[MD] The difference between a Monet and a finger painting

[John Carl]

> [Ant]
> Personally, I do think they indicate a general progressive direction; a
> creative impulse if you like but, critically for the MOQ, one that does not
> require a pre-determined static plan and/or creator.
>
> [Krimel]
> But a "general progressive direction" does not suggest a "creative impulse"
> any more that a run of 500 billions heads alters that fact that, on the
> next
> toss, the odds are 50/50. Even a general claim that the future will be
> "better” suggests that it is somehow "pre-determined" to be "better".
>
> How much "better"? "Better" for whom?


[Kuklick]

Royce's later metaphysics represents a falling back to Bradley's conception.
 We are not told *how* the Spirit of the Community interprets the infinite
series of interpretations to its goal.  Royce admits that temporal beings
cannot know when or how salvation occurs.  In so doing, he acknowledges that
the problem of evil is beyond our comprehension.

Royce concludes his work by returning to Pierce for support.  From this
survey Royce does not want a demonstrative argument for his ideas; rather,
he wants a dramatic illustration of his belief that the whole of time is a
manifestation of a progressive world-order whose aim is beyond the temporal.
 The best example of a Peircean community is the scientific one.  For Peirce
this community attains truth in the infinite future, and in so doing
constitutes the absolute mind.  Although no scientific community possess
truth, the scientific endeavor is regarded as a progressive one.  We have an
example of men engaged in progressively interpreting an infinite series of
signs; they presuppose a final interpretation and also believe that it lies
beyond their grasp.  He closes out his work by drawing this analogy.  "We
can look forward to no final form, either of Christianity or of any other
special religion.   But we can look forward to a time when the work and
insight of religion can become as progressive as is now the work of
science."


[John]

And I emphiasize this point to you Krimel, that the world as we empirically
find it points to evolutionary development headed towards something bigger
than us.  The way we symbolize, analogize, express and compare our
realizations of this "bigger than us" is a GOOD process, not a bad one.