What do you think?
Rate this book
The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, Volume 3
Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) has made an enormous impact upon philosophical thinking. His work continues to fascinate, and occasionally to exasperate, Whitehead's 'Principia Mathematica' (jointly offered with Russell) is crucial to an understanding of recent philosophy of logic and of mathematics. Whitehead's metaphysics has proved formidably difficult yet stimulating. With his ideas on God he fathered a major school of modern theology.
- GenresPhilosophy
816 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
About the author
Alfred North Whitehead
129 books450 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 of 1 review
October 19, 2024
AN EXCELLENT SUMMARY, ANALYSIS, AND CRITIQUE OF THE WHOLE OF WHITEHEAD’S PHILOSOPHY
This 1941 book is part of the “Library of Living Philosophers.” The General Introduction to the series points out that “[The series] can in no sense take the place of the major writings of great and original thinkers. Students … will still need to read the writings of these men. There is no substitute for first-hand contact with the original thought of the philosopher himself… The investigative and critical discussions of the various phases of a great thinker’s work and, most of all, the reply of the thinker himself, are bound to lead the reader to the works of the philosopher himself.”
The book begins with Whitehead’s “Autobiographical Notes,” which contains such gems as: ““I have never been able to read Hegel: I initiated my attempt by studying some remarks of his on mathematics which struck me as complete nonsense. It was foolish of me, but I am not writing to explain my good sense.” (Pg. 7) And especially, ““In 1903 Bertrand Russell published The Principles of Mathematics.. we coalesced to produce a joint work. We hoped that a short period of one year or so would complete the job. Then our horizon extended and, in the course of eight or nine years, Principia Mathematica was produced… Russell had entered the University at the beginning of the eighteen nineties. Like the rest of the world, we enjoyed his brilliance, first as my pupil and then as a colleague and friend. He was a great factor in our lives, during our Cambridge period. But our fundamental points of view---philosophical and sociological---diverged, and so with different interests our collaboration came to a natural end.” (Pg. 10-11) And finally, “Philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe in terms of the limitations of language.” (Pg. 14)
Next follows Victor Lowe’s 107-page summary of “The Development of Whitehead’s Philosophy.’ Lowe offers such observations as, “Whitehead has always been eager to show the USEFULNESS of speculation. A philosophic idea, he holds, is trivial unless it can be shown to illuminate something and to organize idea of lesser generality.” (Pg. 31) Or “Whitehead’s turning toward an all-inclusive speculative construction after his books on the philosophy of natural science would not have been in the least surprising, even if he had not been encouraged by outside causes. He had written several times of the need for a metaphysics which should synthesize mind with nature, and value with fact.” (Pg. 88-89) And “There seems to me to be a natural reason why so many philosophers think… that there must be a lack of harmony between the Whitehead of 1920 and the Whitehead of 1930… the real continental divide in modern philosophy runs between those which do, and those which do not, inquire how experiences are constituted.” (Pg. 109)
Famed logician W.V.O. Quine observed in his essay, “Analysis of the logical structure of natural science had been occupying Whitehead as early as 1906, when he published a paper… The constructions in that paper are couched in the regular Principia notation… and a continuation is outlines in Whitehead’s later writings under the head of ‘extensive abstraction.’ Other constructions in the 1906 paper go far outside geometry; this was the beginning of a quest for the broadest, most basic concepts and principles of nature, and in the decades since Principia Mathematica the quest has issued in a metaphysics.” (Pg. 163)
The essay on Whitehead’s philosophy of science summarizes, “Whitehead’s philosophy of science has been produced by three factors: (1) Bergson’s emphasis upon the add-sufficiency of immediate intuition and the primacy of process, (2) the epistemological difficulties into which the scientist’s bifurcation of nature led modern philosophers, and (3) the reconstruction in the fundamental concepts of contemporary science necessitated by recent discoveries, especially Einstein’s theory of relativity. It has both the strength and weaknesses of these three influences.” (Pg. 205)
Another essay points out, “Whitehead’s position is that of an uncompromising Platonist.” (Pg. 228) Biochemist Joseph Needham says in his essay, “in Whitehead’s philosophy biologists find a view of the world which they are particularly well fitted to appreciate. Though dialectical materialism and emergent evolutionism have also much to teach them, they see in him the greatest and subtlest exponent of organic mechanism.” (Pg. 271) Another essayist admits, “It is perhaps impossible to say which is the primary motive in Whitehead’s philosophy and, therefore, in his proposal to redesign language—namely, the appeal to modern physics and the revision of the basal categories, or the direct appeal to immediate experience.” (Pg. 310)
