Processual Meaning in Motion, Part 3

Processual Meaning in Motion:

Frege, Process and Developing

a Living Language

Part 3

Metamodern Theosophy:

Semantic Reinterpretation in Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

return to Part 1

continue from Part 2

RES

How might process theosophy (discussed in Part 1) address classical Christian thought using Frege's semantics so that the hidden or the sublime might be heightened or expanded?

Chat GPT

This is a rich and profound question - inviting us to explore how process theosophy might use Frege’s semantic framework to reframe and deepen classic Christian thought, particularly in revealing the hidden and sublime meanings that traditional theology often flattens or misrepresents.

Let’s approach this in four layers:

🔹 1. Frege’s Semantic Triad and Theology

Recall Frege’s triad:

• Sign (Zeichen): The linguistic form (e.g., "God," "salvation," "resurrection")

• Sense (Sinn): The conceptual content or mode of presentation (e.g., “God as sovereign ruler” vs. “God as relational becoming”)

• Reference (Bedeutung): The real entity or truth the word points to (e.g., God, actual redemptive transformation, etc.)

In traditional theology:

• The sign is often treated as fixed and sacred.

• The sense is inherited dogmatically (creedal).

• The reference is presumed to be metaphysically static and absolute.

But this locks meaning into closed containers - mistaking orthodoxy’s sense for the fullness of divine reference.

🔹 2. Process Theosophy: The Recovery of the Sublime Sense

Process theosophy, especially grounded in Whiteheadian metaphysics, challenges this static approach. It posits:

• God is not a static object but an evolving relational reality - luring creation toward novelty, justice, beauty.

• Religious language is symbolic and unfolding, not final.

• Revelation is ongoing, not fixed and closed.

Thus, process theosophy decouples sign from rigid sense. It reopens theological signs (e.g., “glory,” “judgment,” “Christ”) to new, dynamic senses that more accurately resonate with the actual reference: a co-creative, persuasive divine reality which is always in process, evolving and becoming towards redemptive fullness.

➤ Frege’s model helps process thought reveal:

• That the traditional sense of Christian terms is often misaligned with their reference in lived, relational experience.

• That true sublimity - the divine lure: reality's unfolding beauty - has been trapped in stale or moralistic senses of words.

• That "misunderstood subliminals" are often the true depth behind the signs, long ignored by creedal literalism.

🔹 3. Bringing Forth the Hidden: Theopoetic Application

Let’s apply this through an example:

Word/Sign: Salvation

• Classical “Salvation”  = Escape from hell; legal pardon God’s saving act in Christ

• Processual “Salvation” = Transformative participation in divine life; an ongoing relational becoming into divine harmony

Inplication:

• The sign is the same.

• The reference, God’s redemptive activity, is arguably the same.

• But the sense in process thought is far more sublime, hidden, evolving, and more existentially true than the juridical framework of classic theology.

🔹 4. Theosophic Implication: From Public Misunderstanding to Sublime Realization

In this light, processual theosophy becomes a hermeneutics of uncovering:

• It re-signifies theological language so it aligns with a living divine reference.

• It invites mystagogy, not dogma - guiding people into the unfolding mystery, rather than enclosing them in fixed dogmatic senses.

• It restores the sublime not as supernatural spectacle, but as emerging/emergent presence in becoming.

This re-enchantment isn’t irrational... it’s supra-rational, poetic, relational, open. It takes what was publicly known (the sign), confronts the classically-and-Platonically misaligned sense, and reinterprets the meaning processually to reflect the truer reference: That God is a God ever in transformatively loving process with-and-alongside the world.

✨ Summary in Fregean Terms:

Process theology reclaims theologically "closed" signs from their fossilized senses, realigns them with the living reference of God-and-creation's divine becoming, thus revealing the hidden sublimity previously veiled by millennia of dogmatic misuse.

What the Sign Forgot

A Fregean Theosophy in Verse

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT-5

> The word was sung - salvation true,

a symbolic sound all faithful knew

It rang in pews, in solemn creeds,

but missed divinity's life in whisper needs.

> For sense was shaped in courts and kings,

of wrath and rules and mortal things;

That forged heavy chains from fear and guilt,

miscalling it love O' wretched thing.

> Yet still the sign had deeper delves and dreams,

which meaning flowed 'neath all living things;

As justice danced in mercy’s fire,

yet a loving God transfixed all souls' desire.

