ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD OM FRS FBA (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
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 consists of processes rather than material objects, and that processes are best defined by their relations with other processes, thus rejecting the theory that reality is fundamentally constructed by bits of matter that exist independently of one another. 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.
* 1 Life
* 1.1 Childhood, education * 1.2 Career * 1.3 Move to the US, 1924
* 3 Views on education
* 5 Influence and legacy
* 6 Primary works * 7 See also * 8 References * 9 Further reading * 10 External links
Whewell's Court north range at Trinity College ,
Alfred North Whitehead
Whitehead was educated at
Sherborne School ,
In 1880, Whitehead began attending
Trinity College, Cambridge
Elected a fellow of Trinity in 1884, Whitehead would teach and write
on mathematics and physics at the college until 1910, spending the
1890s writing his Treatise on Universal Algebra (1898), and the 1900s
collaborating with his former pupil,
In 1890, Whitehead married Evelyn Wade, an Irish woman raised in
France; they had a daughter, Jessie Whitehead, and two sons, Thomas
North Whitehead and Eric Whitehead. Eric Whitehead died in action
while serving in the
Royal Flying Corps
In 1910, Whitehead resigned his senior lectureship in mathematics at
Trinity and moved to London without first lining up another job.
After being unemployed for a year, Whitehead accepted a position as
lecturer in applied mathematics and mechanics at University College
London , but was passed over a year later for the Goldsmid Chair of
In 1914 Whitehead accepted a position as professor of applied
mathematics at the newly chartered
Imperial College London
In 1918 Whitehead's academic responsibilities began to seriously
expand as he accepted a number of high administrative positions within
University of London
Toward the end of his time in England, Whitehead turned his attention
to philosophy . Though he had no advanced training in philosophy, his
philosophical work soon became highly regarded. After publishing The
MOVE TO THE US, 1924
During his time at Harvard, Whitehead produced his most important philosophical contributions. In 1925, he wrote Science and the Modern World, which was immediately hailed as an alternative to the Cartesian dualism that plagued popular science. Lectures from 1927–28, were published in 1929 as a book named Process and Reality , which has been compared (both in importance and difficulty) to Kant 's Critique of Pure Reason .
The Whiteheads spent the rest of their lives in the United States.
Alfred North retired from
The two volume biography of Whitehead by Victor Lowe is the most definitive presentation of the life of Whitehead. However, many details of Whitehead's life remain obscure because he left no Nachlass ; his family carried out his instructions that all of his papers be destroyed after his death. Additionally, Whitehead was known for his "almost fanatical belief in the right to privacy", and for writing very few personal letters of the kind that would help to gain insight on his life. This led to Lowe himself remarking on the first page of Whitehead's biography, "No professional biographer in his right mind would touch him."
As of 2013, the Whitehead Research Project of the Center for Process Studies is currently working on a critical edition of Whitehead's writings.
MATHEMATICS AND LOGIC
In addition to numerous articles on mathematics, Whitehead wrote
three major books on the subject: A Treatise on Universal Algebra
In addition to his legacy as a co-writer of Principia Mathematica, Whitehead's theory of "extensive abstraction" is considered foundational for the branch of ontology and computer science known as "mereotopology ", a theory describing spatial relations among wholes, parts, parts of parts, and the boundaries between parts.
A TREATISE ON UNIVERSAL ALGEBRA
In A Treatise on Universal Algebra (1898) the term "universal algebra
" had essentially the same meaning that it has today: the study of
algebraic structures themselves, rather than examples ("models") of
algebraic structures. Whitehead credits
William Rowan Hamilton
At the time structures such as Lie algebras and hyperbolic quaternions drew attention to the need to expand algebraic structures beyond the associatively multiplicative class. In a review Alexander Macfarlane wrote: "The main idea of the work is not unification of the several methods, nor generalization of ordinary algebra so as to include them, but rather the comparative study of their several structures." In a separate review, G. B. Mathews wrote, "It possesses a unity of design which is really remarkable, considering the variety of its themes."