Another says, “Whitehead’s speculative philosophy tells us that the conclusions of the more exact sciences are abstract, and that we must not ‘misplace concreteness’ by identifying such abstractions with the ultimate or final reality of things.” (Pg. 377) Philosopher Roy Wood Sellars observes, “Yet, curiously, for all his apparent radicalism, Professor Whitehead turns out to be a conservative in many matters. He is opposed to naturalism in any of its forms; he is a theist; he flirts with the idea of immortality; he believes in religious and moral intuitions as significant guides in ultimate matters; he accepts universals and hardly considers it worth while to examine nominalism; he holds that potentiality must be explained in terms of external objects envisaged by God … In all this I take him to be logical. Having made his basic choices he abides by them and clearsightedly grasps their implications.” (Pg. 409)
Another essayist opines, “Because he dwells so much on the overtones of our experience and refers to the fringes of consciousness which resist verbalization, he is a philosopher who inquires about the meaning of religious intuitions rather than a theologian who offers proofs for the existence of a divine being.” (Pg. 489) The same writer adds, “[For Whitehead] God’s nature is founded on what is infinite and eternal, but is itself being completed by advancing reality… Thus we can as truly say that the world creates God as that God creates the world.” (Pg. 497-498) He continues, “God is the spirit of reason and love, the great companion, a fellow-sufferer who understands. Those who worship him must have a religion based on the companionship of all free participants in the unity of adventure.” (Pg. 507-508)
Charles Hartshorne ] wrote a perceptive essay on “Whitehead’s Idea of God,” in which he suggested, “It is true that Whitehead objects to ‘metaphysical compliments’ to God, and thus appears to suggest that God has been too highly thought of, is not really ‘supreme’ over all conceivable beings. Nevertheless, I think his position is better expressed by saying that in the attempt to praise God people have unwittingly talked nonsense… and nonsense is doubtfully classified as praise.” (Pg. 524)
John Dewey comments, “The genius of Whitehead is exhibited in the earliness of his perception that the new mathematical physics did away with the supposedly scientific foundations, on the physical side, which gave obvious point of the separation. Given this initial move, continued reflection could hardly do other than to develop a less abstract, a more vital, sense of the essential community of the less and the more specialized occasions of experience.” (Pg. 647)
Finally, Whitehead’s essays “Mathematics and the Good” and “Immortality” are included. [The 'Mathematics' essay includes Whitehead's sharp observation about Russell's 'Theory of Types': "unfortunately this rule cannot be expressed apart from the presupposition that the notion of number applies beyond the limitations of the rule... It follows that our only way of understanding the rule is nonsense... the rule must be limited to the notion of a rule of safety..." pg. 671-672]
This volume would be “must reading” for anyone who is genuinely and seriously interested in studying the whole of Whitehead’s philosophy.
This 1941 book is part of the “Library of Living Philosophers.” The General Introduction to the series points out that “[The series] can in no sense take the place of the major writings of great and original thinkers. Students … will still need to read the writings of these men. There is no substitute for first-hand contact with the original thought of the philosopher himself… The investigative and critical discussions of the various phases of a great thinker’s work and, most of all, the reply of the thinker himself, are bound to lead the reader to the works of the philosopher himself.”
The book begins with Whitehead’s “Autobiographical Notes,” which contains such gems as: ““I have never been able to read Hegel: I initiated my attempt by studying some remarks of his on mathematics which struck me as complete nonsense. It was foolish of me, but I am not writing to explain my good sense.” (Pg. 7) And especially, ““In 1903 Bertrand Russell published The Principles of Mathematics.. we coalesced to produce a joint work. We hoped that a short period of one year or so would complete the job. Then our horizon extended and, in the course of eight or nine years, Principia Mathematica was produced… Russell had entered the University at the beginning of the eighteen nineties. Like the rest of the world, we enjoyed his brilliance, first as my pupil and then as a colleague and friend. He was a great factor in our lives, during our Cambridge period. But our fundamental points of view---philosophical and sociological---diverged, and so with different interests our collaboration came to a natural end.” (Pg. 10-11) And finally, “Philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe in terms of the limitations of language.” (Pg. 14)
Next follows Victor Lowe’s 107-page summary of “The Development of Whitehead’s Philosophy.’ Lowe offers such observations as, “Whitehead has always been eager to show the USEFULNESS of speculation. A philosophic idea, he holds, is trivial unless it can be shown to illuminate something and to organize idea of lesser generality.” (Pg. 31) Or “Whitehead’s turning toward an all-inclusive speculative construction after his books on the philosophy of natural science would not have been in the least surprising, even if he had not been encouraged by outside causes. He had written several times of the need for a metaphysics which should synthesize mind with nature, and value with fact.” (Pg. 88-89) And “There seems to me to be a natural reason why so many philosophers think… that there must be a lack of harmony between the Whitehead of 1920 and the Whitehead of 1930… the real continental divide in modern philosophy runs between those which do, and those which do not, inquire how experiences are constituted.” (Pg. 109)
