I thought you would particularly recognize the reference to "making sense", since you so splendidly invoked "resonance" in a prior post.
Yeah, I appreciate resonance. I'll tell you what resonates with me. Your first three parts resonate--enough that I could have written them. And ol' Bernard's words resonate, too.
Bernie says: "Man is yet free, during his brief years, to examine, to criticize, to know, and in imagination to create. To him alone, in the world with which he is acquainted, this freedom belongs; and in this lies his superiority to the resistless forces that control his outward life."
I can easily take what you describe in your first three parts and subsume them under Bernie's bolded words. I don't see a contradiction. You're talking about how we interact with our world. I don't see why that interaction would be any different under the divinity model vs. the motion model. That's why I don't think the "matter in motion" thing works as a foil or that part 4 inevitably follows from parts 1-3. If you leave out the matter-in-motion sentence and go strait to divinity-makes-sense I think you're better off but there's still a missing link where the "ergo" should be.
I might noodle around with that paragraph a bit to see if I can find, if not an ergo, at least a more resonant transition.
Karen
P.S. Bernie has a that/which shortfall, as well. |
