Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 XF

[A good example is found in my work:

Comments on Wayne Proudfoot’s Book (1986) Religious Experience

Dr. Proudfoot (writing in the 1980s) eagerly takes Schleiermacher (writing in the 1800s) to task. In order to demonstrate cause and effect in the religious experience, Proudfoot inadvertently selects a few elements out of a three-level interscope. He neglects all other elements.

Of course, if I selected any two elements in the nine-element matrix, I could declare that one element caused the other (provided that the seven other elements remained constant). This is not false. However, this would be deceptive. My selection would neglect all the other elements in the interscope.

Dr. Proudfoot was awarded a book award from the American Academy for Religion for his efforts.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 XE

Summary of text [comment] pages 86 and 87

[Each of these models exhibits a simple relational structure.

The relational structure illustrates how difficult discussions of various topics, such as freedom, can be.

Imagine a thinker focusing on one structural element to the exclusion of other elements.

This is especially easy to imagine when the one thinker is trying to show how another thinker is wrong.]


Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 WV

Summary of text [comment] pages 86 and 87

[Let me review, again.

I have discussed two types of models, so far.

Both rely on the category-based nested form.

One is the two-level interscope, composed of category-based nested forms on the content and situation levels.

The other is the intersection, composed when two category-based nested forms contribute to one actuality.]