[lit-ideas] Re: Kataphatic, Negative and Apophatic Theology

  • From: Scribe1865@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:21:24 EDT

In a message dated 8/6/2004 9:01:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
To remain solely with the via negativa is to eventually end up in the 
difficult spot of having to explain how one can make statements about what 
'stands 
outside' that which makes statements possible. 
_____
A philosopher or theologian may have to explain how such statements are 
possible, but does an individual using via negativa as a spiritual exercise?

The need to explain distinguishes between theologian and mystic isn't it? 

By striving for coherent explanation as a measure of transcendental truth, 
doesn't one unnecessarily restrict the object of one's examination? Using the 
metaphor of the Blind Men and the Elephant, isn't coherent explanation like 
describing the elephant (being) in terms of its right front leg (logical 
consistency)?


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2004