A Treatise on Universal Algebra sought to examine Hermann Grassmann 's theory of extension ("Ausdehnungslehre"), Boole 's algebra of logic, and Hamilton's quaternions (this last number system was to be taken up in Volume II, which was never finished due to Whitehead's work on Principia Mathematica). Whitehead wrote in the preface:
"Such algebras have an intrinsic value for separate detailed study; also they are worthy of comparative study, for the sake of the light thereby thrown on the general theory of symbolic reasoning, and on algebraic symbolism in particular ... The idea of a generalized conception of space has been made prominent, in the belief that the properties and operations involved in it can be made to form a uniform method of interpretation of the various algebras."
Whitehead, however, had no results of a general nature. His hope of
"form a uniform method of interpretation of the various algebras"
presumably would have been developed in Volume II, had Whitehead
completed it. Further work on the subject was minimal until the early
Garrett Birkhoff and
The title page of the shortened version of the Principia Mathematica to *56
Principia Mathematica's purpose was to describe a set of axioms and inference rules in symbolic logic from which all mathematical truths could in principle be proven. Whitehead and Russell were working on such a foundational level of mathematics and logic that it took them until page 86 of Volume II to prove that 1+1=2, a proof humorously accompanied by the comment, "The above proposition is occasionally useful."
Whitehead and Russell had thought originally that Principia
Mathematica would take a year to complete; it ended up taking them ten
years. To add insult to injury, when it came time for publication,
the three-volume work was so long (more than 2,000 pages) and its
audience so narrow (professional mathematicians) that it was initially
published at a loss of 600 pounds, 300 of which was paid by Cambridge
University Press , 200 by the
Royal Society of London
The ultimate substantive legacy of
AN INTRODUCTION TO MATHEMATICS
Unlike Whitehead's previous two books on mathematics, An Introduction
"The object of the following Chapters is not to teach mathematics, but to enable students from the very beginning of their course to know what the science is about, and why it is necessarily the foundation of exact thought as applied to natural phenomena."
The book can be seen as an attempt to understand the growth in unity and interconnection of mathematics as a whole, as well as an examination of the mutual influence of mathematics and philosophy, language, and physics. Although the book is little-read, in some ways it prefigures certain points of Whitehead's later work in philosophy and metaphysics .
VIEWS ON EDUCATION
Whitehead showed a deep concern for educational reform at all levels. In addition to his numerous individually written works on the subject, Whitehead was appointed by Britain's Prime Minister David Lloyd George as part of a 20-person committee to investigate the educational systems and practices of the UK in 1921 and recommend reform.
Whitehead's most complete work on education is the 1929 book The Aims of Education and Other Essays, which collected numerous essays and addresses by Whitehead on the subject published between 1912 and 1927. The essay from which Aims of Education derived its name was delivered as an address in 1916 when Whitehead was president of the London Branch of the Mathematical Association . In it, he cautioned against the teaching of what he called "inert ideas " – ideas that are disconnected scraps of information, with no application to real life or culture. He opined that "education with inert ideas is not only useless: it is, above all things, harmful."
Rather than teach small parts of a large number of subjects, Whitehead advocated teaching a relatively few important concepts that the student could organically link to many different areas of knowledge, discovering their application in actual life. For Whitehead, education should be the exact opposite of the multidisciplinary , value-free school model – it should be transdisciplinary , and laden with values and general principles that provide students with a bedrock of wisdom and help them to make connections between areas of knowledge that are usually regarded as separate.
In order to make this sort of teaching a reality, however, Whitehead pointed to the need to minimize the importance of (or radically alter) standard examinations for school entrance. Whitehead writes:
"Every school is bound on pain of extinction to train its boys for a small set of definite examinations. No headmaster has a free hand to develop his general education or his specialist studies in accordance with the opportunities of his school, which are created by its staff, its environment, its class of boys, and its endowments. I suggest that no system of external tests which aims primarily at examining individual scholars can result in anything but educational waste."
Whitehead argued that curriculum should be developed specifically for its own students by its own staff, or else risk total stagnation, interrupted only by occasional movements from one group of inert ideas to another.
