Radical inductive contemplation – Project topics materials

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Chapter 2: Theolosophy’s Hyp(ostasis)ochondria

Contextual embedding of session

It is now exactly 3:35 pm, and this seat at the door is the second best after the back bench. It has also more leg space than the normal rows. The only thing I don’t like about these seats is the fact that every single time the tram door opens the cold air in winter fiercely rolls over one, and in the mornings that can quickly lead to a sudden cold. It’s amazing what difference one meter more from the door does, and the fuller the tram the better.
Anyway beggars can’t be choosers, I have to do something with my legs! One day in these normal benches can spoil my whole day with back pain and sore knees, so who said the physical is not connected to the emotional, or spiritual? The possible cold at the door will only spoil tomorrow, not today, so why should I worry about a cold tomorrow? That’s a metaphysical question if you want one! I know metaphysics is a thorny topic. When I was doing my MTh, I was tossed around between professors, and I think one of the issues one professor had, was the topic of metaphysics (Du Toit 2005). In his office one morning in 2005 he said I can’t just use words out of context of the bigger academic world; he didn’t particularly refer to metaphysics by name, but I was pretty sure that was what he meant. My next professor (Reimer 2005) said I should just completely leave the word metaphysics altogether19, but that I did not want to do, since I did not ever want to concede to modernism that gave up on the presence of YAHWEH, and thereby wholly embraced atheism. For professor Du Toit I wanted to ask if he had ever read Gilles Deleuze, who argues, as Clare Colebrook puts it, “The ethics of thinking lies in the opposite direction of reducing difference to common forms; we think when we differentiate.” (Colebrook 2002:37). This difference is not what the concept is not, but what it can become – the first example of this new mutation is difference itself. Metaphysics can be bizarre, like the late modernist quote of Nietzsche we started our discussion with. It can be like the irrational trajectory of cancer, like the body that kills itself.In the same way modernist metaphysics led to the self-destruction of certainty through certainty. In principle we can say that modernism is a metaphysical short-circuit that turns out the lights on the Western, Graeco-Roman encumbered intelligentsia.That is why those that despise postmodernism call postmodernism a wandering in darkness, but that is purely because they are sitting in darkness themselves, and think everyone else is also embraced by darkness. They are like someone who goes blind during the night, and thinks YAHWEH is doing a trick on us by putting out the sun, and assumes no one else can see anything either. Like an antediluvian living in the past,modernists despise postmodernism that points out the fact that they are actually blind.Having said this, I know I have to be very wary of what I’m saying at this point, and again admit my suspected cognitive relativism. I am, even paradoxically, aware that YAHWEH is not bound to be more friendly towards postmodern metaphysical schemes and tools because I/we think so. My predilection for some postmodernists with all their breaking,fragmentising, momentalising and dynamising of all the mega reductionist ambiences and all the big individual subjects of modernity cannot be carried over and placed in the hands of YAHWEH just like that. YAHWEH is YAHWEH present in this context of what we are dealing with at this moment. Not a word could be added. The metaphysical fragments and moments of light that seep and creep through the darkness in the postmodern dynamic environment are immensely helpful in the ongoing holographic event-shape of this dissertation.Deconstruction rightly cast the verdict on modernists’ self-destructed metaphysics as we have discussed this morning, but reaches its limit in no attempt to come up with an alternative metaphysics – no metaphysics is their metaphysics. Others like Paul Ricœur (Simms 2003:51), George Lakoff and Mark Johnson assert apriori, the flesh, which is legibly captured in George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s book called Philosophy in the flesh:
the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought (Lakoff 1999) Their effort to escape the Graeco-Roman dualism, the vascular system of modernism, is praiseworthy, and therefore has a place in my worldview, but raises the question “If they attempt to precede a priori modernist metaphysics, aren’t they just doing more metaphysics?” Actually I think they might just agree though, since we cannot escape metaphysics and still stay sane, or make sense, and get a doctor’s degree, or even go to heaven?

READ Institutional mechanisms of the African human rights system

Prologue:
1. Self introduction and embedding of setting – the start of a mental journey
2. Radical inductive contemplation
3. Mental journey continues
4. Pertinent cultural reflection
5. Inductive reflection continues
6. Mental journey continues
7. Inductive reflection continues
8. Mental journey continues in physical tram journey
9. Wider theolosophy debate
Bibliography:
10. Prescript as Postscript
11. Dozing off the session
Chapter 1: The muddy mess of modernism swept clean.
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Radical inductive contemplation
3. Wider theolosophy debate
4. Pertinent cultural reflection
5. Biblical narratives as string succession
6. Dozing off the session
Chapter 2: Theolosophy’s Hyp(ostasis)ochondria
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Wider theolosophy debate
3. Radical inductive contemplation
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Dozing off the session
Chapter 3: B’rit Hadashah Theolosophy
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Wider theolosophy debate
3. Biblical narratives as string succession
4. Radical inductive contemplation
5. Dozing off the session
Chapter 4: Tanakh Theolosophy.
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Wider theolosophy debate
3. Pertinent cultural reflection
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Radical inductive contemplation
6. Dozing off the session
Chapter 5: Memoirs of a dream
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Radical inductive contemplation
3. Wider theolosophy debate
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Dozing off the session
Chapter 6: Psycho-logic lost in Social-physics
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Pertinent cultural reflection
3. Radical inductive contemplation
4. Wider theolosophy debate
5. Biblical narratives as string succession
6. Intermediary flip side addition.
7. Dozing off the session
Chapter 7: The Narrative Container
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Radical inductive contemplation
3. Wider theolosophy debate
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Dozing off the session
Chapter 8: Witnessing my witnessable, not yours!
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Radical inductive contemplation
3. Middle script as postscript
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Wider theolosophy debate
6. Dozing off the session
Chapter 9: The Virtual of Hermeneutics’ Reality – the experiential story of Hermeneutics!
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Wider theolosophy debate
4. Biblical narratives as string succession
5. Radical inductive contemplation
6. Dozing off the session
Chapter 10: YAHWEH’s memorandum of esteem – His dream!
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Wider theolosophy debate
3. Radical inductive contemplation
4. Wider theolosophy testimony
5. Biblical narratives as string succession
6. Pertinent cultural reflection
7. Dozing off the session
Off-the-record
Director’s cut:
1. Contextual embedding of session
2. Pertinent cultural reflection