The Analogical Model of Cognitive Principles and Its Significance for the Dialogue between Science and Theology
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article presents some types of analog models for a given theory of knowledge, in particular
- peaks and troughs of Fig. 1
- Parts of the human body, skin, flesh, bones, ventricles of the heart
- Biblical characters.
The article when judged for the validity of the proposed analogies is, in my opinion, relatively interesting, especially for the biblical analogies. On the other hand I must confess that the exposition of the theory of knowledge is very naïve and perhaps more suited for an article of a newspaper rather than of a philosophical journal. Quite well written however.
I have some observations.
The author should clarify his philosophical reference to the theory of knowledge he exposes; is it a scholastic theory? Surely it is not one shared by all.
In illustrating the analogy associated with Fig. 1, the author should better specify the meaning of the terms intellect and reason (meaning that varies from philosopher to philosopher). I would then recommend moving immediately after Fig. 1 what is written in the conclusions on this analogy, which explains it quite satisfactory.
Regarding the analogies with the human body, it is not clear to me that of right and left ventricles introduced for the intellectual common sense, given that each of the ventricles is the basis of other analogies.
Regarding the biblical characters of the old testament (western religions) the author presupposes their knowledge from a cultured reader. This is not the case, and in my opinion the author should specify the audience to which such analogies could be useful, followers of reformed churches? – I suppose that catholic people know much more new testament than the old one, and eastern culture do not know at all the bible.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is an interesting example of the analogy between the mental world and the world of thoughts we took human body. It is an example of the successful use of the phenomenological method. In philosophical thinking, the method of analogy is suitable for use. This is especially true of the philosophy of religion.The analogy is interesting, three levels are related to intellect and three to understanding. The author follows the method of following the direction of Merleau-Ponty. The phenomenology of the body used in this study is relatively often contracted. In this context, this is an unusual use.The structure of the article is fine. The author cyclically returns to the core of analogy. I believe that the analogy is justified and that the authors' way of understanding the problem is on a sufficient philosophical level. I consider the paper well prepared. It is noticeable that the author devoted a long time to solving the problem. The method of argumentation is philosophical. There are plenty of resources, the bibliographic base is rich. The author makes extensive use of Bible analogies. I appreciate the author's graphic attachments. I perceive the potential of solving the article.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review. The paper has been revised based on comments from both reviewers' comments.