Above all else in his educational writings, Whitehead emphasized the importance of imagination and the free play of ideas. In his essay "Universities and Their Function", Whitehead writes provocatively on imagination:
Whitehead's philosophy of education might adequately be summarized in his statement that "knowledge does not keep any better than fish." In other words, bits of disconnected knowledge are meaningless; all knowledge must find some imaginative application to the students' own lives, or else it becomes so much useless trivia, and the students themselves become good at parroting facts but not thinking for themselves.
PHILOSOPHY AND METAPHYSICS
Richard Rummell's 1906 watercolor landscape view of Harvard
University, facing northeast. Whitehead taught at
Whitehead did not begin his career as a philosopher . In fact, he
never had any formal training in philosophy beyond his undergraduate
education . Early in his life he showed great interest in and respect
for philosophy and metaphysics , but it is evident that he considered
himself a rank amateur. In one letter to his friend and former student
However, interest in metaphysics – the philosophical investigation of the nature of the universe and existence – had become unfashionable by the time Whitehead began writing in earnest about it in the 1920s. The ever-more impressive accomplishments of empirical science had led to a general consensus in academia that the development of comprehensive metaphysical systems was a waste of time because they were not subject to empirical testing .
Whitehead was unimpressed by this objection. In the notes of one of his students for a 1927 class, Whitehead was quoted as saying: "Every scientific man in order to preserve his reputation has to say he dislikes metaphysics. What he means is he dislikes having his metaphysics criticized." In Whitehead's view, scientists and philosophers make metaphysical assumptions about how the universe works all the time, but such assumptions are not easily seen precisely because they remain unexamined and unquestioned. While Whitehead acknowledged that "philosophers can never hope finally to formulate these metaphysical first principles ," he argued that people need to continually re-imagine their basic assumptions about how the universe works if philosophy and science are to make any real progress, even if that progress remains permanently asymptotic . For this reason Whitehead regarded metaphysical investigations as essential to both good science and good philosophy.
Perhaps foremost among what Whitehead considered faulty metaphysical assumptions was the Cartesian idea that reality is fundamentally constructed of bits of matter that exist totally independently of one another, which he rejected in favor of an event -based or "process" ontology in which events are primary and are fundamentally interrelated and dependent on one another. He also argued that the most basic elements of reality can all be regarded as experiential, indeed that everything is constituted by its experience . He used the term "experience" very broadly, so that even inanimate processes such as electron collisions are said to manifest some degree of experience. In this, he went against Descartes' separation of two different kinds of real existence, either exclusively material or else exclusively mental. Whitehead referred to his metaphysical system as "philosophy of organism", but it would become known more widely as "process philosophy ."
Whitehead's philosophy was highly original, and soon garnered
interest in philosophical circles. After publishing The
This is not to say that Whitehead's thought was widely accepted or even well understood. His philosophical work is generally considered to be among the most difficult to understand in all of the western canon . Even professional philosophers struggled to follow Whitehead's writings. One famous story illustrating the level of difficulty of Whitehead's philosophy centers around the delivery of Whitehead's Gifford lectures in 1927–28 – following Arthur Eddington 's lectures of the year previous – which Whitehead would later publish as Process and Reality :
Eddington was a marvellous popular lecturer who had enthralled an audience of 600 for his entire course. The same audience turned up to Whitehead's first lecture but it was completely unintelligible, not merely to the world at large but to the elect. My father remarked to me afterwards that if he had not known Whitehead well he would have suspected that it was an imposter making it up as he went along ... The audience at subsequent lectures was only about half a dozen in all.
Indeed, it may not be inappropriate to speculate that some fair
portion of the respect generally shown to Whitehead by his
philosophical peers at the time arose from their sheer bafflement.
University of Chicago
However, Mathews' frustration with Whitehead's books did not negatively affect his interest. In fact, there were numerous philosophers and theologians at Chicago's Divinity School that perceived the importance of what Whitehead was doing without fully grasping all of the details and implications. In 1927 they invited one of America's only Whitehead experts – Henry Nelson Wieman – to Chicago to give a lecture explaining Whitehead's thought. Wieman's lecture was so brilliant that he was promptly hired to the faculty and taught there for twenty years, and for at least thirty years afterward Chicago's Divinity School was closely associated with Whitehead's thought.
