Led Tv Reviews
January 19, 2012The image of man in modern science, make it possible to speak of the spiritual nature of man? Close attention to the scientific image of man to distinguish the reality of the "soul" of led tv reviews man. On the other hand, the Christian doctrine of man can fully assume the natural idea of man, whose only horizon is death, and place in the "call" God's supernatural introduction of human beings in a spiritual condition that relates to a metaphysical dimension. By Javier Montserrat. What is the modern ontology of science and how from it we can now address a proper hermeneutical beliefs of kerigmacristiano? Hermeneutics old today produces obvious problems that hinder an effective and powerful proclamation of the Christian kerygma. On the infeasibility of the old paradigm, the logic of Christian belief should lead the church to engage in the search for a new hermeneutic. Without prejudging the outcome, should lead the process of open discussion of the modern world aimed at finding ways to proclaim the right hermeneutic Christian kerygma to the society. No doubt the contributions of philosophers and theologians would be enriching for this process of reflection. In this article, keeping to the idea of man, let us refer to the profiles of the new anthropological hermeneutics should lead the new image of the ontology of concrete universo.En think, obviously not believing that he said the last word, something it would be naive, that my proposal, and argued on the blog for the New Council, is a reflection of the image height on scientific and philosophical and socio-political reality in modernity and the hermeneutic alternative since it is possible to understand more deeply and proclaim the Christian kerygma. Truth does not know that there are other proposals that are comparable to mine in density argument. But it would be desirable to arise, so that to a "proliferation of proposals" in Feyerabend's epistemological sense, the Christian church itself could lead the reflective process, in my opinion, should be completed in the new council. But what then is the modern ontology? How and why it leads to a new hermeneutics of Christian kerygma?. This exhibition as a whole is a reasoned response to what should be the new modern hermeneutics of Christianity. Here, of course, try to insist on a very specific point that, from my own experience, has a crucial value for many. I mean the human constitution. When asked what the man is, what is your real ontology in the ontology of the universe. In Christian terminology would ask what the man in the created universe: how God created man, how he has done in the framework of the general way that created the universe. The fact is that hermeneutics came to Greco-Roman Christian culture impose a dualistic image of man founded on the ancient philosophies of Greek origin, performed later by Scholastic. But the fact is that the modern world offers a monistic and evolutionary picture of reality, and also the man. What is man? From the modern image of man, if we accept the results of modern science, is it possible to understand the Christian kerygma? We think so, and we will expose it. What should the church do to the image of man in modern science? Suggest an answer, just admit its results for the simple reason that, in principle, science provides reliable knowledge. In principle, the Christian should think, therefore, that the real world that has been created by God is described as science. Consequently, philosophical reflection on the man will take the basic results of science. But this admission of science has, of course, a limit to the believer, the Christian kerygma. This means that if the scientific image of man is not compatible with the Christian kerygma, then the believer should doubt it. This is what happened over centuries when science provided an image "reductionist" (mechanical, deterministic, robotics) of man is incompatible with a religious idea of things. This is one reason that the church remain in the old paradigm: because modernity, both scientific and philosophical and socio-political as it was hardly "assimilated" by the church and its beliefs. The church did not accept certain approaches of modernity "nascent" and the subsequent history has shown that, in fact, was a success. Modernity had not yet reached a stage of maturity appropriate to establish a fruitful dialogue with Christianity. However, today is setting up a new scientific picture of the universe, life, humanity, society and history, who no longer respond to pure old reductionism. What is this new scientific and philosophical image of man? Draw, in short, most important profiles. This is essential because, ultimately, defend, as we will see, which is compatible with the Christian image of man. 1) The universe was born in the big bang as a huge expansive energy, dynamic, producing the appearance of matter in the form of elementary particles. It may be said, therefore, that physical reality is energy and matter, radiation wave and corpuscle. Corpuscles would, ultimately, "folded radiation." This physical reality answering fundamental properties that science has come to know in part, as explained in quantum mechanics. One of these properties is called "quantum coherence" that makes the physical reality be consistent unit fields where it is impossible