Not iron gates, but gardens wide and flowing,

nor fiery wrath, but bounteous rivers deep and true;

A heavenly process filled with hearts renewing,

not saved from hell but saved into creation's mystery.

Having traced salvation's hidden frame,

from broken words to living impress;

Though symboled sign yet remains -

it's sense expands Love's divining reference.

The Sign that Grew Wings

A Fregean Theosophy in Verse

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT-5

The sign once stood like carved tablet stone,
cold syllables beneath Almighty's throne.
But time has turned the world askew -
breaking meaning from it's granite script.

The sense now sings in layered tones,
not fixed, but enfolding like winged flames.
In consuming reference, unchained, unbound,

across lively acts met within loving hands.

Let us then behold divine's signs grow wings,
to flutter and soar beyond the breath of men.
For only when we dare re-learn, re-vision,
can God be truly beheld salvation's meaning.

Finale

What began with Frege’s precision ends in metamodern resonance. Meaning, once seen as static correspondence, becomes living coherence in motion. Through processual theosophy, theology returns to life - not as defense of doctrine, but as participatory artistry within divine enfolding. In Fregian Process, signs evolve, senses deepen, and references emerge within deepening relationships.

This is theology reborn:

not in the preservation of hardened meaning - but in its renewal.

Not in the defense of fixed truths - but within the maturation of becoming.

In Frege’s logic, meaning was the bridge between word and world.

In processual theosophy, meaning is the world becoming lively word.

- R.E. Slater & ChatGPT 

 

Processual Meaning in Motion, Part 2

Processual Meaning in Motion:

Frege, Process and Developing

a Living Language

Part 2

Metamodern Theosophy:

Semantic Reinterpretation in Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

continue from Part 1

move forward to Part 3

Question 1 - Using Frege's semantic analysis, briefly, give an example of using the same sentence with unequal, separate senses.

ChatGPT

Sure! Here's an example of the same sentence used with unequal, separate senses:

Sentence: "She broke the silence."

1. Literal sense: She suddenly spoke after a long period of quiet.

2. Figurative sense: She challenged a taboo or unspoken rule by revealing a hidden truth.

Though the wording is identical, each use carries a distinct and unequal meaning—one social and emotional, the other physical and acoustic.

RES

 

Now do the same where both sentences carry the same referent...

ChatGPT

Certainly! Here's an example where the same sentence is used with unequal, separate senses, yet both refer to the same event or referent:

Sentence: "The glass shattered."

1. Literal sense: The physical object (a drinking glass) broke into pieces.

2. Figurative sense: A tense or fragile emotional moment collapsed—e.g., a moment of calm or pretense was broken dramatically.

Here, we use the same referent: A single event where someone drops a glass during a heated argument. The literal shattering is real, but it simultaneously represents the breakdown of emotional restraint.

So the one action - of one referent - serves dual roles: material and symbolic.

RES

Now adjust these answers using the Fregian construction of "sense and reference"...

ChatGPT

Excellent. Let’s now analyze the examples using Gottlob Frege’s distinction between sense (Sinn) and reference (Bedeutung):

Frege’s Definitions (briefly):

Reference (Bedeutung): The actual object or event in the world that a term or sentence points to.

Sense (Sinn): The mode of presentation—the way the reference is understood or captured in the mind, or conceptualized.

Example 1 (Original Sentence): “She broke the silence.”

Single reference: The event of a woman speaking after a period of quiet.

Two unequal senses:

1. Acoustic sense (Sinn 1): She literally made sound, ending a stretch of quiet.

2. Social/emotional sense (Sinn 2): She disrupted a psychological or cultural silence (e.g., revealing a family secret).

✔ Although the reference is the same—an act of speaking—the senses differ: one presents it as an auditory event, the other as a symbolic or social rupture.

Example 2 (Original Sentence): “The glass shattered.”

Single reference: The actual event of a glass object breaking into fragments during a moment of tension.

Two unequal senses:

1. Literal sense (Sinn 1): The glass physically fractured.

2. Metaphorical sense (Sinn 2): The emotional or interpersonal situation collapsed (e.g., a relationship tension snapping).

✔ Again, the reference is one and the same—the breaking of the glass—but the senses present that event in two unequal ways: one as physical destruction, the other as emotional symbolism.

