This reminds me of the phrase we use in medicine around imaging: "one view is no view." Basically, you cannot appreciate any given pathology off of one image of it. You have to have multiple, a lot like having to walk around a Christmas tree before being able to appreciate the whole. And that is just for being able to appreciate something with our eyes! Being able to know the things of God whether in the ethics of scripture or circumstances of your life requires so many more views (and a lot of time). Great piece
interesting post! a lot of parallels here with c.s. pierce. i.e. the meaning of a concept is the sum total of its practical consequences for action. also he has a much more highly developed triadic view of reality. frames three perspectives dovetails nicely with the three main divisions of the summa! i wrote at length about my own take on this in my pilgrimmage as first philosophy post.
Hi Stephen, Thanks for this. I don't think I know C. S. Pierce. Will have to check that out. And your post. Hadn't even considered parallels with the Summa! Very cool thought.
he came to trinitarian faith through his development of a triadic theory of reality, logic, and signs. but his thought is more like a fecund garden to be pruned and worked on, rather than a finished product to be digested like Kant or Hegel or Aristotle. this makes him inaccesible to most and its understandable.
This reminds me of the phrase we use in medicine around imaging: "one view is no view." Basically, you cannot appreciate any given pathology off of one image of it. You have to have multiple, a lot like having to walk around a Christmas tree before being able to appreciate the whole. And that is just for being able to appreciate something with our eyes! Being able to know the things of God whether in the ethics of scripture or circumstances of your life requires so many more views (and a lot of time). Great piece
Mmm, yeah that’s a great analogy too. Stoked for you to be the wise doctor you’re going to be. Thanks for reading man and for this great comment.
interesting post! a lot of parallels here with c.s. pierce. i.e. the meaning of a concept is the sum total of its practical consequences for action. also he has a much more highly developed triadic view of reality. frames three perspectives dovetails nicely with the three main divisions of the summa! i wrote at length about my own take on this in my pilgrimmage as first philosophy post.
Hi Stephen, Thanks for this. I don't think I know C. S. Pierce. Will have to check that out. And your post. Hadn't even considered parallels with the Summa! Very cool thought.
here is a good essay to start with from pierce, and depicts his pragmatic conception of belief: https://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/ideas/id-frame.htm
he came to trinitarian faith through his development of a triadic theory of reality, logic, and signs. but his thought is more like a fecund garden to be pruned and worked on, rather than a finished product to be digested like Kant or Hegel or Aristotle. this makes him inaccesible to most and its understandable.
Love it. Thanks for this. Sounds like a fascinating dude. He's kinda ringing a bell to me now.