0001 Daniel Turbon, hailing from the University of Barcelona, publishes an article in the journal, Scientia et Fides(8(2)/2020, pages 65-94).   The essay is available online.  The full title is “The Distinctive Character of the Human Being in Evolution”.  I place only the second focus in the header of my comments, while noting that the first character cannot be ignored.

0002 When I look at this essay, what do I see?

Does the title translate into a category-based nested form?

Here is a diagram, following the script in A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form.

0003 Each of the above terms constitute an empty slot.

So, I ask, “How would words in the entire title correspond to the above empty slots?”

My answer is necessarily both speculative and synthetic.

The normal context₃ is evolution₃.

The actuality₂ is (the origin of) human beings₂.

The potential₁ is a distinctive character₁.

0004 The resulting application looks like this.

0005 The category-based nested form contains four statements.  The fourth is paradigmatic: The normal context of evolution₃ brings the actuality of the origin of the human being₂ into relation with the potential of a distinctive character₁.

When I read the title of Daniel Turbon’s article, this is what I see.