Not exact matches
Now, to
speak of conscious human
experience in Whiteheadian categories is to
speak of a regnant nexus
of actual occasions which are enjoying rich supplemental phases.
We may
speak by analogy with Hartshorne's «neoclassical theism»
of Whitehead's neoclassical empiricism» precisely because it is a self -
conscious revision
of the classical tradition on the one hand and can be seen to consist in an analysis
of the formally possible doctrines regarding the character and content
of experience on the other.
It is not true that liturgical worship entirely fails to
speak to the strictly
conscious levels
of human
experience; it does indeed
speak to these, but it has richer connotations and implications; and it is these which do most
of the «work» in liturgical as distinguished from didactic or other types
of Christian worship.
Indeed one might say that liturgical worship by and large
speaks not so much to the
conscious attention
of its participants as to those profound and almost unconsciously
experienced areas
of human life where men live in terms
of feeling - tone,
of unutterable emotion, and
of profound subconscious relationships, with an almost intuitive awareness
of the «more» which is deep down in the structure
of reality.
It is these occasions
of which we have immediate knowledge; or more accurately, the
experiences we
speak of as ours (both
conscious and unconscious) are these occasions.
Despite Prager's self -
conscious imitation
of classic films from the 1940s and 1950s, Face in the Crowd
speaks to very contemporary
experiences of social alienation and isolation within the modern city.