Famed logician W.V.O. Quine observed in his essay, “Analysis of the logical structure of natural science had been occupying Whitehead as early as 1906, when he published a paper… The constructions in that paper are couched in the regular Principia notation… and a continuation is outlines in Whitehead’s later writings under the head of ‘extensive abstraction.’ Other constructions in the 1906 paper go far outside geometry; this was the beginning of a quest for the broadest, most basic concepts and principles of nature, and in the decades since Principia Mathematica the quest has issued in a metaphysics.” (Pg. 163)
The essay on Whitehead’s philosophy of science summarizes, “Whitehead’s philosophy of science has been produced by three factors: (1) Bergson’s emphasis upon the add-sufficiency of immediate intuition and the primacy of process, (2) the epistemological difficulties into which the scientist’s bifurcation of nature led modern philosophers, and (3) the reconstruction in the fundamental concepts of contemporary science necessitated by recent discoveries, especially Einstein’s theory of relativity. It has both the strength and weaknesses of these three influences.” (Pg. 205)
Another essay points out, “Whitehead’s position is that of an uncompromising Platonist.” (Pg. 228) Biochemist Joseph Needham says in his essay, “in Whitehead’s philosophy biologists find a view of the world which they are particularly well fitted to appreciate. Though dialectical materialism and emergent evolutionism have also much to teach them, they see in him the greatest and subtlest exponent of organic mechanism.” (Pg. 271) Another essayist admits, “It is perhaps impossible to say which is the primary motive in Whitehead’s philosophy and, therefore, in his proposal to redesign language—namely, the appeal to modern physics and the revision of the basal categories, or the direct appeal to immediate experience.” (Pg. 310)
Another says, “Whitehead’s speculative philosophy tells us that the conclusions of the more exact sciences are abstract, and that we must not ‘misplace concreteness’ by identifying such abstractions with the ultimate or final reality of things.” (Pg. 377) Philosopher Roy Wood Sellars observes, “Yet, curiously, for all his apparent radicalism, Professor Whitehead turns out to be a conservative in many matters. He is opposed to naturalism in any of its forms; he is a theist; he flirts with the idea of immortality; he believes in religious and moral intuitions as significant guides in ultimate matters; he accepts universals and hardly considers it worth while to examine nominalism; he holds that potentiality must be explained in terms of external objects envisaged by God … In all this I take him to be logical. Having made his basic choices he abides by them and clearsightedly grasps their implications.” (Pg. 409)
Another essayist opines, “Because he dwells so much on the overtones of our experience and refers to the fringes of consciousness which resist verbalization, he is a philosopher who inquires about the meaning of religious intuitions rather than a theologian who offers proofs for the existence of a divine being.” (Pg. 489) The same writer adds, “[For Whitehead] God’s nature is founded on what is infinite and eternal, but is itself being completed by advancing reality… Thus we can as truly say that the world creates God as that God creates the world.” (Pg. 497-498) He continues, “God is the spirit of reason and love, the great companion, a fellow-sufferer who understands. Those who worship him must have a religion based on the companionship of all free participants in the unity of adventure.” (Pg. 507-508)
Charles Hartshorne ] wrote a perceptive essay on “Whitehead’s Idea of God,” in which he suggested, “It is true that Whitehead objects to ‘metaphysical compliments’ to God, and thus appears to suggest that God has been too highly thought of, is not really ‘supreme’ over all conceivable beings. Nevertheless, I think his position is better expressed by saying that in the attempt to praise God people have unwittingly talked nonsense… and nonsense is doubtfully classified as praise.” (Pg. 524)
John Dewey comments, “The genius of Whitehead is exhibited in the earliness of his perception that the new mathematical physics did away with the supposedly scientific foundations, on the physical side, which gave obvious point of the separation. Given this initial move, continued reflection could hardly do other than to develop a less abstract, a more vital, sense of the essential community of the less and the more specialized occasions of experience.” (Pg. 647)
Finally, Whitehead’s essays “Mathematics and the Good” and “Immortality” are included. [The 'Mathematics' essay includes Whitehead's sharp observation about Russell's 'Theory of Types': "unfortunately this rule cannot be expressed apart from the presupposition that the notion of number applies beyond the limitations of the rule... It follows that our only way of understanding the rule is nonsense... the rule must be limited to the notion of a rule of safety..." pg. 671-672]
This volume would be “must reading” for anyone who is genuinely and seriously interested in studying the whole of Whitehead’s philosophy.
Displaying 1 of 1 review