David Bentley Hart's first chapter in All Things Are Full of Gods presents a compelling argument through a Platonic dialogue that contrasts two opposing worldviews: subjective human experience and mechanistic naturalism.
The depiction of the quantitative and objective side contrasted with the characterization of the qualitative and subjective is an interesting subject.
I did I get it right, there is an attempt to integrate these two perspectives, hence,the abyss?
I suspect there is a bias to the qualitative because it is being played within the mind of the person. However, in the quantitative and objective, although the process is worked involving tangible inputs still these are to be interpretated within the mind for the agreement of relationship of the external and internal inputs.
What I noticed, the stance of the first is observational, the second is interactional. The first could be a spectator of the game, while the second is a player in the game. If ever there is an integration of the two perspective it is being a coach of the game. The coach understand both perspective in the mind of the spectator as well as what is in the mind of the player. But each of tyd three has its defined place in the game.
Our understanding of reality being a reflection of God the creator is therefore can be Trinitarian.
I saw a post from a writer, recently, involving advice on proofreading:
1. Finish your manuscript or book, read it out loud to someone else at least 5 times and make all the final corrections.
2. Publish, and wait for readers to find all the errors you missed.
We included a CD (with guided contemplative exercises) with our book. I think it was at least two years before someone pointed out that the CD stated that all recorded material was in the "pubic" domain!
The depiction of the quantitative and objective side contrasted with the characterization of the qualitative and subjective is an interesting subject.
I did I get it right, there is an attempt to integrate these two perspectives, hence,the abyss?
I suspect there is a bias to the qualitative because it is being played within the mind of the person. However, in the quantitative and objective, although the process is worked involving tangible inputs still these are to be interpretated within the mind for the agreement of relationship of the external and internal inputs.
What I noticed, the stance of the first is observational, the second is interactional. The first could be a spectator of the game, while the second is a player in the game. If ever there is an integration of the two perspective it is being a coach of the game. The coach understand both perspective in the mind of the spectator as well as what is in the mind of the player. But each of tyd three has its defined place in the game.
Our understanding of reality being a reflection of God the creator is therefore can be Trinitarian.
interesting.
The book’s title is All Things Are Full of Gods, plural. It’s a reference to Thales.
Embarrassing but I’m a terrible editor. Especially because I knew that was the title, but didn’t catch myself. Thanks
No worries! Not trying to nitpick.
I saw a post from a writer, recently, involving advice on proofreading:
1. Finish your manuscript or book, read it out loud to someone else at least 5 times and make all the final corrections.
2. Publish, and wait for readers to find all the errors you missed.
We included a CD (with guided contemplative exercises) with our book. I think it was at least two years before someone pointed out that the CD stated that all recorded material was in the "pubic" domain!
😂. Thats me.