This procession just is the logical posteriority
of all things, in that they exist at all only by being in some way one, to unparticipated one itself.
MacEwen assembles some of the strongest arguments for and against the Matthean Posteriority
Hypothesis (MPH) in order to evaluate it as a solution to the Synoptic problem (the question of the chronological order of and literary relationships between the first three Gospels of the New Testament).
His concern is with its structural and conceptual features as "a rhetorical, intellectual, and experiential phenomenon that emerges from our understanding of lateness, supersession, and posteriority
In other words, the English gerund can express simultaneity, anteriority and posteriority
, and even no temporal relation at all, as in (2a), (2b), (2c) and (2d) respectively, as well as imperfective and perfective readings, as in (2e):
Although there is an order in the procession of understood Being [the Son] from understanding Being [the Father], and of beloved Being [the Holy Spirit] from the loving act of understanding Being and understood Being, and although we see a certain priority and posteriority
according to abstract logical reason, there is truly no priority in the three forms, neither in effect nor according to ontological reason.
For these reasons, the term "postrace" does not mean that we are beyond race; the prefix "post" here does not mean a chronological "superseding," a triumphant posteriority
. Rather, the term entails a conceptual shift to the question of what meaning the idea of "race" carries in our own times.
In the absence of one of the markers mentioned in Table 2, the only other way in which Otomi subordinate clauses are distinct from main clauses is the occurrence of certain tense markers, which code person plus Contemporality, Posteriority
or Anteriority, and cliticize to the verb.
The answer is he didn't give a damn about what he called "posteriority
." He just didn't care.
The a posteriority
of the conclusion is the result of "spill-over" from the empirical minor premise.
Describing this second type of ontological priority, Ibn Sina says: The mind is not repelled at all by our saying, "when Zayd moves his hand, the key moves," or when we say, "Zayd moves his hand, then the key moves." But it is repelled by our saying, "when the key moves, Zayd moves his hand," even though the mind rightly says, "when the key moves, we know that Zayd moves his hand." Thus, with respect to the temporal coexistence of the two movements, the mind assigns a priority to one and a posteriority
to the other.