Upon my lunch gathering with Roxana and Jane on Thursday, I was inspired that after "repentance" there requires a further step or commitment of "raise the standard" (beyond) in order to reach the level of transcendance.
In modern philosophy, Kant gave transcendental a new, third meaning in his theory of knowledge, concerned with the conditions of possibility of knowledge itself. For him it meant knowledge about our cognitive faculty with regard to how objects are possible a priori. "I call all knowledge transcendental if it is occupied, not with objects, but with the way that we can possibly know objects even before we experience them." (Critique of Pure Reason, A12) Something is transcendental if it plays a role in the way in which the mind "constitutes" objects and makes it possible for us to experience them as objects in the first place. Ordinary knowledge is knowledge of objects; transcendental knowledge is knowledge of how it is possible for us to experience those objects as objects. This is based on Kant's acceptance of David Hume's argument that certain general features of objects (e.g. persistence, causal relationships) cannot derive from the sense impressions we have of them. Kant argues that the mind must contribute those features and make it possible for us to experience objects as objects. In the central part of his Critique of Pure Reason, the "Transcendental Deduction of the Categories", Kant argues for a deep interconnection between the ability to have self-consciousness and the ability to experience a world of objects. Through a process of synthesis, the mind generates both the structure of objects and its own unity. For Kant, the "transcendent", as opposed to the "transcendental", is that which lies beyond what our faculty of knowledge can legitimately know. Hegel's counter-argument to Kant was that to know a boundary is also to be aware of what it bounds and as such what lies beyond it -- in other words, to have already transcended it.
I have been sometime awakened and being in a stage of hungry to be close to God. Thus, I repented on my lacking of understanding of the Bible. That motivated the devotion of my time in searching and walking with God in a different way. However, am I satisfied with the current situation? Or I am willing to raise the standard and go beyond. A good question to myself.
In the PF course, to evolve means that you are becoming someone different, not just someone who's growing, changing or expanding yourself.
WHO you are in what you do. In other words, how you live your life, what you do for a living, how you decide what to do, etc.
- I am someone who is curious to observe, link things in thinking, structurally to map a plan of action and moves forward. I was said to be a person with discerning.
- I am someone who loves to meet people, offers ideas and caring to the community and could identify individual's talents for growing.
- I am someone who creates ideas and activities, glues people together to make things happen.
How could I live differently? I mean to live differently that glorify GOD. (I added later)
- from discerning to ??? (The Truth)
- from caring to ??? (The Sacrifice)
- from making to ??? (Being in One with God the Greatness)
I am afraid I have to go back to look at the model of Jesus:
to experience myself, my life as objects of objects >> Self-Deny .......(I do not live for myself but for the plan that God has designed across the time and space in His Good Will.)
Then, why I have needs, why I have wants, why I have anger, why I have disappointment, why I have expectation........what I should come across has already been prepared. Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment