What do you think?
Rate this book
Cambridge Philosophy Classics
The Concept of Nature
from the PREFACE: The contents of this book were originally delivered at Trinity College in the autumn of 1919 as the inaugural course of Tarner lectures. The Tarner lectureship is an occasional office founded by the liberality of Mr Edward Tarner. The duty of each of the successive holders of the post will be to deliver a course on 'the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Relations or Want of Relations between the different Departments of Knowledge.' The present book embodies the endeavour of the first lecturer of the series to fulfil his task.
The chapters retain their original lecture form and remain as delivered with the exception of minor changes designed to remove obscurities of expression. The lecture form has the advantage of suggesting an audience with a definite mental background which it is the purpose of the lecture to modify in a specific way. In the presentation of a novel outlook with wide ramifications a single line of communications from premises to conclusions is not sufficient for intelligibility. Your audience will construe whatever you say into conformity with their pre-existing outlook. For this reason the first two chapters and the last two chapters are essential for intelligibility though they hardly add to the formal completeness of the exposition. Their function is to prevent the reader from bolting up side tracks in pursuit of misunderstandings. The same reason dictates my avoidance of the existing technical terminology of philosophy. The modern natural philosophy is shot through and through with the fallacy of bifurcation which is discussed in the second chapter of this work. Accordingly all its technical terms in some subtle way presuppose a misunderstanding of my thesis. It is perhaps as well to state explicitly that if the reader indulges in the facile vice of bifurcation not a word of what I have here written will be intelligible.
The last two chapters do not properly belong to the special course. Chapter VIII is a lecture delivered in the spring of 1920 before the Chemical Society of the students of the Imperial College of Science and Technology. It has been appended here as conveniently summing up and applying the doctrine of the book for an audience with one definite type of outlook.
This volume on 'the Concept of Nature' forms a companion book to my previous work An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Natural Knowledge. Either book can be read independently, but they supplement each other. In part the present book supplies points of view which were omitted from its predecessor; in part it traverses the same ground with an alternative exposition. For one thing, mathematical notation has been carefully avoided, and the results of mathematical deductions are assumed. Some of the explanations have been improved and others have been set in a new light. On the other hand important points of the previous work have been omitted where I have had nothing fresh to say about them. On the whole, whereas the former work based itself chiefly on ideas directly drawn from mathematical physics, the present book keeps closer to certain fields of philosophy and physics to the exclusion of mathematics. The two works meet in their discussions of some details of space and time.
CONTENTS:
NATURE AND THOUGHT 1 THEORIES OF THE BIFURCATION OF NATURE 26 TIME 49 THE METHOD OF EXTENSIVE ABSTRACTION 74 SPACE AND MOTION 99 CONGRUENCE 120 OBJECTS 143 SUMMARY 164 THE ULTIMATE PHYSICAL CONCEPTS 185 NOTE: On the Greek Concept of a Point 197 NOTE: On Significance and Infinite Events 197 INDEX 199108 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1920
About the author
Alfred North Whitehead
144 books461 followersAlfred North Whitehead, OM FRS (15 February 1861 – 30 December 1947) was an English mathematician and philosopher. He is best known as the defining figure of the philosophical school known as process philosophy, which today has found application to a wide variety of disciplines, including ecology, theology, education, physics, biology, economics, and psychology, among other areas.
In his early career Whitehead wrote primarily on mathematics, logic, and physics. His most notable work in these fields is the three-volume Principia Mathematica (1910–13), which he co-wrote with former student Bertrand Russell. Principia Mathematica is considered one of the twentieth century's most important works in mathematical logic, and placed 23rd in a list of the top 100 English-language nonfiction books of the twentieth century by Modern Library.
