02/23/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JM

[The mirror of the world_3a reflects a symbolic order_3a.

Responsibilities and words express the character of ‘a system of…_3a’.

Correspondingly, the potentials within me_1a are already refined, cut into interpellations, finite in number, because they well up in response to the normal context configured as ‘a system of…_3a’.

Freedom and bondage express the character of ‘… differences_1a’.

Both obligations and exercises of the heart share an actuality_2a that corresponds to an utterance, emerging from and situating the potentials inherent in me.]

02/22/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JL

[What is to be found in the thought experiment_3a?

The thought experiment_3a is the content-level normal context.

Like the system…_3a in _parole, the thought experiment_3a seems to be referential.

We project referentiality into the thought experiment.

But, it also exists as a symbolic order.

The system…_3a sets the normal context for the potentiation of …differences_1a.

Parole_2a exists as a system of differences_3a-1a.]

02/21/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JK

[Have I arrived at another way to speculate about responsibility (in virtue) and words (in sin)? ]

02/20/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JI

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[Does the thought experiment where ‘I choose something’ have both referential and symbolic character, just like the symbolic order of parole?

Does the potential inherent in me_1a compare to my potential of using manual brachial gestures for hand talk_1a, consisting of a finite and habitual suite of different possibilities.]

02/19/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JH

02/16/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JG

[For hand talk, a system of gesturing and seeing₃ brought parole_2a into relation with the potential of a finite number of different habitual manual brachial gestures_1a.

The mirror of the world_3a compares to the system_3a in a system_3a of differences_1a.

A thought experiment that everyone in the group is participating in₃_a acts like gesturing and seeing_3a.

Similarly, the potential inherent in me_1a parallels the potential of a set of finite and habitual different features (comparable to the manual brachial gestures in hand talk)_1a.

Something_2a compares to parole_2a, the utterance.]

02/15/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JF

[Now, I want to compare something_2a to parole_2a.

Parole_2a is the actuality in the content level of the system of differences of language.

The nested form is:

A system…_3a( parole_2a( …of differences_1a))]

02/14/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JE

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[In virtue, I take my responsibilities and freedom for granted.

My responsibility corresponds to mirror of the world_3a(something_2a(____1a)).

My freedom corresponds to ___3a( something_2a( potentials of me_1a)).

In sin, I take my words and my bondage for granted.]

02/13/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JD

[What is this mirror_3a that I am obligated to engage whenever ‘I choose something’?

It is a source of reflectivity that I always seem to ignore.

It reflects the perspective level, the Zeitgiest, in a highly personal manner.]

02/12/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 JC

[So I pray (or think about it).

The interscope becomes an intersection.

The non-contemplative acts.

The contemplative prays.]

An Archaeology of the Fall

A Horror Story by Razie Mah