Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GQ
[The label for the intersection is a social construction.
My heart is a referencec (a single actuality) socially constructedb on a referencea (the intersection of two actualities).]
11/8/17
11/6/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GO
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[The single actuality composing the intersection of human action and human thought, for the message underlying religion, is what is good and what is bad.
The single actuality composing the intersection of recognition and participation is the state of grace or the state of self-destruction.
My heart is the single actuality corresponding to the entanglement of ‘my choice (revealing my values)2V’ and ‘something (revealing my desire)2H’.]
11/3/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GN
[I, seat of choice3V, parallels thinkgroup3V and thinkdivine3V.
My choice2V and something (revealing desire)2H parallels sinful and virtuous acts2.
Something1V parallels consciencespecified1V.
Thought experiment3H parallels lawessential3H.
Me1H parallels dispositions1H.]
11/2/17
11/1/17
11/1/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GL
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[The thought experiment where ‘I choose something’ is visualized as an intersection in a previous blog.
I can draw parallels to the intersection that comprises the message underlying the word ‘religion’.]
10/31/17
10/30/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GJ
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Now, allow me to consider the intersection.
Is the intersection more convenient for exploring Schoonenberg’s comments on freedom?
I think so.
If these two nested forms intersected, two permutations are possible.
This is the one I select:
The content level becomes the horizontal (not vertical) axis.
The situation becomes the vertical axis.]
10/27/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 GI
[Look at the interscoping nested form.
Where does the collective enter into the picture?
It does through the thought experiment3a.]
10/26/17