Shortly after Whitehead's book Process and Reality appeared in 1929, Wieman famously wrote in his 1930 review:
"Not many people will read Whitehead's recent book in this generation; not many will read it in any generation. But its influence will radiate through concentric circles of popularization until the common man will think and work in the light of it, not knowing whence the light came. After a few decades of discussion and analysis one will be able to understand it more readily than can now be done."
Wieman's words proved prophetic. Though Process and Reality has been called "arguably the most impressive single metaphysical text of the twentieth century," it has been little-read and little-understood, partly because it demands – as Isabelle Stengers puts it – "that its readers accept the adventure of the questions that will separate them from every consensus." Whitehead questioned western philosophy's most dearly held assumptions about how the universe works, but in doing so he managed to anticipate a number of 21st century scientific and philosophical problems and provide novel solutions.
WHITEHEAD\'S CONCEPTION OF REALITY
Whitehead was convinced that the scientific notion of matter was misleading as a way of describing the ultimate nature of things. In his 1925 book Science and the Modern World, he wrote that
"There persists ... fixed scientific cosmology which presupposes the ultimate fact of an irreducible brute matter , or material, spread through space in a flux of configurations. In itself such a material is senseless, valueless, purposeless. It just does what it does do, following a fixed routine imposed by external relations which do not spring from the nature of its being. It is this assumption that I call 'scientific materialism.' Also it is an assumption which I shall challenge as being entirely unsuited to the scientific situation at which we have now arrived."
In Whitehead's view, there are a number of problems with this notion of "irreducible brute matter." First, it obscures and minimizes the importance of change. By thinking of any material thing (like a rock, or a person) as being fundamentally the same thing throughout time, with any changes to it being secondary to its "nature ", scientific materialism hides the fact that nothing ever stays the same. For Whitehead, change is fundamental and inescapable; he emphasizes that "all things flow."
In Whitehead's view, then, concepts such as "quality", "matter", and "form" are problematic. These "classical" concepts fail to adequately account for change, and overlook the active and experiential nature of the most basic elements of the world. They are useful abstractions , but are not the world's basic building blocks. What is ordinarily conceived of as a single person, for instance, is philosophically described as a continuum of overlapping events . After all, people change all the time, if only because they have aged by another second and had some further experience. These occasions of experience are logically distinct, but are progressively connected in what Whitehead calls a "society" of events. By assuming that enduring objects are the most real and fundamental things in the universe, materialists have mistaken the abstract for the concrete (what Whitehead calls the "fallacy of misplaced concreteness ").
To put it another way, a thing or person is often seen as having a "defining essence " or a "core identity " that is unchanging, and describes what the thing or person really is. In this way of thinking, things and people are seen as fundamentally the same through time, with any changes being qualitative and secondary to their core identity (e.g. "Mark's hair has turned gray as he has gotten older, but he is still the same person"). But in Whitehead's cosmology, the only fundamentally existent things are discrete "occasions of experience" that overlap one another in time and space, and jointly make up the enduring person or thing. On the other hand, what ordinary thinking often regards as "the essence of a thing" or "the identity/core of a person" is an abstract generalization of what is regarded as that person or thing's most important or salient features across time. Identities do not define people, people define identities. Everything changes from moment to moment, and to think of anything as having an "enduring essence" misses the fact that "all things flow", though it is often a useful way of speaking.
Whitehead pointed to the limitations of language as one of the main
culprits in maintaining a materialistic way of thinking, and
acknowledged that it may be difficult to ever wholly move past such
ideas in everyday speech. After all, each moment of each person's
life can hardly be given a different proper name, and it is easy and
convenient to think of people and objects as remaining fundamentally
the same things, rather than constantly keeping in mind that each
thing is a different thing from what it was a moment ago. Yet the
limitations of everyday living and everyday speech should not prevent
people from realizing that "material substances" or "essences" are a
convenient generalized description of a continuum of particular,
concrete processes. No one questions that a ten-year-old person is
quite different by the time he or she turns thirty years old, and in
many ways is not the same person at all; Whitehead points out that it
is not philosophically or ontologically sound to think that a person
is the same from one second to the next.