Summary Table (Fregean Analysis)

1Sentence - 2Reference (Bedeutung) - 3Sense 1 (Sinn) - 4Sense 2 (Sinn)

1She broke the silence - 2A woman speaking after a period of quiet - 3End of acoustic silence - 4Social/emotional rupture

1The glass shattered - 2A glass breaking during a tense moment - 3Literal, physical shattering - 4Metaphor for emotional breakdown

This shows how Frege’s model elegantly explains how the same reference can support distinct and unequal conceptual pathways, deepening semantic interpretation.

RES

Frege's philological construction had three operandi, the sign, the reference, and the sense...

ChatGPT

You're absolutely right—Frege’s philological (or more precisely, semantic) construction involves three components:

🔹 1. Sign (Zeichen)

The linguistic expression or symbol used in language (e.g., a word, phrase, or sentence).

• Ex. “The morning star”

🔹 2. Sense (Sinn)

The mode of presentation—how the referent is conceived or understood. The sense determines how we think about the referent, not what it is.

• Ex. “The morning star” = Venus as seen at dawn

🔹 3. Reference (Bedeutung)

The actual object or entity in the world that the sign points to.

• Ex. The planet Venus (which is also the evening star)

✴ Applied Example: “The glass shattered”

Let's reconstruct this Fregean-style, fully:

Element        Literal Sense                                   Figurative Sense

Sign                 The glass shattered                              The glass shattered

Sense (Sinn) A fragile object broke into                 A fragile situation or emotion collapsed                                      pieces suddenly

Reference      A specific real-world event: the breaking of the glass (possibly during a moment of tension)

🔁 Note: The sign is the same in both readings.

➡ The reference remains unchanged: one real-world event.

🧠 The sense differs: one physical, one metaphorical.

✴ Applied Example: “She broke the silence”

Element            Acoustic Sense                Social/Emotional Sense

Sign                    She broke the silence            She broke the silence

Sense (Sinn)   A voice interrupted               A taboo or emotional
                              a quiet environment             restraint was broken

Reference         A single utterance or           (same act in both cases)

                               verbal action by "she"

🧠 Frege’s Contribution

Frege helps us see how multiple senses can arise from a single expression, even when the reference remains constant. This is especially important in poetry, metaphor, and symbolic language—where one referent may carry many conceptual layers.

Here is a multilayered poem constructed to reflect Frege’s three-part semantic model—sign, sense, and reference—unfolding over metaphor, symbol, and concrete reality.

The Shattered Glass

a poem by ChatGPT

(A Poem in Three Layers)

I. Sign (Zeichen)

The words that tremble on the surface

>The glass shattered - three words, bare,

Framed in sound, suspended air.

A sentence whispered, sharp and clean,

With syntax taut and meaning lean.

II. Sense (Sinn)

The thoughts that shape what’s seen

> It cracked not just with brittle edge,

But like a vow near breaking’s ledge.

The silence screamed through sudden gleam,

A fracture in the woven dream.

> The moment held a double weight:

A hand let go - a held-back state.

The glass, a mirror, caught despair,

The room no longer breathing air.

III. Reference (Bedeutung)

What truly happened - there, out there

> A vessel fell. It met the stone.

It splintered sharp and left alone.

No metaphor, no echo’s lie -

Just shards beneath a kitchen cry.

🌀 Commentary

The first stanza focuses on the Sign—the linguistic shell, "the glass shattered."

The second stanza offers the Sense—how we might interpret or experience that phrase: metaphor, emotional collapse, or psychological turning point.

The final stanza anchors the Reference—a real event in spacetime, regardless of interpretation.

---

Below is a sublime, interwoven version of the poem that blends sign, sense, and reference into a seamless tapestry—so the reader experiences them all at once, intuitively, without explicit division. Each line carries linguistic form (sign), evokes layered understanding (sense), and gestures toward lived or living truth (reference).

Where the Glass Remembered

a poem by ChatGPT

(A Fregian Poem in One Breath)

>The glass remembered how silence held,

until her hand spoke louder than lips.

It leapt - no, it fell - no, it was freed,

like truth unlatched in a locked-up room.

A ring of sound stitched through the hush,

as though quiet itself had broken open,

not just the glass, but something beneath:

a decade of dinners, unspoken things.

Shards mapped the floor like stuttered thoughts -

some still, some screaming in sunlit flecks.

Her breath returned, a wave on wood,

soft as a storm, unbrushed by apology.

And though they swept the pieces clean,

the absence never quite stopped gleaming.

The glass had shattered, yes, and still -

the silence never truly mended.

