Lance. Thank you. Finally some clarity.
What is the problem with admiring another's
contribution?
jt: Contribution to what? Philosophy,
art, myth, and religion? What does this have
to do with life and truth? The
man did not know Jesus and he was not led by the
Holy Spirit.
Guaranteed.
I don't get it. Were certain ones among us born
under a rock (read pebble)?
Were they not influenced by someone, anyone along
the way, maybe a mother or
a dad? And what if ma and pa have passed away, are
they not part of the history
from which sons and daughters draw when determining
right from wrong and good
from evil?
jt: It all depends; if they were not
believers then we inherited generational iniquity and
vain conversation from
them for which we need to repent and be delivered
from in
Christ. Polyani would be in
this category.
Were they not authorities as well, right along with
the God and Scripture?
jt: God and His Word tell us to honor
our parents, even unbelieving parents but
once we come to the light we do not
follow their example which would lead us back
into darkness.
Is there any among us who confuses dear ol' mom
with the Holy Ghost?
It seems to me that that distinction is a tougher
one to draw than the one many
times removed between a deceased Chemist and little
old me living in the Twenty
First century. That is, if we are aware of the
Chemist's contribution and not just
gulping up his gooze without discernment.
Bill
jt: Why elevate the writings of a deceased
Chemist? the Holy Spirit always
points to Jesus. Polyani was Jewish and he did
not. Where had discernment
gone?
judyt From Deepsight.org articles on the internet:
By far, the most extensive discussion of religion in
Polanyi's writing comes in his final book Meaning, written, as his
health declined, with the help of the American philosopher Harry Prosch. In this
book, Polanyi tries to extend his epistemological model to describe the nature of human knowledge found in art, myth and
religion. It is the kinship between metaphor, symbol, and ritual that interests
Polanyi and he uses his theory of tacit knowing to describe this
relationship and show the differences between ordinary perceptual and conceptual
knowledge and that found in the class of special artefacts
available in art and religion; he argues for the importance of human meaning in
art, myth and religion in the contemporary world.
While theologians and religious thinkers were among the first to appreciate Polanyi's philosophical ideas, it is also the case that Polanyi's late writing in which he tried more directly to discuss religion and religious knowledge has generated much scholarly debate. Although it is not possible to provide details here, it is fair to say that the discussion has focused in two related areas: Some scholars have asked if the perspective outlined in Meaning indeed fits with the mature philosophical outlook of Personal Knowledge and The Tacit Dimension. The second issue is concerned with discerning what Polanyi intended to affirm regarding the metaphysical status of religious and artistic realities. These issues were debated in meetings of the Polanyi Society in the early eighties; the discussion of both issues was the topic of articles in a special issue of Zygon: The Journal of Religion and Science (17:1[1982]; see especially the articles by Gelwick and Prosch) devoted to Polanyi. Intermittently, the discussion has continued in articles and reviews found in the issues of Tradition and Discovery: The Polanyi Society Periodical published since the Zygon issue (see the reference below to the Polanyi Society home page where there is a listing of authors and article titles). |
- Re: [TruthTalk] POLYANI AND THE HOLY SPIRIT Judy Taylor
- Re: [TruthTalk] POLYANI AND THE HOLY SPIRIT Wm. Taylor
- Re: [TruthTalk] POLYANI AND THE HOLY SPIRIT Kevin Deegan
- [TruthTalk] POLYANI AND THE HOLY SPIRIT Judy Taylor