Beginning in the late 1910s and early 1920s, Whitehead gradually turned his attention from mathematics to philosophy of science, and finally to metaphysics. He developed a comprehensive metaphysical system which radically departed from most of western philosophy. Whitehead argued that reality was fundamentally constructed by events rather than substances, and that these events cannot be defined apart from their relations to other events, thus rejecting the theory of independently existing substances. Today Whitehead's philosophical works – particularly Process and Reality – are regarded as the foundational texts of process philosophy.
Whitehead's process philosophy argues that "there is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have consequences for the world around us." For this reason, one of the most promising applications of Whitehead's thought in recent years has been in the area of ecological civilization and environmental ethics pioneered by John B. Cobb, Jr.
Isabelle Stengers wrote that "Whiteheadians are recruited among both philosophers and theologians, and the palette has been enriched by practitioners from the most diverse horizons, from ecology to feminism, practices that unite political struggle and spirituality with the sciences of education." Indeed, in recent decades attention to Whitehead's work has become more widespread, with interest extending to intellectuals in Europe and China, and coming from such diverse fields as ecology, physics, biology, education, economics, and psychology. However, it was not until the 1970s and 1980s that Whitehead's thought drew much attention outside of a small group of American philosophers and theologians, and even today he is not considered especially influential outside of relatively specialized circles.
In recent years, Whiteheadian thought has become a stimulating influence in scientific research.
In physics particularly, Whitehead's thought has been influential, articulating a rival doctrine to Albert Einstein's general relativity. Whitehead's theory of gravitation continues to be controversial. Even Yutaka Tanaka, who suggests that the gravitational constant disagrees with experimental findings, admits that Einstein's work does not actually refute Whitehead's formulation. Also, although Whitehead himself gave only secondary consideration to quantum theory, his metaphysics of events has proved attractive to physicists in that field. Henry Stapp and David Bohm are among those whose work has been influenced by Whitehead.
Whitehead is widely known for his influence in education theory. His philosophy inspired the formation of the Association for Process Philosophy of Education (APPE), which published eleven volumes of a journal titled Process Papers on process philosophy and education from 1996 to 2008. Whitehead's theories on education also led to the formation of new modes of learning and new models of teaching.
In his early career Whitehead wrote primarily on mathematics, logic, and physics. His most notable work in these fields is the three-volume Principia Mathematica (1910–13), which he co-wrote with former student Bertrand Russell. Principia Mathematica is considered one of the twentieth century's most important works in mathematical logic, and placed 23rd in a list of the top 100 English-language nonfiction books of the twentieth century by Modern Library.
Beginning in the late 1910s and early 1920s, Whitehead gradually turned his attention from mathematics to philosophy of science, and finally to metaphysics. He developed a comprehensive metaphysical system which radically departed from most of western philosophy. Whitehead argued that reality was fundamentally constructed by events rather than substances, and that these events cannot be defined apart from their relations to other events, thus rejecting the theory of independently existing substances. Today Whitehead's philosophical works – particularly Process and Reality – are regarded as the foundational texts of process philosophy.
Whitehead's process philosophy argues that "there is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have consequences for the world around us." For this reason, one of the most promising applications of Whitehead's thought in recent years has been in the area of ecological civilization and environmental ethics pioneered by John B. Cobb, Jr.
Isabelle Stengers wrote that "Whiteheadians are recruited among both philosophers and theologians, and the palette has been enriched by practitioners from the most diverse horizons, from ecology to feminism, practices that unite political struggle and spirituality with the sciences of education." Indeed, in recent decades attention to Whitehead's work has become more widespread, with interest extending to intellectuals in Europe and China, and coming from such diverse fields as ecology, physics, biology, education, economics, and psychology. However, it was not until the 1970s and 1980s that Whitehead's thought drew much attention outside of a small group of American philosophers and theologians, and even today he is not considered especially influential outside of relatively specialized circles.
In recent years, Whiteheadian thought has become a stimulating influence in scientific research.
In physics particularly, Whitehead's thought has been influential, articulating a rival doctrine to Albert Einstein's general relativity. Whitehead's theory of gravitation continues to be controversial. Even Yutaka Tanaka, who suggests that the gravitational constant disagrees with experimental findings, admits that Einstein's work does not actually refute Whitehead's formulation. Also, although Whitehead himself gave only secondary consideration to quantum theory, his metaphysics of events has proved attractive to physicists in that field. Henry Stapp and David Bohm are among those whose work has been influenced by Whitehead.
Whitehead is widely known for his influence in education theory. His philosophy inspired the formation of the Association for Process Philosophy of Education (APPE), which published eleven volumes of a journal titled Process Papers on process philosophy and education from 1996 to 2008. Whitehead's theories on education also led to the formation of new modes of learning and new models of teaching.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
June 21, 2016
We are in 1920, Whitehead tries to tell apart what is nature and what is just mental excitements of ours. This is very entertaining and enlightening. We are seeking simplicity in abstractions of nature that just exist in our minds, also called models. Progress, however, demands distrust in such simplifications so to find better abstractions for the structure of events that we call nature. He was strongly influenced by Einstein’s theory of relativity (1916) sharing gems like "science is concerned with the adventures of material entities in space and time".
August 27, 2024
I love Whitehead; he's one of the most brilliant philosophers ever. But this book is dry as dust, an utter pedagogical failure, cluttered with ill-developed arguments and ill-explained coinages, only some of which are arrayed in more orderly fashion in Process and Reality. That is the book you really ought to read. This one you can skip, unless you are a deep scholar of Whitehead's thought.
August 28, 2023
Sabía que Whitehead era matemático, pero no esperaba un libro así. El concepto de Naturaleza, conjunto de conferencias que tuvieron lugar en GB-1919 (guiño espacio-tiempo), es un monumento derrumbándose. Los primeros dos capítulos son espectaculares en su labor explicativa de la naturaleza fenoménica, con la aproximación de la recién estrenada filosofía de las ciencias versus un conocimiento de la naturaleza que se centrase en las percepciones, en lo observado en sí y dejase de lado esa visión antropo-egocéntrica en la cual el mundo se crea y recrea en nuestra mente. En este sentido, la bifurcación de la naturaleza de Whitehead consiste en el abandono del conocimiento como problemática del sujeto-mente y retoma la realidad física, una oda a la vida. La naturaleza efluente versus la naturaleza causal, la llama.
"Otra manera de formular esta teoría contra la cual estoy discutiendo es bifurcar la naturaleza en dos divisiones, esto es, en la naturaleza aprehendida en la advertencia y la naturaleza que es causa de la advertencia. La naturaleza que es el hecho aprehendido en la advertencia contiene el verdor de los árboles, la canción de los pájaros, la calidez del sol, la dureza de las sillas y el tacto del terciopelo. La naturaleza que es causa de la advertencia es el sistema conjeturado de moléculas y electrones que afecta a la mente de modo tal que produce la advertencia de la naturaleza aparente. El punto de encuentro de estas dos naturalezas es la mente, siendo la naturaleza causal el influyente y la naturaleza aparente el efluente.La naturaleza causal es la influencia sobre la mente que es la causa de la efluencia de la naturaleza aparente desde la mente."
Hasta aquí, genial. E incluso cuando prosigue y hace crítica de las teorías absolutas del espacio y el tiempo, y las sustituye por una teoría relacional de construcción de espacios y concatenación de acontecimientos, me parece una idea fantástica y evidentemente muy aprovechable. Pero es a partir de ahí, quizás el cuarto capítulo, en que Whitehead se centra en dotar de matemática a su visión, y para mí se enmaraña terriblemente. Es decir, es seguible, pero es aburrido, abandona el gran valor intuitivo de su idea para reconstruirla matemáticamente. De ahí en adelante, desgraciadamente, he ido leyendo sin demasiado interés.
"Otra manera de formular esta teoría contra la cual estoy discutiendo es bifurcar la naturaleza en dos divisiones, esto es, en la naturaleza aprehendida en la advertencia y la naturaleza que es causa de la advertencia. La naturaleza que es el hecho aprehendido en la advertencia contiene el verdor de los árboles, la canción de los pájaros, la calidez del sol, la dureza de las sillas y el tacto del terciopelo. La naturaleza que es causa de la advertencia es el sistema conjeturado de moléculas y electrones que afecta a la mente de modo tal que produce la advertencia de la naturaleza aparente. El punto de encuentro de estas dos naturalezas es la mente, siendo la naturaleza causal el influyente y la naturaleza aparente el efluente.La naturaleza causal es la influencia sobre la mente que es la causa de la efluencia de la naturaleza aparente desde la mente."
Hasta aquí, genial. E incluso cuando prosigue y hace crítica de las teorías absolutas del espacio y el tiempo, y las sustituye por una teoría relacional de construcción de espacios y concatenación de acontecimientos, me parece una idea fantástica y evidentemente muy aprovechable. Pero es a partir de ahí, quizás el cuarto capítulo, en que Whitehead se centra en dotar de matemática a su visión, y para mí se enmaraña terriblemente. Es decir, es seguible, pero es aburrido, abandona el gran valor intuitivo de su idea para reconstruirla matemáticamente. De ahí en adelante, desgraciadamente, he ido leyendo sin demasiado interés.
August 12, 2023
li o segundo capitulo, pro curso de whitehead da apph.
June 24, 2015
Anybody expecting to read this book for some kind of metaphysical buzz will be disappointed. Whitehead's approach is highly technical involving four dimensional geometry, event particles, "sigma primes" and a host of other self defined technical terms. Among these terms (ie a "duration") just when I felt I had grasped his meaning I came upon what to me was an inconsistency. Since it is ANW I can only conclude I hadn't grasped his meaning in the first place. He definitely pushes against the tendency to over simplification such as the separation of time and space as well as the bifurcation of nature - His motto at the end of one chapter being "seek simplicity and distrust it". To think these were a series of lectures is mind boggling but actually I found listening to the reading on Librivox more palatable than actually reading the text. I suspect the reason is that while listening you may miss something and not stopping to re-listen what you DO get is the flow of the text and an understanding of the general meaning of the text which is about as far as I can muster. A more academic mind (which I lack) would probably prefer to read the text more analytically. I found the summaries of his chapters the most enlightening - the technicalities in the middle sometimes made me want to give up. I am pleased I managed to complete the book and look forward to having my second crack at "Process and Reality"
Read
January 11, 2026Buena introducción al pensamiento de Whitehead. Aclara muchos conceptos y presenta una idea muy sólida de la naturaleza. Un maquina el Whitehead la verdad.
February 22, 2015
Whitehead has come up as an influence on both philosophers/theorists (Latour, Bennett, DeLanda, Deleuze/Guattari) and theologians that I've been interested in recently. This was a nice (free -- thanks Project Gutenberg!) intro, though even for me it got a little overly dedicated in its exploration of definitions. It's worth riding it out, in part because now I feel ready to dive into some other works of his.
I suppose it helps that I was already pretty convinced that we're better off thinking of everything as a process already (people, mountains, cats, paper, war, ships, music, etc.).
Onward!
I suppose it helps that I was already pretty convinced that we're better off thinking of everything as a process already (people, mountains, cats, paper, war, ships, music, etc.).
Onward!
January 27, 2016
Interesting exposition but could be more plainly written
Whiteheads thesis in this book is outlines a structure for understanding nature in a novel way that, once you penetrate the writing has coherence. It won't give you a modern view but would make interesting reading for anyone interested in metaphysics. The only area lacking is that his symbolism is hard to follow and his coinage of new words unnecessary. Otherwise a pleasant challenge to read.
Whiteheads thesis in this book is outlines a structure for understanding nature in a novel way that, once you penetrate the writing has coherence. It won't give you a modern view but would make interesting reading for anyone interested in metaphysics. The only area lacking is that his symbolism is hard to follow and his coinage of new words unnecessary. Otherwise a pleasant challenge to read.
January 31, 2026
【The Concept of Nature / A N Whitehead / 1920, 1964, UP Cambridge】
This book originally is inspired by the theory of relativity as well as the original theory of the author, the philosophy of process, and as a book on quantum physics, I don't know how much of it would be of use. However, if you're artsy-minded, this theory would be of great use.
What are we watching whenever we watch a film? The screen? The film / datum itself? The images from the "film" (or digitally transcribed data)? The atmosphere? It wouldn't sound really beneficial to dwell on this point without being aware of the theory of mind, but the theory might lead us to solipsism. Here's a solution from Whitehead - namely, we're seeing events happening on the screen:
1. Events are what we call "nature" - that is to say, the external world.
--We are aware of an event which is our bodily life, of an even t which is ten course of nature within this room, and if a vaguely perceived aggregate if other partial events. (p. 15., Chapter I, Nature and Thought)
2. The events are divided by the sense of duration = time.
A duration is a concrete slab of nature limited by simultaneity which is an essential factor disclosed in sense-awareness. (p. 53., Chapter III, Time)
3. However, the events are also occupying a certain place - space.
--The character of space has hitherto been presented as a collection of bare facts, ultimate and disconnected. (p. 98., Chapter IV, Method of Extensive Abstraction)
4. But events pass. We perceive an event, because it's going to pass.
--In other words, perception is always 'here,' and a duration can only be posted as present for sense-awareness on condition that it affords one unbroken meaning of 'here' in its relation to the percepient event. (p. 110., Chapter V, Space and Motion)
5. However, objects don't pass because:
--Thus the theory of objects is the theory of the comparison of events. (p. 144., Chapter VII, Objects)
This book originally is inspired by the theory of relativity as well as the original theory of the author, the philosophy of process, and as a book on quantum physics, I don't know how much of it would be of use. However, if you're artsy-minded, this theory would be of great use.
What are we watching whenever we watch a film? The screen? The film / datum itself? The images from the "film" (or digitally transcribed data)? The atmosphere? It wouldn't sound really beneficial to dwell on this point without being aware of the theory of mind, but the theory might lead us to solipsism. Here's a solution from Whitehead - namely, we're seeing events happening on the screen:
1. Events are what we call "nature" - that is to say, the external world.
--We are aware of an event which is our bodily life, of an even t which is ten course of nature within this room, and if a vaguely perceived aggregate if other partial events. (p. 15., Chapter I, Nature and Thought)
2. The events are divided by the sense of duration = time.
A duration is a concrete slab of nature limited by simultaneity which is an essential factor disclosed in sense-awareness. (p. 53., Chapter III, Time)
3. However, the events are also occupying a certain place - space.
--The character of space has hitherto been presented as a collection of bare facts, ultimate and disconnected. (p. 98., Chapter IV, Method of Extensive Abstraction)
4. But events pass. We perceive an event, because it's going to pass.
--In other words, perception is always 'here,' and a duration can only be posted as present for sense-awareness on condition that it affords one unbroken meaning of 'here' in its relation to the percepient event. (p. 110., Chapter V, Space and Motion)
5. However, objects don't pass because:
--Thus the theory of objects is the theory of the comparison of events. (p. 144., Chapter VII, Objects)
March 19, 2021
The language is so complicated that I can't even multitask during listening to this audiobook. The things told are just so known and general that everyone who has given a thought about Nature and Life for a moment would have thought about it at some point in their life.
I read this because of Aristotle but i dont know, i found it useless for myself. Ofcourse its philosophy and it depends ... but I might think of reading one or two more Aristotle books as to just look upon but until then this experience was not good enough.
The one thing i would like to say, well, it is about my inspiration, the legend - Einstein, who was also, ofcourse , mentioned in this book. And i feel that he is/was so renowned even at that time, for his thoughts and views and scientific approach that anyone would talk about him even if they hated his theories and him as a person. Einstein was just incredible and I wish I can be a bit like him in the further journey of my life. The discipline and mind-focus and the fun, with which the man he was, has inspired almost every legendary book at some point. And as this book focuses on the sayings and contributions of people anyhow in the world, he was mentioned for his works too, but in a different way, and that part was really good, enlightening and wholesome.
I read this because of Aristotle but i dont know, i found it useless for myself. Ofcourse its philosophy and it depends ... but I might think of reading one or two more Aristotle books as to just look upon but until then this experience was not good enough.
The one thing i would like to say, well, it is about my inspiration, the legend - Einstein, who was also, ofcourse , mentioned in this book. And i feel that he is/was so renowned even at that time, for his thoughts and views and scientific approach that anyone would talk about him even if they hated his theories and him as a person. Einstein was just incredible and I wish I can be a bit like him in the further journey of my life. The discipline and mind-focus and the fun, with which the man he was, has inspired almost every legendary book at some point. And as this book focuses on the sayings and contributions of people anyhow in the world, he was mentioned for his works too, but in a different way, and that part was really good, enlightening and wholesome.
March 18, 2025
I heard Alfie’s writing is confusing, and this is certainly an example of that, but it was pretty great. I feel more ready to dig into “Process and Reality,” but simultaneously wished I had read it first. For a second there around the middle I thought I had a stroke, but by the end of the book he stopped talking about rects and sequences of time-systems, and I was learning again.
November 3, 2020
''Nature is a process.''
March 12, 2023
Highly interesting conception of nature. Mostly made me want to engage with Whitehead's actual work. Will be doing that. Great read, albeit difficult.
August 29, 2023
Great book, I listened to the audiobook version on YouTube. I will leave the link below so that everyone can enjoy it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOO6D...
October 15, 2023
Whitehead is well over my head.
December 14, 2023
As dry as a bone. No profound metaphysical dopamine to be found here
September 24, 2025
It's amazing how much physics and astronomy have changed since 1919 and how little ecology has changed.
October 13, 2024
WHITEHEAD LOOKS BROADLY (AND METAPHYSICALLY) AT “NATURE”
Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) was an English mathematician [he is credited as co-writer with Bertrand Russell of Principia Mathematica] and philosopher, best known for developing Process Philosophy.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1920 book, “The contents of this book were originally delivered at Trinity College in the autumn of 1919… The duty… [was] to deliver a course on ‘the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Relations or Want of Relations between the different Departments of Knowledge.’ The present book embodies the endeavor … to fulfill his task.”
He also states, “Einstein’s method of using the theory of tensors is adopted, but the application is worked out on different lines and from different assumptions. Those of his results which have been verified by experience are obtained also by my methods. The divergence chiefly arises from the fact that I do not accept his theory of non-uniform space or his assumption as to the peculiar fundamental character of light-signals… in my judgment he has cramped the development of his brilliant mathematical method in the narrow bounds of a very doubtful philosophy.” (Pg. vii)
He says, “there is an essential atomic property in nature which is independent of the dissociation of extension. There is something which in itself is one, and which is more than the logical aggregate of entities occupying points within the volume which the unit occupies. Indeed we may well be skeptical as to these ultimate entities at points, and doubt whether there are any such entities at all. They have the suspicious character that we are driven to accept them by abstract logic and not by observed fact.” (Pg. 23)
He outlines what he calls “the theory of psychic additions. This theory… is a sound common-sense theory which lays immense stress on the obvious reality of time, space, solidity and inertia, but distrusts the minor artistic additions of colour, warmth and sound. The theory is the outcome of common-sense in retreat. It arose in a epoch when the transmission theories of science were being elaborated.” (Pg. 43)
He explains, “The primary task of a philosophy of natural science is to elucidate the concept of nature, considered as one complex fact for knowledge, to exhibit the fundamental entities and the fundamental relations between entities in terms of which all laws of nature have to be stated, and to secure that the entities and relations thus exhibited are adequate for the expression of all the relations between entities which occur in nature.” (Pg. 46)
After discussing a disagreement between Henri Poincare and Bertrand Russell, Whitehead argues, “I look on it as no slight recommendation of the theory of nature which I am expounding to you that it gives a solution of this difficulty by pointing out the factor in nature which issues in the preeminence of one congruence over the indefinite herd of other such relations. The reason for this result is that nature is no longer confined within space at an instant. Space and time are now interconnected; and this peculiar factor of time which is so immediately distinguished among the deliverances of our sense-awareness, relates itself to one particular congruence relation in space.” (Pg. 124)
Whitehead’s later metaphysical philosophy is “not for everyone”; but for those who are interested in it, this is one of his major expressions of it.
Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) was an English mathematician [he is credited as co-writer with Bertrand Russell of Principia Mathematica] and philosopher, best known for developing Process Philosophy.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1920 book, “The contents of this book were originally delivered at Trinity College in the autumn of 1919… The duty… [was] to deliver a course on ‘the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Relations or Want of Relations between the different Departments of Knowledge.’ The present book embodies the endeavor … to fulfill his task.”
He also states, “Einstein’s method of using the theory of tensors is adopted, but the application is worked out on different lines and from different assumptions. Those of his results which have been verified by experience are obtained also by my methods. The divergence chiefly arises from the fact that I do not accept his theory of non-uniform space or his assumption as to the peculiar fundamental character of light-signals… in my judgment he has cramped the development of his brilliant mathematical method in the narrow bounds of a very doubtful philosophy.” (Pg. vii)
He says, “there is an essential atomic property in nature which is independent of the dissociation of extension. There is something which in itself is one, and which is more than the logical aggregate of entities occupying points within the volume which the unit occupies. Indeed we may well be skeptical as to these ultimate entities at points, and doubt whether there are any such entities at all. They have the suspicious character that we are driven to accept them by abstract logic and not by observed fact.” (Pg. 23)
He outlines what he calls “the theory of psychic additions. This theory… is a sound common-sense theory which lays immense stress on the obvious reality of time, space, solidity and inertia, but distrusts the minor artistic additions of colour, warmth and sound. The theory is the outcome of common-sense in retreat. It arose in a epoch when the transmission theories of science were being elaborated.” (Pg. 43)
He explains, “The primary task of a philosophy of natural science is to elucidate the concept of nature, considered as one complex fact for knowledge, to exhibit the fundamental entities and the fundamental relations between entities in terms of which all laws of nature have to be stated, and to secure that the entities and relations thus exhibited are adequate for the expression of all the relations between entities which occur in nature.” (Pg. 46)
After discussing a disagreement between Henri Poincare and Bertrand Russell, Whitehead argues, “I look on it as no slight recommendation of the theory of nature which I am expounding to you that it gives a solution of this difficulty by pointing out the factor in nature which issues in the preeminence of one congruence over the indefinite herd of other such relations. The reason for this result is that nature is no longer confined within space at an instant. Space and time are now interconnected; and this peculiar factor of time which is so immediately distinguished among the deliverances of our sense-awareness, relates itself to one particular congruence relation in space.” (Pg. 124)
Whitehead’s later metaphysical philosophy is “not for everyone”; but for those who are interested in it, this is one of his major expressions of it.
March 15, 2016
Theoretical and philosophical, Whitehead's conceptual exploration has, for such a short book, a fullness that can sink you if you are not prepared for it. I enjoyed it for the things that I could glean from it--especially in the earlier chapters; but as he continued his lectures, his erudition obfuscated the matter enough for me that I found myself skimming.
