I have not read the book; the relationship between Plato's idealism, "theology," and the Hellenic mind seems obvious to a person with an Asian mind (that would be me). The Hellenic mind thinks by manipulating abstractions weakly connected to the everyday world. Reification is often the result. The Asian mind thinks concretely -- The writings and sayings of Laozi, Confucius and Buddha are excellent examples. Abstract concepts do not exist apart from the observable qualities of everyday life in a collectivist society. The Asian mind has great difficulty in conceiving "God" -- "The Dao that can be known is not the Dao."
So the concept "worldview" is unintelligible.
The vast majority of human societies are composed of people with concrete thinking minds -- Hebrews included. The Greeks and their mental progeny are the exception, not the rule.
I've left comments before -- no one has ever responded to me. So what's the purpose of having comments?
Thank you for your feedback, Fred and I’m sorry for your lack of engagement. This is my first time encountering your comments and I think your point about the incommensurability of the western vs eastern mind presents challenges for comparative analysis. At this point I would offer the triperspectival test of truth to consider each for a nonreductionist evaluation of respective merits: the correspondence, coherence, and credibility lenses for determining justified true belief or warranted knowledge. I believe ontology determines epistemology and epistemology is the nub of the issue.
Also, your analytical outline for the book is incisive, empowering and immediately actionable. I love it!
The spiritual warfare piece is epic! I went and got the book. I’m excited to read it.
I have not read the book; the relationship between Plato's idealism, "theology," and the Hellenic mind seems obvious to a person with an Asian mind (that would be me). The Hellenic mind thinks by manipulating abstractions weakly connected to the everyday world. Reification is often the result. The Asian mind thinks concretely -- The writings and sayings of Laozi, Confucius and Buddha are excellent examples. Abstract concepts do not exist apart from the observable qualities of everyday life in a collectivist society. The Asian mind has great difficulty in conceiving "God" -- "The Dao that can be known is not the Dao."
So the concept "worldview" is unintelligible.
The vast majority of human societies are composed of people with concrete thinking minds -- Hebrews included. The Greeks and their mental progeny are the exception, not the rule.
I've left comments before -- no one has ever responded to me. So what's the purpose of having comments?
Thank you for your feedback, Fred and I’m sorry for your lack of engagement. This is my first time encountering your comments and I think your point about the incommensurability of the western vs eastern mind presents challenges for comparative analysis. At this point I would offer the triperspectival test of truth to consider each for a nonreductionist evaluation of respective merits: the correspondence, coherence, and credibility lenses for determining justified true belief or warranted knowledge. I believe ontology determines epistemology and epistemology is the nub of the issue.