Lonergan_L Google Group

Re: [Lonergan_l] NORTHROP FRYE SOCIETY

mou...@uw.edu — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:17:02 UT

Nice blog, and promising journal! In addition to Mike's question, I was wondering if you could describe how the copyright to Frye's work is managed for your group?
I've always thought Lonergan's work would be more accessible (and might even sell more books) if his heirs released him to the public. Columbia supports a significantly sophisticated Dante page, for example, and even Joyce mostly is available with some advertising. Google Books is a huge contribution, although it falls short of what's possible.

Re: [Lonergan_l] just to share a comment

octaviogro...@gmail.com (Octavio Groppa) — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:53:47 UT

Thank you, very much, Doug!
Re the subject of my thesis, well, it won't be easy to resume it in a few
words... I think that the relationship appears through the orientation given
by the fourth level of our intentional structure, that is, through the
judgments of value and the decision to act, because Theology is the ultimate

[Lonergan_l] NORTHROP FRYE SOCIETY

mikealberts...@mac.com (Mike Albertson) — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:01:08 UT

Begin forwarded message:
Mayer's article refers to Lonergan's Exegesis and Dogma where he describes three distinct approaches to scriptural interpretation:relative, romantic, and classical. On page 148 of the journal Method article Mayer goes on to write ". . . However, humans are rational animals, but they are not merely rational. For the sake of simplicity we might say that, besides rational minds there is emotive psyche. Two forms of understanding coexist in us mind- discursive logical reason, and psyche- the intensity of imagination and affectivity. To characterize the classic approach, we must contrast between these two.

[Lonergan_l] NORTHROP FRYE SOCIETY

nicholas.gra...@utoronto.ca — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:33:15 UT

DEVOTED COLLEAGUES
HAPPY TO SEND YOU THE FOLLOWING EXCITING AND IMPORTANT NEWS.
Seanson's Greetings!
Nicholas William Graham
PRESIDENT
Northrop Frye Society
nicholas.gra...@utoronto.ca
Just in time for Christmas, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa, we are pleased to
announce, at long last, the launch of our journal dedicated to Northrop

[Lonergan_l] Fwd: HIGHER TRUTHS

jarayma...@aol.com — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:33:56 UT

[Lonergan_l] En hora buena

v...@pusit.admu.edu.ph (Vicente Marasigan) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:33:42 UT

En hora buena, amigo mio Octavio, Licenciado en Teologia Sagrada. You are now authorized to teach the theology of Accountancy Economics.
In my own efforts to do this sort of undertaking, I once asked John to consider visiting the International Accounting Standards Board office in Switzerland to see how the IASB is reacting to my (attached) request. John wants to know what you and Phil would think of such a request. Phil replied positively: "give it a shot" and offered some excellent suggestions.

[Lonergan_l] Fwd: SOME HIGHER TRUTHS IN POETRY??????

nicholas.gra...@utoronto.ca — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:51:32 UT

Dear All,
John Milton's
On the Morning of Christ's Nativity
Compos'd 1629
THis is the Month, and this the happy morn
Wherein the Son of Heav'ns eternal King,
Of wedded Maid, and Virgin Mother born,
Our great redemption from above did bring;
For so the holy sages once did sing, [ 5 ]
That he our deadly forfeit should release,

Re: [Lonergan_l] another comment

mou...@uw.edu — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:36:40 UT

Dear All, there were two features of the "Introduction" that I hoped would be pursued because I think they are related. One was the question of, "How do you present naive realism to itself as it's own problem?," but the other is the correct understanding of the desire to know.
J.J. Gibson's experiments clearly demonstrate that organs participate in data collection rather than merely transmit data as neutral channels. Given the simplicity of the demonstration, the "problem" presented here suggests an intersubjective relation. The one who can ask such a question, for example, probably has a theological or geometrical maturity demonstrating that naive realism is not a problem for them, and hence the implied concern is between one judging above about one who is judged to be below.

Re: [Lonergan_l] just to share a comment

mou...@uw.edu — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:05:41 UT

Congratulations Octavio! I'd like to hear your ideas on the relationship between Theology and Social Sciences.
(mi tio fue desde buenos aires, y mi primas carnales viven en la ciudad - Feliz Navidad!)
______________________________ _________________
You are subscribed to the Lonergan_l mailing list
Lonerga...@skipperweb.org

[Lonergan_l] just to share a comment

octaviogro...@gmail.com (Octavio Groppa) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:43:05 UT

Dear pals,
I just want to tell you that yesterday morning I had my STL dissertation on
BL's GEM and the relatonship between Theology and Social Sciences, at the
Jesuit Uniersity, here in Buenos Aires.
You don't imagine my surprise and emotion when this morning I realized that
yesterday had been Lonergan's birthday! A nice gift!

Re: [Lonergan_l] invariant law

1729...@gmail.com (Joe F) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 04:55:28 UT

"As the late Edward Forbes often insisted, there is a striking
parallelism in the laws of life throughout time and space: the laws
governing the succession of forms in past times being nearly the same
with those governing at the present time the differences in different
areas. We see this in many facts.” Origin of Species (1859) Chapter

Re: [Lonergan_l] invariant law

1729...@gmail.com (Joe F) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 04:53:24 UT

One has to go back and forth a few times in order to determine what
the other fellow is saying so no prob. No question that
self-reflectivity is nothing new. But I just wondered when that very
modern sounding formulation of invariant law became popular. Why is it
important? I think it is important to figure out if part of Lonergan's

Re: [Lonergan_l] invariant law

mou...@uw.edu — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:19:28 UT

Sorry Joe, try the "Merton Theorem," developed by mathematicians at Merton College in the 1300's.
And, sorry again, I meant that the ancients weren't reflective about the shape of the earth or the number of stars, but they were self-reflective about other, important knowledge.
In any case, you know me, I can't agree that science is a quest for invariant laws. I can agree that Lonergan identifies an important foundation with his example of inverse insight. Limits open new fields of study, and now I am wondering when that definition for what an engineer does (design under constraint) became common, and is that important?

Re: [Lonergan_l] invariant law

1729...@gmail.com (Joe F) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:49:40 UT

My references to Darwin must seem completely out of left field to
anyone not inclined to pursue Lonergan's 'illustration of scientific
intelligence' involving Darwin. It is a brief mention in a huge work.
But I could explain how it works out for me. I am not specifically a
devotee of Darwin. He made mistakes I feel. But something about

Re: [Lonergan_l] invariant law

1729...@gmail.com (Joe F) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:33:07 UT

Dear Doug and John,
Thanks and your post bears much further thought. But what is Merton's
rule. It can't be real because it seems I can't google it. Also even
toward the end of your post where you bring up the ancient's 'self
reflective' take on the roundness of the earth. Still the roundness is
the phenomenon. I am asking when human beings began saying: Hey,