If I have not misunderstood Ignacio de Marinis, and if Ignacio is not misunderstood Hegel, it seems that Hegel says (hermeneutic mediation ... ... ... ... ... ....) Limited infinity so that "it is not "infinite, or finite, a contradiction, and therefore the infinite includes the finite. In other words, an in-finite "is not" the finite is finite and therefore ....
Very important objection. But if Gadamer is reason, I can not leave my horizon to reach me on the horizon of Hegel as if my horizon did not exist. I can, yes, try a fusion of horizons (Gadamer's terminology), in my terms, which added, "intersection of horizons."
And my horizon is that of a Judeo-Christian understanding of the God of Israel and the world as creator and creation, and from the short right-fe of St. Thomas, God is infinite and the world is finite. God embraces the world, yes, but not as being the world but the world as a cause, a cause that penetrates, because he holds in his being, but not to be confused with creation.
From this horizon I can see that the objection Hegel puts us in the limits of language (Wittgenstein). From St. Thomas we deduce that there is a finite cause can not itself be finite, and then, via negation, called in-finite. But because in essence we know or not because first conceive the infinite, then finite, but because we conclude as non-finite. Can not imagine not see it, the guess. And this opens a dialogue with all Christian Neoplatonic metaphysics as we know it is NOT God but not what it is .... But Thomas also added the path to eminence. Because it takes the path of participation. Put less technically, the finite is about what is imminent. For example, Martha Argerich plays Chopin perfectly, eminent. If I was his student, I would approach asymptotically without ever reaching that perfection. And, of course, Martha Argerich NOT be Gabriel. But that Gabriel not take anything away from Marta and eminence of its perfection ....
Deception, knots of language, is produced in us because our language is finite. To speak of the infinite must be terse and careful, almost like a blind man talking about the light. Our language tends to establish two classes: the class of finite and infinite class. Of course, there are ruined everything (St. Thomas and Hegel included). Or we tend to imagine something like this: the finite line in the middle and the other side of infinity, which is, of course, limited, cut in half, that is finite.
"The other of the finite", ie God, speaks with analogies, metaphors, with parables, with shadows that our intellect can understand. And quarens intellectum fides looking for a way to speak of God and then take the analogy of Aristotle and applies it to the Judeo-Christian horizon. That is St. Thomas. But, nothing more :-). Nothing less. Human language reaches its limits, and silence is the distance between the edge and understanding of God.
0 comments:
Post a Comment