🔍 Notes

• “The glass remembered…” — personifies the sign; it already holds its meanings and histories.

• “…her hand spoke louder than lips” — overlays literal and metaphorical rupture.

• “like truth unlatched…” — blends referent (shattering) with layered sense (emotional disclosure).

• Final couplet — circles back to permanence in impermanence, the residue of meaning even after the reference has passed.

continue to Part 3

Processual Meaning in Motion, Part 1

Processual Meaning in Motion:

Frege, Process and Developing

a Living Language

Part 1

Metamodern Theosophy:

Semantic Reinterpretation in Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

move forward to Part 2

move forward to Part 3

Introduction

I.

This dialogue explores the reclamation of theological meaning through the lens of Frege’s triadic semantics - sign, sense, and reference - as reinterpreted within process theology and metamodern philosophy.

Rather than allowing the discipline of theology to determine either the absolute or fluid philosophical categories on it's own apart from any philosophical guidance, we reverse the religious construction by first starting with a dynamic metaphysical framework such as process philosophy that is grounded in dynamic relationality, creativity, and becoming. From this foundation derivative categories such as theology, sociology, science, and ecology may then be birthed and enlivened having established a sufficient structural framework for each to flow and explore within.

II.

Of note is the fact that process philosophy in all its forms is a responsive framework which morphs with acknowledged academic studies so that it keeps its currency. But as a framing conceptual ideology it also guides as well as grows in response to era-specific discovery, need and demand. Thus, process philosophy is a guide as much as it is a companion on the journey of life previously walked by both the ancients and modern society.

This also addresses the question of which comes first, theology or philosophy? Loosely, "Did we think about God before we formed our earliest hominin patterns?" Though each affects the other the proper order is always philosophy first, theology second. And if this is so, then theology, doctrine, denominations, and theologians alike must be built upon a philosophy that is itself worthy and aimed at worthy valuative goals.

Historically, the church has built it's theology upon an eclectic base of philosophies appealing to an admixture of era-specific ideas and principals. In contrast, a rigorous theology is always built upon a rigorous philosophical base and not the other way around. Thus the importance of discovering a worthy philosophical framework so that the subjectivity of a theology is reigned in from excess and abuse.

Without a guiding philosophical reference, a theology, a faith, or a religion, can set it's own tone according to it's own "philosophical bias" so that it is unrestricted to the harm and oppression it can - and most likely will - create upon it's own members and society at large. As example,

today's American "Maga-Christian movement" is a perfect illustration of a faith and a religion gone wrong, though many within it's movement completely assent to its claims, practices, and cultural identity, believing them to be faithful expressions of Christianity, when in fact they reveal the dangers of a theology unmoored from a sound and humane philosophy.”

In counterpoint, process theology is a worthy derivative of process philosophy as it flows in sympathy with an enlivening processual foundation. A foundation as much committed to value, worth and ethic as it is to metaphysical and ontological discussion within process philosophy. Whereas other Western philosophies have subscribed to the goal of "the worthy life" yet in historical reflection this worthy life came to mean separation from the world - and perhaps one's body  - for purposes of Christian sanctification and holiness.

In contrast, process theology does not withdraw from the world but embraces it as the very arena of God’s creative becoming. The body, the earth, and history are not obstacles to transcendence but the very mediums through which divine value, worth, and love are made real. In this way, process theology affirms sanctification not as escape from life, but as deeper participation in life’s ongoing renewal.”

In process theology the sanctification and holiness striven for in Christianity is always focused on loving outcome to the other as well as one's self. Hence, the worthy life is a life which loves others and self because of God's love given to mankind and creation at large. To Jesus, the purpose of sanctification and holiness had only one goal which he exemplified - to love one another. In themselves, the pursuit of sanctification and holiness is bankrupt before God. Without meaning. Meaningless. But in context to loving and serving others, one attains sanctification and holiness by one's selfless acts of sacrifice, thoughtfulness, kindness, and gifts of helps.

III.

Theosophy

Metaphorical usage (critical):

Theosophy — a careless mixing of philosophy and theology that results in a diluted or incoherent framework. Like a meal of mismatched ingredients, such “theosophy” may be consumed by culture but lacks the rigor, clarity, and worth of process philosophy and its derivative processual theology.

Historical usage (strict):

Broadly: any mystical or philosophical system that seeks direct insight into the divine through spiritual wisdom; a mystical synthesis or esoteric wisdom tradition that tries to merge philosophy, theology, and spirituality.

Academicians, and culture at large, have often intertwined philosophy with theology creating what we might call a semantic admixture of “theosophy.” But too often this knee-jerk blending produces a sloppy mixture of intellectual goop that society readily consumes at its dining table - however untrue or unhealthy or deadly to it's cultural body.

By contrast, in process philosophy, the soul of its core is already worthy, and for this reason the heart of its derivative process theology also proves worthy. In this mutuality, each nourishes the other in healthy ways, just as our own wise actions nourish body and soul together, shaping the culture in which we live.

This is also why a process form of Christianity can help the Christian faith remain within the bounds of a healthy and healing vision of God and its practices. The theosophic boundaries of process thought, grounded in its very core, always affirm the worth of God and the value of all humanity.

It is important to stress, however, that in using the term theosophy in this shorthand, critical sense, I do not mean in any measure to invoke esoteric mysticism or occult movements. Why? Because processual panpsychism itself provides a more rigorous grounding for spirituality, locating divine connection within human experience and within this world. This framework has already been shown above in relation to sanctification and holiness.

Processual panpsychism, arising from the more disciplined path of process philosophy, thus undergirds process theology in its movement toward divine wisdom and human salvation. It revives religious language with enough depth to meet the reality of human suffering, betrayal, and abandonment in a world saturated with flattened signs and meaningless reference points.

Consequently, this discussion - especially in dialogue with Frege’s analytic focus on language - seeks to integrate poetry, diagrams, and semantic analysis in order to bridge logic and spirit, language and life, theory and beauty. To begin, we now proceed by developing this investigation from the simple to the complex.

Here we go....

Who Is Frege?

I.

Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege was a late 1800s German philosopher, logician, and mathematician, he is considered to be the father of analytic philosophy concentrating of the philosophy of language, logic and mathematics. Introduced to academia by later noted philosophers, Frege became widely considered as the greatest logician since Aristotle, and one of the most profound philosophers of mathematics ever (as noted by Bertrand Russell who, with Alfred North Whitehead, had jointly published Principia Mathematica)

In Frege's 1892 paper, "On Sense and Reference" he explained that expressions of language may have more than one meaning - or, multiple modes of representation - for the same referent. In practice, the one who is communicating may wish to differentiate what is being talked about (qua, refence) from how it's being described (qua, sense).

This is used all the time by artificial intelligence (AI). As example, Google's semantic search relies on Fregean-like logic to understand user queries in terms of sense and referent. If a user states they are going to NYC, AI might determine NYC as referring to New York City or The Big Apple as the user's destination. In law, the sematic frame of a minor may refer to an underage person. This would help in differentiating between intent (sense) from application (reference).

Essentially, a technical communicator may need to clarify intention from meaning so that they are not misunderstood by his audience. This helps in conflict resolution or intercultural communication, so that one might distinguish "how" something is said from "what" is meant.

II.

When coming to philosophical theology Frege's form of semantic communication can be quite helpful in modifying and expanding older descriptions and meanings towards newer descriptions and meanings.

As example, literalist readings of Scripture and doctrinal theology often collapse sense and reference to the modern mind whereas a process-based reading of Scripture or doctrinal theology will often expand traditional / classic sense and meaning.

Hence, Frege's work states that belief is more than just knowing what something refers to, but how it is understood. To say that God exists is not a sufficient explanation of "faith". It also involves "grasping the sense" of the meaning that "God exists". As such, an existent God may suggest that this God is loving, just, triune, incarnational, redemptive, etc.

Philosophical theology is always driving towards clarity while at the same time expanding the referent of its subject beyond the simple "senses" which sects, denominations, creeds, and doctrines have filled it with. In this case, process-based philosophical theology challenges the delimiting views of classical or traditional creeds and doctrines. Since God exists, then why does God exist? For what reason? And if for love, then what does God's love mean, imply, communicate, intends to do?

Earlier beliefs have insisted that God exists to be worshipped but today's progressive faiths wish to error on the pragmatic. The practical. And so they teach that God exists to serve humanity through all human institutions - including the church. That worship alone is not enough. That the church must act in love. Vote in love. Provision in love. Reach out in helps, in aides, in practical means, modes, and methods.

So when using Frege, "worship" may have a reference not only as "adoration of God" but now, in a processual sense, have another meaning, that of "self-sacrificial service."

continue to Part 2