I like his definition of nature: "the creative force of existence" (p. 73). I like his chapter on the bifurcation of the theories of nature because he explores the dichotomous thinking of western philosophy that alienates us from nature. He states that we have two contiguous views of nature; first, an effluent view that is open to perception ("the sky is blue," etc.), and second, an influent thinking that searches for the constituent parts of nature (theories, formulas, geometry, etc.). These two meet in the mind. This explanation makes sense to me in explaining the materialist view of nature.
I can see in passages that T. S. Eliot must have read Whitehead's book because I can see trace elements in some lines of his from "The Four Quartets."
I like his definition of nature: "the creative force of existence" (p. 73). I like his chapter on the bifurcation of the theories of nature because he explores the dichotomous thinking of western philosophy that alienates us from nature. He states that we have two contiguous views of nature; first, an effluent view that is open to perception ("the sky is blue," etc.), and second, an influent thinking that searches for the constituent parts of nature (theories, formulas, geometry, etc.). These two meet in the mind. This explanation makes sense to me in explaining the materialist view of nature.
I can see in passages that T. S. Eliot must have read Whitehead's book because I can see trace elements in some lines of his from "The Four Quartets."
March 18, 2018
One interesting quote and idea: 'What we perceive as present is the vivid fringe of memory tinged with anticipation', beyond that a bit of a slog. More about the inside of A.N.W.'s head than nature or reality, loads of novel terms and definitions that do not seem necessary and serve more to confuse than elucidate.
When I realized that he was taking on Einstein and relativity it pretty much lost me: until we can use rects and abstractive sets to keep our GPS satellites in sync I'm going to go with Einstein.
When I realized that he was taking on Einstein and relativity it pretty much lost me: until we can use rects and abstractive sets to keep our GPS satellites in sync I'm going to go with Einstein.
December 16, 2015
Like all Whitehead's work The Concept of Natures is dense and esoteric. It is a hard read and will require additional analysis. That said I love Whitehead and this was no exception. From what I understood I don't think I agree with some of his conclusions, in particular about is interpretation of Einsteinian physics. But his general approach is very interesting and I will need to look at it again.
July 11, 2012
A marvelous first step in Whitehead's overhaul of our picture of the world. It lacks the completeness of process and reality, yet many of his ideas, still in their fetal stages here, are clearer and more graspable. Not for the faint-of-heart; if you like physics or math, this is a good book for you.
Read
July 21, 2014I was tipped off to Whitehead in Jed Perl's New Art City, where Fairfield Porter and Donald Judd were each apparently influenced by him. Whitehead's discussions about nature, time, space, motion & objects are highly technical - energizing my studio practice.
April 2, 2011
Based on a series of lectures in 1919 at Trinity College regarding discussions on the relations between time, space, and logical perception...
Actually a 4.5 read, occasional research to be done during its duration, very interesting and knowledge increasing...
Actually a 4.5 read, occasional research to be done during its duration, very interesting and knowledge increasing...
April 10, 2016
For those who are native natural scientists and/or have an interest in natural philosophy, this book is a must read. It also forms some sort of bridge towards his magnum opus, which is really useful considering the way in which Process and Reality is written.
April 22, 2026
As partes interessantes do livro estão no começo e no final. O meio é preenchido com formulações matemáticas da teoria. Mesmo sem matemática, a linguagem não ajuda. Não vale o esfoço compreender a teoria nessa forma incompleta.
Currently Reading
March 14, 2012big thinking here sometimes I have to reread whole paragraphs
May 9, 2016
Dense, difficult, and challenging
But well worth the effort for its insights into nature, our perception of it, and how we might think about nature without bifurcating it.
But well worth the effort for its insights into nature, our perception of it, and how we might think about nature without bifurcating it.
September 7, 2012
One of the most important works in philosophy of nature/science of the past few centuries
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews