No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
The origin of self as subject can be sought neither in astrology, genetics nor in arbitrary divine will. These answers depend upon a realist belief in a world of objects, governed by the sufficient reason principle, as if the divine ideas were a necessary set of the possibles! The alternative is the unity of self and God, i.e. personal contingency is impossible. Otherness, rather, is in any thinkable God (any non‐abstract infinity is differentiated). The world too, as other, is inseparable from God, therefore, willing to be what he then is, though not temporally. Transcendence, as infinite, demands immanence. Why God has no real relation to creatures (Aquinas) is because they are not as God is, or as God transcends such being. Human actuality requires inversion of the common‐sense world. The idea of a privileged access to truth is arbitrary. Truth, rather, must be intrinsically human. We live in God. Only so are we, images, in ourselves. Emergent knowledge is natural to the universe. It constructs it.
1 “Other Problems about the Self”, Sophia (Australia), Vol. 24, no. 1, April 1985, pp. 11‐21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Pieper, Joseph, Was heisst Philosophieren?, IIIWerke, Meiner, Hamburg 1995, pp. 15‐70Google Scholar.
3 This Hegelian term is of course something of a joke. It simply means that infinite mind determines its posits undisturbed, do we what we will, since it alone is what makes us both to will and to do.