Blogging some thoughts
It occurred to me that the way to the universal is through the particular. I’ve been arguing with someone who wants to change the system and finds that more important than changing persons. I’ve been a radical existentialist, so that does not sit well with me. Yet I find that the holistic approach is also necessary.
I believe that “changing the system” is too simple a term for such a complex endeavor. Bourdieu’s fields can be considered. They could provide several angles that approach a system. Systems may also be made up out of fields. But then consider Habermas, his Life World and the Two Systems, economic and political. Habermas states that the systems are there for the sake of the Life World and not vice versa. What would “changing the system” mean for his theoretical model?
I get this way of thinking from the formula: Finitum capax infinitum (the finite is capable of containing the infinite). Luther upheld this view in order to affirm the Incarnation: “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Thus the way to God is through Jesus the Christ and through his life we glimpse Heaven.