extenstions of the symbology for first-person philosophy
while there are symbols by which I2 may represent the first person perspective of that which self-asserts its own reality type as ontological, the humanese language must be broad enough to encompass the representation of belief systems which hold that ontological realities do not have a first-person perspective or that the first-person perspective of a higher power is not expressed thru just anyone.
§1: symbols for a higher power
impersonal component specific pronoun
|T3||ontological||T3 is||an impersonal ontological component that goes into the construction of the human individual; for example, mind or spirit as a collectivity rather than particularity (a mind or a spirit).|
third person pronouns for a higher power
|G3 or G3.0||ontological||G3.0 is||an (alleged) divinity as a whole; irregardless of (or deliberately ambiguous as to) personification or manifestation.|
|G3.1||O.E||G3.1 is||ontological (with existential manifestation): an (alleged) aspect of the human individual that is said to be a 'spark of the divine fire'|
|G3.2||O.P||G3.2 is||ontological (with phenomenological personification): an (alleged) personification of the divinity or of the ground of being.|
|G3.3||O.O||G3.3 is||ontological (beyond conceptualizations): the (alleged) ground of being, to use Paul Tillich's wonderful phrase. G3.3 is the 'referent' of anaphoric discourse about the referent of G3.3 ...|
§1.1: details of the numbering system for a higher power
G3 or G3.0 are deliberately ambiguous in ways that are analogous to the ways in which the 'I' of VE or the I0 of HE are ambiguous.
the first digit after the decimal point, when not a '0', indicates a perspective that is loosely analoguous to the reality types these codes would otherwise indicate.
a reality type code of 1 indicates an existential or physical reality. with regard to an alleged supreme being, G3.1 suggests the manifestation of G3 within the physical universe as a human individual. this would then represent aspects of a belief system concerning saviors, avatars, messiahs and the like; or, aspects of beliefs about the human individual.
a reality type code of 2 indicates a phenomenological or experiential reality. with regard to an alleged supreme being, G3.2 suggests a personification of G3 not manifested within the physical universe as a human individual. this could then represent the objects of a belief system concerning the 'persons' of a singular, non-personified supreme being; or, the objects of a belief system concerning distinct beings (eg 'gods' and 'goddesses') where there is no G3.3. debate concerning the sex of G3 marks the debate as being about alternate conceptions of G3.2.
a reality type code of 3 indicates a ontological reality. with regard to an alleged supreme being, G3.3 suggests the hidden god; the god beyond all gods; and, so on. acceptance that there is a referent for G3.3 provokes a paradox: anything said about G3.3 reduces its referent to G3.2. hence, anaphoric discourse is used to 'point to' G3.3 while simultaneously disclaiming, unsaying or unlearning whatever might be said about the referent --- beyond that it is.
§1.2: uses of this notation
the purpose of this notation scheme is not merely to classify theologies; although, it could be used that way; but, rather, to correlate what a theology says about its object with what it assumes or concludes about the structure of the I0.
for example, the claim is sometimes made that the I3 is a spark of the divine fire. there is the common claim among theologies that the supreme deity manifested itself on earth. one question that naturally arises is whether the I3 and G3.1 are the same. this is a question for those who accept that there is an I3: is the I3 equivalent to a/the G3.1; or, is it not.
some say that only the saviour figure carries a spark of the divine fire. the structure of the I0 in this belief system is represented as [ I1 - I2 - I3 - G3.1 ] - G3.2 - G3.3.
others say that every I0 carries a spark of the divine fire. the structure of the I0 in this belief system is represented as [ I1 - I2 - I3 ≡ G3.1 ] - G3.2 - G3.3.
the question itself (whether the I3 and G3.1 are the same) can be represented as
[ I1 - I2 - I3 ≡ G3.1 ] || @4.4.1