and live for the Glory of God.So, upon death, these
souls realize that the physical world was just a shadow of God's love (the nature, food etc) and their own lies (violence, self love etc) and realize that love is their only need.They pursue it from other
soul beings but are hurt that there's only hate and self love.They are afraid to approach the light because they don't want to renounce their identity
as they have not recognized God's love before.
As Whitehead clearly states, the question of the immortality of the soul is the question whether this regnant society can continue to persist without its supporting subordinate societies; for reasons such as this I have referred to this regnant society as being the analogue of the traditional concept of sou
As Whitehead clearly states, the question of the immortality of the
soul is the question whether this regnant society can continue to persist without its supporting
subordinate societies; for reasons such
as this I have referred to this regnant society as being the analogue of the traditional concept of sou
as this I have referred to this regnant society
as being the analogue of the traditional concept of sou
as being the analogue of the traditional concept of
soul.
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.
He is, rather, a very complex structured society which sustains, among many other societies, a regnant, personally ordered,
subordinate society (an enduring object) which Whitehead refers to
as «the
soul of which Plato spoke» (Adventures of Ideas 267 — see also pp. 263 - 264 for a clear statement of the distinction between «the ordinary meaning of the term «man,» which includes the total bodily man, and the narrow sense of «man,» where «man» is considered a person in Whitehead's technical sense, i.e.,
as the regnant, personally ordered society which he identifies
as his equivalent of Descartes» thinking substance and Plato's
soul).
The eleventh - century Hindu theologian Ramanuja defined a body
as any substance or actuality «which a sentient
soul is capable of controlling and supporting for its own purposes, and which stands to that
soul in an entirely
subordinate relation.»
With respect to the latter point, it is true that St. Ignatius conceives the intellectual life
as being
subordinated to the higher end of saving
souls.
Sexuality has been viewed
as the epitome of the bodily, and therefore
as something to be
subordinated to, and controlled by, the
soul.