to distinguish individual particles differentiated reality being a single field or coherent unit vibration. The primary radiation of the big bang was cooled and fractionated into small vibrations produced by folding or encapsulated corpuscles or elementary particles. Some of these particles, in appropriate circumstances, could enter quantum coherence (thus, particles called bosons) and, in others, return to the corpuscular state in processes of quantum coherence and decoherence. Light, for example, would be a bosonic particle (photon) that could also come in electromagnetic fields of quantum coherence. But the big bang also led to other particles (fermions)-electrons, protons, neutrons, whose mode of vibration (ie, its "wave function", in physical terms more precise) was not easy to get into quantum coherence , thus maintaining their independence and differentiation of particles over others. When these particles interact with each other fermion-according to the four natural forces, they formed the first atomic nuclei and the first atoms. These gave rise to molecules, to macromolecules, the grouping of stellar matter, the birth of the heavenly bodies, minerals and inorganic world objects in general. However, the interactions between these bodies formed by fermionic matter and did not respond to the interactions of primordial matter (described in quantum mechanics). The interactions of the macroscopic world were formed by fermionic matter described in classical Newtonian mechanics. The classical world is our world of experience that there are distinct objects and bodies, macroscopic, whose interactions are not responsible for the good of the quantum properties owned, however, that matter is deep, as all matter in the universe is the same and answer the same fundamental ontology. 2) Therefore, science is understood that all physical reality as we know it comes from a primal energy that was becoming matter. Everything contains the universe and the universe itself, comes from the binomial convertible matter / energy. In this sense science is an understanding "monistic" nature of the universe and of living in it (all from a single principle, the matter / energy). By the action of natural forces can be organized structurally matter. But the structures are not really distinct from matter / energy, but the way in which the matter relates to itself or bodies forming fermionic systems (structures), or systems or matter fields in quantum coherence. Science describes how the same primordial material produced) a "quantum world" that govern the quantum coherence, quantum superposition, indeterminacy, and action at a distance (excuse here to explain these concepts), but also b) a " classical world "in which the interactions between their bodies and objects are preferably deterministic, rigid, mechanical (but also in the classical world of indeterminacy phenomena occur, such as chaos, or as some" bubbles of uncertainty ", as is the land surface that may or may not happen much). 3) Leaving aside issues such as speculative explanation of the matter (eg the string theory and superstring) or the nature and origin of the universe (which gives rise to various theories), which can be followed in the c. IV of my work towards the new council, let us focus now on what is most important for understanding human nature. Start with the nature of life. Living beings can exist because they have a "classical body" formed by stable physical structures similar to the purely physical, but precisely because of their different specific structural form (biochemistry). Biological beings are physical-chemical systems, in principle, have a dynamic interaction with the environment and the adaptive growth depends on its structure "cybernetics" and inherited by evolution from the game in the DNA genetic coding with determinism governing embriogenéticos processes. The body of living beings in the various animal species, although constantly evolving and responding to a high mechanical rigidity and deterministic because she can speak for the maintenance of heritage and structural stability of our bodies. We stay in overnight and we can build our lives, our life, because the rigid structure of our body can be kept from one day to another. And this we owe to physical determinism is a large part of nature and biology, and human biology in continuity with the evolution of life on earth. 4) But living beings have another property that in principle can not be attributed to the purely physical world: the ability to feel. Biology is always described property, visible even in single-celled living. Speaking of the biological evolutionary process we can speak of the appearance of sensitivity-awareness (consciousness in higher animals). Consciousness is the ability to feel a unified body and the outside world for a systemic integration of the various internal and external senses, making possible a unified response to the environment (not to confuse the conscience conscious this biological sense "moral" or "rational", which is only attributable to man, as some use terminology). For the sensitivity-awareness and causal consequences have been living psychic systems becoming a "psychic subject." They have "psyche" because their bodies are a system of awareness and sensitivity, "subject" that drives the answers and plays a role in adaptive behavior to the environment to survive. 