Kevin Hart

Phenomenality and Christianity

Ibegin by considering three propositions, each of which summarizes a complex position: (1) there cannot be a phenomenology of Christianity; (2) there can be a phenomenology of Christianity; and (3) Christianity is already a phenomenology. I shall discuss them one at a time in the order given. The first proposition makes a significant concession to objections leveled against the phenomenology of religion as developed in the first half of the twentieth century. For it speaks of Christianity, not religion, thereby admitting that religion is too diverse a field to have an eidos that can be discerned and varied imaginatively. An entire literature by and centered on Mircea Eliade is therefore put to one side. Even so, the proposition remains combative. We might wonder about the status of Martin Heidegger’s course ‘‘Augustine and Neo-Platonism’’ (1921), his notes for ‘‘The Philosophical Foundations of Medieval Mysticism’’ (1918–19), and his lectures ‘‘The Problem of Sin in Luther’’ (1924) and ‘‘Phenomenology and Theology’’ (1927), the latter of which argues that theology’s proper object is faith, not God. These, surely, are evidence of very early interest in the phenomenology of Christianity and, more obliquely, of the relations between phenomenology and theology, and they can be bolstered by pointing to Max Scheler’s On the Eternal in Man (1921), Otto Gründler’s Elemente zu einer Religionsphilosophie auf phänomenologischer Grundlage (1922), Kurt Stavenhagen’s Absolute Stellungnahme (1925) and Jean Hering’s Phénoménologie et philosophie religieuse (1926). Other works that do not circle around Edmund Husserl, even at a distance, could readily be cited, for the phenomenology of religion precedes phenomenology as classically proposed in the Logical Investigations (1900–01), The Idea of Phenomenology (1907) and Ideas I (1913). Works of concrete or reconstructive phenomenology are not of immediate interest here, however, my concern being with essential phenomenology in its various forms, extensions and revisions. Against proposition (1) one might say that there is nothing in the philosophy of disclosure, as conceived and endlessly refined by Husserl, to prevent core Christian practices and experiences being reduced to pure phenomena. Robert Sokolowski considers the modes of disclosure in the Eucharist, for example, without any special pleading as to procedure or vocabulary; and, from another perspective, Jean-Yves Lacoste does the kevin hart

Risk-informed assessment of Scott Stadium evacuation through agent-based simulation

The risk of personal injury from lightning and other threats is increasing without being consistently addressed through continuous improvement of evacuation operations. Three major factors contribute to this growing risk. First, natural and man-made disasters (e.g., lightning storms) remain a constant threat. Second, stadium expansion, renovation, and increased utilization allow more spectators at a greater number of events, which amplifies nation-wide exposure to both natural and man-made disasters. Third, evacuation and disaster management plans are quite complex because they require the coordination of spectators, ushers, managers, police officers, firefighters, medical teams, and athletes, among others, and do not always keep up with the changes to stadium or community emergency management procedures. Analysts are increasingly able to capture certain individual and crowd behaviors through simulation. Our team has constructed a simulation by section, ensuring the quality and correctness of the utilized computer drawings and making corrections as necessary to build a valid model. Through analysis of individual subsections of the stadium, we have noticed that 99% of the attendees within the 70 sections of a total of approximately 60,000 people evacuated in about 19 minutes, with 50% of the population evacuated in 6 minutes and 95% of the population evacuated within 15 minutes. The full capacity evacuation started with evacuees in the stands, and the first evacuees reached the exits within the first minute.

Uncommon Equivocation in Geoffrey Hill

Abstract This essay considers Hill’s expression “common equivocation,” which he associates with Richard Hooker. The expression comes about as a response to Christopher Ricks’s admiration of T. S. Eliot’s Four Quartets. In that late poem Ricks finds that Eliot has confidence in cliches, “in their generous common humanity.” Hill responds by asking Ricks to think about how this expression would fare within the field of Hooker’s “common equivocation.” But what is “common equivocation?” Is Hill guilty of it as a poet? Or does he practice something else? I argue that he practices “uncommon equivocation.” Hooker thought that equivocation is a consequence of original sin. Hill believes in original sin, and his poetry is about its effects. This is the root of Hill’s “difficulty.” Yet “difficulty” is not just the opposite of ease; it is also hindrance to action. Hill’s best poems are often difficult in both senses.

Eliot’s rose garden: Some phenomenology and theology in “Burnt Norton”

T. S. Eliots Four Quartets respond to and gradually modify the experience that is evoked in the first part of “Burnt Norton”. Yet the well-known rose garden scene has been variously interpreted, the “presences” being either naturalized or regarded as supernatural entities. A phenomenological reading of the rose garden scene gives us a more secure, and also a more nuanced, understanding of what happens in the rose garden, and therefore allows us to develop a fuller and more reliable reading of Four Quartets.