| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: The Soul |
 |
|
I have tried at least 50 times to send this message and it has not come
through the srb server. This time I am sending it directly from the srb server
as a test. I do not know the problem.
Hi Suzanne and Mark.
In another discussion Mark touched on 'Abdu'l-Baha's use of the words
"rational soul" in the context of a sort of Baha'i Creationism. I find my
interpretation of the conceptuality that 'Abdu'l-Baha outlines in His talks
and Writings consistent, but in my opinion mostly misinterpreted.
I don't find Him talking about current concepts of spiritualism, metaphysics
channeling, mediums, astrology or any other spiritualism. But often the
interpretations given to His writings assumes those spiritualisms.
That is not to say He (or I for that matter) don't believe in a
spiritualism. Personally I am uncomfortable talking about it because what I
say is so misunderstood, for the most part. Part of that is because of
preconceptions everyone has as to what spiritualism is, and a confusion
about precisely what is meant when a person says the words spirit, soul, or
metaphysics. I think 'Abdu'l-Baha was especially careful to clarify
spiritualism as intellect, rationality and the soul, not the current
misconceptions.
"The human spirit which distinguishes man from the animal is the rational
soul; and these two names -- the human spirit and the rational soul --
designate one thing. This spirit, which in the terminology of the
philosophers is the rational soul, embraces all beings, and as far as human
ability permits discovers the realities of things and becomes cognizant of
their peculiarities and effects, and of the qualities and properties of
beings." (Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith p. 316)
According to my understanding a rational soul has a specific definition. It
is our essence as seen from beyond time and space. The essence or soul of
anything is its existence in a nutshell, taking into account its beginning
and its end, its form and function. It is a rational construct just as
everything communicated with words and names is a rational construct. What
humanity knows is rational, intellectual, expressed in words and names.
And the rational is not physical, not what is generally associated with the
metaphysical either though I believe it is central to any notion of
non-physical existence. So far as I can understand, the only non- physical
existence is that of order, relationships, aspects and attributes, which
humanity knows exclusively through rational concepts.
When 'Abdu'l-Baha was referred to common notions of spiritualism He
responded with the conceptuality of the rational, the intellect, the
non-physical world of words and names that humanity inhabits. For Him,
spirituality was the highest form of intellect and rationality, known to us
mainly as virtues.
So spiritualism to Him, I believe, meant that certainly we can tap into the
conceptualities and intellect of our fellow humanity by being open,
listening and striving for those virtues. The magic happens when we provide
the effort, well planned and reasonable effort on behalf of all humanity.
So, in my terms, the magic is that there is no magic. It is hard work and
reason that brings us all the good things we provide for all humanity.
--Kent |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
On Jun 26, 12:20 pm, Kent Johnson <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I have tried at least 50 times to send this message and it has not come
through the srb server. This time I am sending it directly from the srb server
as a test. I do not know the problem.
|
Bingo! Again, since you are a moderator, it does not make sense to me
why you would need to "double moderate" your own posts, i.e., by
approving them after you send them.
| Quote: | According to my understanding a rational soul has a specific definition. It
is our essence as seen from beyond time and space. The essence or soul of
anything is its existence in a nutshell, taking into account its beginning
and its end, its form and function. It is a rational construct just as
everything communicated with words and names is a rational construct. What
humanity knows is rational, intellectual, expressed in words and names.
|
IMHO, the rational soul/human spirit is a category, a rubric, of human
functioning. `Abdu'l-Baha appears to use "human spirit" to refer to
those functions which differentiate humans from animals.
| Quote: | When 'Abdu'l-Baha was referred to common notions of spiritualism He
responded with the conceptuality of the rational, the intellect, the
non-physical world of words and names that humanity inhabits. For Him,
spirituality was the highest form of intellect and rationality, known to us
mainly as virtues.
|
Yes, the spirit of faith.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
On Jun 26, 2:46 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | You appear to be saying the human spirit and the rational soul are not the
same thing. Do I read you correctly?