5) Science has tried to explain the causes that led to the emergence of this unusual biological factor, the sensitivity-awareness. It was not easy. The explanation of the biological bodies in the physical framework of classical mechanics as deterministic systems has been easier. But where does awareness and sensitivity, which is the mode of action of beings with "psyche"? When explaining to reduce to classical determinism fell into the "reductionism." Science, in fact, was for many years deterministic (and still is in certain sectors). However, science today, the emergent quantum neurology, is building an adequate and convincing, holistic, to explain the sensitivity-awareness. To do so is postulated to be attributed to the ontology itself of energy / matter that constitutes the universe capable of producing sensation. Why matter produces "feel" or rather did not happen? We do not know. But the fact is that we must attribute the ontological capacity to produce "feel". On the other hand, the biological body and its nervous system (in the neuronal system) living beings have been building evolutionarily diverse sensations, internal and external real-time recording and its connection with the responses to the environment, counting for it with a quantum structure have been forming their niche in the interior of a classic body. 1) From a scientific point of view the appearance of man is seen today as a step in the evolutionary continuum of animal life. Specifically one step further in the evolution of hominids. The man is a system of sensations, integrated into unity consciousness, which, as psychic subject responds to the environment similar to how they respond the higher animals. His sensitive-emotional world and their responses are recorded in your brain, so that man builds his own history, biographical self. The human functional biological structure, with a deterministic classical body and a system of nested quantum states in that body and your brain classic, is entirely similar to that of animals. The man is conscious of his own body and their status as subjects maker of "life" in a number of emotional situations that constitute his personal history. What distinguishes man from animals is the human psychic specificity different from hominids: the emergence of reason and a man's own emotional world. The reason makes the responses to the environment and are not automatic in some way deterministic (as in the animal), but must be "mediated" by the constructs of reason produces to give your life "sense" (ie , an adaptation as correct as possible to the objective world in order to achieve optimal survival). The man knows himself morally responsible for his life, the "sense" that has given him, and wonders through reason what is the profound truth of the world around him (DEVELOPING a complex scientific technology for control) and what is the final truth, metaphysics, the universe has been produced in the human species. The human world-the "person" human, is the world of culture, aesthetics, philosophy, science, religions, technology … But the human world is explained as something that has been built in the brain of a qualitatively different and irreducible to animal behavior, but based on mechanisms similar to those produced evolutionarily animal brain. 2) According to this, is, according to the results of scientific knowledge about human reality, what then is the man? It makes sense to respond by saying that man is born consists of two dimensions of the profound unity of his being psicobiofísico real. On the one hand distinguish its "body" produced by a classical deterministic system (DNA, biochemical and cellular interactions, their automated systems, brain determinism …) and a swing-indeterministic quantum system that allows real-time psychic life , indeterministic, holistic, and mental life of memories in the past updated for the activation of complex networks of networks or neural circuits. The biophysical body is not always the same, and that becomes dynamically, although he retains those basic structures that allow its continuation. So our body is permanent but actually transforms. But on the other hand, we distinguish in man something else we might call his "soul" (we can, in fact, freely admit this term). It is the experiences, knowledge, emotions, decisions, commitments and metaphysical life, attitudes, emotions and feelings taken before God, all that, ultimately, is the history or personal history that each has built over time, relying on his own body, its processes psicobiofísicos over the years. Without this there would have been history, indeed, a "soul": namely, the "soul" that the staff has been giving me your body has appropriated as its capabilities and has built his own biography. Thus, the "soul" of each is the "life" has been, is and will be built by each man. The soul is intangible at a particular time. At each time our "soul" in our brains biologically rooted: in our engrams and neural circuits that allow us to think, have emotions and memories, be aware of our own self. But our whole psychic dimension is not identified with the body at any given time (think of an Alzheimer's patient). When the body breaks down and the neural networks that allow us to think, feel and be ourselves, fade, to grow old in some way our "soul" is de-construct in the here and now. In this unfortunate situation, the state of our body, such as we discuss in ordinary language, "we are not ourselves." However, intangible soul has been produced by us and has been true in our body over years and years, our body has been giving reality to our soul. The living history of our personal being is something that is there is not tangible although neurologically. The whole human history is also that intangible something that has been produced for the soul of many lives. Our soul is there, but there is also the soul of human history. 3) But when we die, what will happen to our bodies? What is the soul that we have been able to create freely with our bodies? What will become of our human reality? What science tells us depends on the knowledge produced by it and respond with objectivity and coldness: we simply waiting to die the death, the corruption of our mortal body and the disappearance of our soul. The body has been corrupted and slowly throughout life. Our soul has also been undergoing a process of collapse: the enormous wealth existential lived in our souls, in our old age, just remembered, and even neural networks exist that support the memory of knowledge and emotions experienced. We state that neither we ourselves remember. The other men we barely remember. In real history experienced by the human species, just be a memory that is capable of reviving the true greatness of what was the history of mankind. This is what we expect according to the natural world that has been created by God and we know from science. 4) Then, to die, everything disappears? That's exactly what the science says. Just be the dim recollection that new generations have past history. Therefore, science and culture of modernity, is not known immortal human entity itself? Is not human reality discovers something that in itself should make us think that man is immortal? The answer is that science does not discover any entity to which we can attribute immortality (so that our immortality is the memory that you leave on others is nothing more than a consolation naive and childish). Science has no grounds for asserting the existence of an entity similar to what were the Platonic Forms or Aristotelian, which by its nature, by its own ontology, they should be attributed immortality, permanence beyond death . Thus, the "soul" that science can recognize that man has built throughout his life, not an "immortal soul", it will disappear by the dynamic evolution of the world. Life allows us to build something great that is the "soul", the formidable personal history of every human being: but life known to science in the context of the evolving universe we inhabit has no other future than death and oblivion. This is objectively and science must recognize without hesitation. 1) Consequently, science is not an entity known by its own ontology to be "immortal" (as was the Aristotelian soul understood in the Thomistic system). The man, body and soul, is naturally doomed to death and oblivion. Is this thinking acceptable to Christianity? It is clear that the Christian kerygma has the belief in the immortality of the "soul" of man. It seems, therefore, exist, in principle, a certain contradiction between the new paradigm in modern science and Christianity's own beliefs. Is it really so?. 3) The recognition of the existence of this divine call or appeal is part of the Christian kerygma and has been explained through the theology of the three witnesses, or "testimonium veritatis". What does God call man? The work of the Father, the work of God in creation, is already a call to the right of man to know the possible real existence of a God who could hide a plan of salvation (Testimony of Father). He also is called by the mystery of Christ believe in the kenosis of God in the world as a prelude to the glorious resurrection, belief that every man has implicit access to believe in the saving power of God, despite its remoteness and its silence in the world (witness the Son). Finally, every man is the subject of the supernatural presence of God's Spirit, the Holy Spirit, who calls inside and moves us to believe in God the Creator and the God of the mystery of Christ, hidden / liberator, as the Spirit-Paraclete the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son within the single unit of work in creating Trinity and salvation of man. This "testimony" has been exposed to during my work for the New Concilio.4) So who is the man in the world? It is the science that describes: the man who by nature in an evolutionary universe has no foreseeable future death and oblivion. But when the natural man receives a supernatural way Trinitarian testimony, harmonious and united, the Father, the Son and the Spirit, can open up faith and hope that his "soul" will be "saved" by God. But not only his soul, but the "soul" of all human history. In this sense his soul will not die because, even through the inevitable natural trance of death, will be "saved" by God according to the plan creator who acquires its meaning in the eternal Logos Christology of creation. Therefore, for the Christian, the natural life does not disappear but is transformed by the work of God's saving power. In this sense the human soul is immortal, not actually die (even die) because life is transformed into the new life of "soul" saved by God. This means that the foundation of Christian faith to believe in the immortality of the soul is Christian response to the call of God is proclaimed in the Christian kerygma. We know we are immortal, they do not really die, because our soul is transformed into a new life wrought by the power of "omnipotent" the same God created the universe. 5) Maybe someone will appear to confirm the existence of an "immortal soul" by its own ontology, now known by reason and science could confirm it would be much more "secure." This is what made the old paradigm. But we think that the real world, the world created by God, as our reason permits us to know today. And the fact is that scientific and philosophical reflection allows us not argue the existence of an "immortal soul" for his own ontology. We accept it and, therefore, understand the Christian kerygma in accordance with the properties of the real world, as created by God and science describes us. This is what it means to understand it according to the paradigm of modernity. But then, this paradigm precludes the Christian belief in the immortality of the soul, as he proclaims the Christian kerygma? Not at all. The Christian believes in the immortality of the soul and the soul of history) because it has been called by God to accept that immortality and b) because it relies on the saving power of Almighty God who created the universe and holds it in the be. Now, how God made salvation of the soul into making their status "immortal" by divine grace? We do not know, but the Christian faith that adheres to Jesus in the kerygma proclaimed by the church, believe, faith trusts God's omnipotence that has already manifested itself in the splendor of created nature. Nor could the old paradigm to explain how God transcendent immortality assumed in the immortal soul which was described in scholastic systems. For centuries the scholastic tried to understand how a soul, "form corporis" dematerialized, universal, could bring into the immortality of the "individual personnel." The conceptual problems of the "intermediate eschatology" were endless, and insoluble in the background. Ultimately, it also resorted to the application of the saving power of God to explain how and why man's personal being was saved after death. Well, the application of the saving power of God is also the paradigm of modernity, reason to believe that the human soul enters immortality. We do not know how God created the universe and not even know the deep ontology of the being of God, do not know what is the universe, nor the deep ontology of matter, space and time, or their relationship with the ontology of Divinity , nor do they know how God can make "immortal" our "soul" individual with the wealth of his personal history built over time. But being called by God for the witness of the Father, the Son and the Spirit builds our faith and our hope of immortality that will be done by saving omnipotence of God that Christians believe. It is a fact that the man would live in absolute safety, knowledge dominating the past, present and future of the universe. But we must stick to the facts and these impose uncertainty. The atheist lives in uncertainty about the ultimate foundation of the universe. The believer does not have a stranglehold on the knowledge of God. But the believer relies on the power of God and therefore believes that God will the salvation of his soul because he has called us and promised us salvation in Jesus. 6) This idea of immortality of the soul can also understand other aspects of the Christian kerygma. On the one hand, the belief in personal immortality immediately after death and the trial staff. On the other hand, belief in the resurrection of the bodies and the Last Judgement when God will judge each and the whole story. After the Parousia, the second coming of Christ, those who have been saved by divine omnipotence, after the final resurrection bodies dfe, enter the New Jerusalem in the final abode of God with men of the Apocalypse speaks as pray beliefs proclaimed in the Christian kerygma. How will all this? The truth is that Christian faith is full of darkness. Accepted in faith can discern things that do not understand how they can get work done reality of divine omnipotence, but it firmly believes that will happen. We know from experience what the world time, but do not know what the "time" of God. We do not know the difference between "here" in our history and the "beyond" the transcendent divine life. Therefore, it is difficult to understand what are those strange "intermediate states" between salvation and individual trial, after death, and resurrection on the Day of Judgement at the end of the story (and here we are talking, of course, the "history" in our "human time"). 7) Hermeneutics Christian theology of the Christian kerygma was dependent on many aspects of the ontology and anthropology of the Greco-Roman paradigm. It is clear in many of the concepts used to "clarify" Trinitarian theology and the great Christological dogmas (about the person of Christ), as formulated in the early councils. But, placed Christianity in the modern paradigm, which involves a new ontology of the universe created by God and a new anthropology (eg, a new understanding or hermeneutic of the immortality of "human soul", as we have seen)