Text understanding priori : conceptive and belief
Yahya Mohamed
The mind deals with text meaning, including the religious text, according to two categories; one is “the conceptualization of meaning,” and the other is “the belief of meaning,” and each of them has its priori, as is the case with other types of knowledge.
The text conceptual priori work to show the meaning in the mind, similar to what happens in the perception of external things. We call it the meaning appearance of the text. It is a self-appearance that is not dependent on the conceptual will of the mind. However, this will can train itself to bring up new conceptual meanings, such as what happens in the case of realizing reality and training to see it with a new and different vision. Whereas the function of the belief priori isto make the judgment whose most prominent applications are comprehension and reading, as they depend on what is achieved from the meaning appearance of the text. The distinction of judgment in this position depends on the conceptual will of the mind, in contrast to what happens in that appearance.
In terms of the mechanism, the meaning appearance of the text (Ta) depends on both the conceptual priori (Pc) and the text as it is in itself, which we express by the unknown text (T). According to the mathematical expression the following can be made:
conceptual priori + unknown text → Meaning appearance
Pc + T → Ta
As for comprehension (H) or reading, it depends on this result represented by the meaning appearance of the text (Ta) in addition to the belief priori, which we symbolize as (Pb). According to the general mathematical expression:
belief priori + meaning appearance → Comprehension
Pb + Ta → H
But comprehension (H) or reading is either an indication (I) or a clarification (L) of that indication, as will be shown later. So, according to the mathematical expression, the indicative is determined as follows:
indicative priori + meaning appearance → Indication
Pbi + Ta → I
As for the clarification (L), it is different from the previous indicative relationship, as it has new a priori, which are the clarifying or explanatory priori, and therefore the clarifying relationship should be as follows:
Indicative priori + clarifying priori + meaning appearance → clarification
Pbi + Pbl + Ta → L
If there is a kind of merging or union between the indication and the clarification, as it sometimes happens; Their priori are undifferentiated, to which the following mathematical relationship applies:
2 (belief priori) + meaning appearance → clarification
2 Pb + Ta → L
Translation review by Ali al-Inizi
The reference
https://www.fahmaldin.net/index.php?id=2582