|
No, I assume that `Abdu'l-Baha, at least in this case, is using the
Aristotelian term, "rational soul," as a synonym for the human spirit.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:46 am Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
Hi Mark,
It is curious to me that you say:
| Quote: | IMHO, the rational soul/human spirit is a category, a rubric, of human
functioning. `Abdu'l-Baha appears to use "human spirit" to refer to
those functions which differentiate humans from animals."
|
However, in the very message you are responding to I quote 'Abdu'l-Baha
saying "The human spirit which distinguishes man from the animal is the
rational soul; and these two names -- the human spirit and the rational
soul -- designate one thing."
You appear to be saying the human spirit and the rational soul are not the
same thing. Do I read you correctly?
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:K6Sdnao7Mt_wcv7VnZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | On Jun 26, 12:20 pm, Kent Johnson <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
I have tried at least 50 times to send this message and it has not come
through the srb server. This time I am sending it directly from the srb
server
as a test. I do not know the problem.
Bingo! Again, since you are a moderator, it does not make sense to me
why you would need to "double moderate" your own posts, i.e., by
approving them after you send them.
According to my understanding a rational soul has a specific definition.
It
is our essence as seen from beyond time and space. The essence or soul of
anything is its existence in a nutshell, taking into account its
beginning
and its end, its form and function. It is a rational construct just as
everything communicated with words and names is a rational construct.
What
humanity knows is rational, intellectual, expressed in words and names.
IMHO, the rational soul/human spirit is a category, a rubric, of human
functioning. `Abdu'l-Baha appears to use "human spirit" to refer to
those functions which differentiate humans from animals.
When 'Abdu'l-Baha was referred to common notions of spiritualism He
responded with the conceptuality of the rational, the intellect, the
non-physical world of words and names that humanity inhabits. For Him,
spirituality was the highest form of intellect and rationality, known to
us
mainly as virtues.
Yes, the spirit of faith.
Mark Foster
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
Hi Mark.
It seems just wrong to me that you view Abdu'l-Baha's term "rational soul"
as "Aristotelian". Upon what do you base that interpretation?
Also, Susan and you both seem to be saying that the use of "Divine Word" is
equivalent to the Aristotle's Neo-Platonism term "Logos" despite the fact
that the only quotes in the Baha'i Writings using that phrase clearly are
not equivalent.
How do you explain these errors?
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:SLWdnQLjp-0hpvnVnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | On Jun 26, 2:46 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
You appear to be saying the human spirit and the rational soul are not
the
same thing. Do I read you correctly?
No, I assume that `Abdu'l-Baha, at least in this case, is using the
Aristotelian term, "rational soul," as a synonym for the human spirit.
Mark Foster
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
| Quote: | Also, Susan and you both seem to be saying that the use of "Divine Word" is
equivalent to the Aristotle's Neo-Platonism term "Logos" despite the fact
that the only quotes in the Baha'i Writings using that phrase clearly are
not equivalent.
|
Dear Kent,
Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. I couldn't help but
notice that in most cases where they were not it wasn't so much the
Writings you were quoting but letters written on the Guardian's behalf
which did not use his diction.
warmest, Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:51 pm Post subject: Re: The Soul |
|
|
On Jun 27, 7:33 am, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | It seems just wrong to me that you view Abdu'l-Baha's term "rational soul"
as "Aristotelian". Upon what do you base that interpretation?
|
Because of the context. Aristotle also saw the "souls" of animals and
vegetables as incorporated into the rational soul. Both models are
presented similarly.
| Quote: | Also, Susan and you both seem to be saying that the use of "Divine Word" is
equivalent to the Aristotle's Neo-Platonism term "Logos" despite the fact
that the only quotes in the Baha'i Writings using that phrase clearly are
not equivalent.
|
I agree with what Susan wrote on that subject. I would also add that,
irrespective of the usage by the Guardian's secretary or secretaries,
the term "logos" has established theological precedents. In utilizing
the term, I was referring to the latter.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
