Humans have free will, but God knows their fate. In Book V of the City of God, Saint Augustine discusses the matter of fate and free will pertaining to having a relationship with God. Within that section of the text he makes many statements about how humans have the freedom to make their own choices, but God ultimately knows the outcome. Logically, this make sense. If God created everything, then this would mean He has created everything in the past, present and future.
Another distinction which has had a strong impact on the study of culture is the understanding of culture as practice or culture as a system of symbols and meanings. As Hall stresses, culture is about meaning and as such “permeates all of society.” Representations, practices, values and identities have cultural meanings that are discursively constructed and tap into previous cultural discourses to be meaningful. Critical intercultural communication casts light on ways in which meanings echo cultural knowledge and are therefore difficult to identify and question – even for researchers themselves, hence a strong emphasis placed on reflexivity. The importance of “cultural resonance” has also been pointed out by scholars examining media
Richard Shusterman (2012:1) states that it is difficult to point out what is considered to be art and what is not. The problem surfaces when we have to determine how an ordinary object of real life becomes an artwork. According to Shusterman, in order for something to be considered as art it has to be a product of human activity, an artefact. Shoes for example, could be seen as art in aesthetics to a certain someone. For art to be aesthetic it must draw attention or appeal to us in some way.
Furthermore, the ontology of this particular social theory is concerned with reality. Reality is thought of as an individual construct dependent to different situations while applied to hermeneutical phenomenological research. Hereafter, it is based on the belief that realities are multiple. In addition, we tackled on two important people who are important in hermeneutical phenomenology. These people were Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger.
The transformation of cultural documents into knowledge, is reflecting the phenomena of the social reality, where the communication takes place. When the formulated information, and messages are differing, the exhibited cultural material is stable(2). Objects are like language, it is understood as a social, and cultural action, which is significant for certain groups. The museum objects are the culture documentation material. The museum objects layers of meaning are drawing down their Museality.
Their truth was authenticated by ab muscles fact of their continued repetition. History, which is often understood to be your free account that purports actually of events and means of thinking and feeling in certain part of the human past, is due to this archetypal human narrative activity. While sharing a common ancestry with myth, legend, epic poetry, as well as novel,history has certainly diverged from all of these forms. Its claim they fact is based in part on the reality that all the individuals or events it describes really existed or occurred at sometime in the
Often such work portrays a particular configuration of statements, symbols, and meanings as an example of underlying and enduring collective understandings produced in extended ideological struggles. The epistemological assumptions behind such representations are that the rationality of the elements establishing the frame map to some corresponding consistency in a belief system. This is seen as particularly important for purposes of frame alignment. However, the presupposition is that this framing discourse is an internally stable enough tool for the communication of meaning so that interpretive strategies for mobilization and action are possible. In many of their analyses, frame analysts also assume some isomorphism between their abstractions and the ways in which people actually use framing
On the one hand, this historical consciousness provides the theologizing community a realistic picture of the present situation construed through their own eyes. It prompts them to view their experience from their realized subjectivity as a historically constructed and conditioned subjectivity. On the other hand, this historical consciousness provides insights into how their subjectivity had been shaped through the course of time and space. That helps the theologizing community to address the politics of power as historically fabricated and sustained realities, which through course of time made normative and detached from historical trajectories. Hence, for any authentic theologizing historical consciousness becomes a perquisite.
According to their study, conventional metaphors are very important as their shape our cognition. They influence the concepts in our mind because they help us understand the meaning of abstract notions (which are slightly defined by our experinces) such as time, plans, emotions, ideas, etc. Therefore, we compare abstract notions to concepts which are more clear in our thought or experience in order to fully understand them (115). Since the way we understand things is structured by the concepts in our head, our conceptual system is of critical importance to our perception of reality. Lakoff and Johnson also state that universal experiences form part of our global perception as we use them to think from the day we exist.
According to Johnson (1987), an important generalisation that emerges from these conceptual metaphors is that conceptual metaphors typically employ a more abstract concept as target and a more concrete or physical concept as their source. Although this process may typically be formulated as ‘TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN’ (Lakoff 1993, 207), it does not mean that the two domains are identical. Only certain aspects of the source domain are mapped onto the target domain, depending on which aspects of the target one intends to highlight (cf. Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Kövecses 2002). Given the partial nature of metaphorical mappings, it follows logically that different source domains can be used to focus on different aspects of the same target