Bernard Lonergan’s typescript of Method in Theology, chapter 3.
Archival Number: A806
Author: Lonergan, B.
Bernard Lonergan's typescript of Method in Theology, chapter 3.
New tw on p. 1, which is clearly a substitute for some earlier page. MiT 3 at top of p. 1, MiT V at top of other pp.
-- pt 61, 16: indentation is in ts indentations
-- 61, 17: gramophone is in ts changed to phonograph.
-- 61, 17: a concrete pattern is in ts simply `concrete pattern'
-- pt 69, last sentence in text was added late in ts, is pasted to bottom of p. 102.
-- pt 71, top: par. originally began, `so it is that human conscious intentionality develops in and is moulded by its mother tongue. A professor of chemistry once remarked that the theoretical developments in his field in the previous five years had enormously extended the range of data.'
-- pt 72, - 15: `logic' is in ts `logics'.
-- pt 73, -4: something is left out here: `The transcendental are the very dynamism of intentional consciousness, its capacity to attend, to inquire, to reflect, to deliberate, a capacity ...'
-- pt 74, 13: ts has `... the sensible in act and the sense in act are one and the same; and the intelligible in act and intelligence in act are one and the same.'
-- pt 74, 3: constitutive or effective was at first `active' in ts; this corresponds to 74, - 6: `active meanings'--but for this ts has `Active and performative meaning come with judgments of value, decisions, actions. It is a topic ...'
-- pt 76, 3: ts has colon after being--better.
-- pt 78, - 7: `incarnately is not in ts (just as section 6 earlier in chapter was added later).
-- pt 79, - 1, etc.: `inauthentic', etc., are changed by BL to `unauthentic.' By the end of pt 80, ts has switched.
-- pt 82, - 15: ts has no comma after `congruences'--better.
-- pt 84, 6: `common sense, theory, and interiority' replace `possible human experience'.
-- pt 85, med: Crossed out in ts at end of section 9: `Prof. Frank Tillman has spoken of the reductionist tendencies of linguistic analysis. It is difficult to see how such tendencies can be eliminated as long as ordinary language is retained as a criterion.' In margin: IPQ 7 ('67) 40.
-- pt 85, - 14: `In the first' is in ts `In a first'--better.
-- pt 86, - 3: `It also' starts a new sentence in ts.
-- pt 87, 18: something left out here: `For gestures occur with respect to objects present in space. Insights occur with respect to perceptual ...'
-- pt 87, note 28: ts has 199 f. (not ff.).
-- pt 90, note 36: the Borsch ref. is not in ts.
-- pt 91, - 5: `a distinction' is in ts just `distinction'
-- pt 92, 12: something left out--`But these limitations recede in the measure that linguistic feed-back is achieved, that is, in the measure that linguistic explanations ...'
-- pt 93, med: an entire section omitted: `Finally, let us remark that, while drawing a distinction is simply a metter of experiencing, understanding, judging, and uttering a negative, comparative sentence of the type, A is not B, still a far greater degree of sophistication is required if one is to define what a distinction is, if one is to distinguish between real and other distinctions, if one is to explain in what sense real distinctions regard reality. So it is within the power of primitives to draw distinctions, but it is not in their power to set up a doctrine of distinctions and to observe it consistently. Mind had first to express itself in magic and myth, then advance to the literary portrayal of man, and finally through the criticism of magic move towards science and through the criticism of myth move towards philosophy.'
-- pt 96, 8: ts has `a nature is a principle'.
-- pt 99, end: ts has a continuation crossed out: `What is to be the basis of communication?'
Database and descriptions © Copyright 2017 by Robert M. Doran
No transcription available.