A second problem with materialism is that it obscures the importance of relations. It sees every object as distinct and discrete from all other objects. Each object is simply an inert clump of matter that is only externally related to other things. The idea of matter as primary makes people think of objects as being fundamentally separate in time and space, and not necessarily related to anything. But in Whitehead's view, relations take a primary role, perhaps even more important than the relata themselves. A student taking notes in one of Whitehead's fall 1924 classes wrote that:
In fact, Whitehead describes any entity as in some sense nothing more and nothing less than the sum of its relations to other entities – its synthesis of and reaction to the world around it. A real thing is just that which forces the rest of the universe to in some way conform to it; that is to say, if theoretically a thing made strictly no difference to any other entity (i.e. it was not related to any other entity), it could not be said to really exist. Relations are not secondary to what a thing is, they are what the thing is.
It must be emphasized, however, that an entity is not merely a sum of its relations, but also a valuation of them and reaction to them. For Whitehead, creativity is the absolute principle of existence, and every entity (whether it is a human being, a tree, or an electron ) has some degree of novelty in how it responds to other entities, and is not fully determined by causal or mechanistic laws. Of course, most entities do not have consciousness . As a human being's actions cannot always be predicted, the same can be said of where a tree's roots will grow, or how an electron will move, or whether it will rain tomorrow. Moreover, inability to predict an electron's movement (for instance) is not due to faulty understanding or inadequate technology; rather, the fundamental creativity/freedom of all entities means that there will always remain phenomena that are unpredictable.
The other side of creativity/freedom as the absolute principle is that every entity is constrained by the social structure of existence (i.e., its relations) – each actual entity must conform to the settled conditions of the world around it. Freedom always exists within limits. But an entity's uniqueness and individuality arise from its own self-determination as to just how it will take account of the world within the limits that have been set for it.
In summary, Whitehead rejects the idea of separate and unchanging bits of matter as the most basic building blocks of reality, in favor of the idea of reality as interrelated events in process. He conceives of reality as composed of processes of dynamic "becoming" rather than static "being", emphasizing that all physical things change and evolve, and that changeless "essences" such as matter are mere abstractions from the interrelated events that are the final real things that make up the world.
THEORY OF PERCEPTION
Since Whitehead's metaphysics described a universe in which all entities experience , he needed a new way of describing perception that was not limited to living, self-conscious beings. The term he coined was "prehension", which comes from the Latin prehensio, meaning "to seize." The term is meant to indicate a kind of perception that can be conscious or unconscious, applying to people as well as electrons . It is also intended to make clear Whitehead's rejection of the theory of representative perception, in which the mind only has private ideas about other entities. For Whitehead, the term "prehension" indicates that the perceiver actually incorporates aspects of the perceived thing into itself. In this way, entities are constituted by their perceptions and relations, rather than being independent of them. Further, Whitehead regards perception as occurring in two modes, causal efficacy (or "physical prehension") and presentational immediacy (or "conceptual prehension").
Whitehead describes causal efficacy as "the experience dominating the primitive living organisms, which have a sense for the fate from which they have emerged, and the fate towards which they go." It is, in other words, the sense of causal relations between entities, a feeling of being influenced and affected by the surrounding environment, unmediated by the senses . Presentational immediacy, on the other hand, is what is usually referred to as "pure sense perception", unmediated by any causal or symbolic interpretation , even unconscious interpretation. In other words, it is pure appearance, which may or may not be delusive (e.g. mistaking an image in a mirror for "the real thing").
In higher organisms (like people), these two modes of perception combine into what Whitehead terms "symbolic reference", which links appearance with causation in a process that is so automatic that both people and animals have difficulty refraining from it. By way of illustration, Whitehead uses the example of a person's encounter with a chair. An ordinary person looks up, sees a colored shape, and immediately infers that it is a chair. However, an artist, Whitehead supposes, "might not have jumped to the notion of a chair", but instead "might have stopped at the mere contemplation of a beautiful color and a beautiful shape." This is not the normal human reaction; most people place objects in categories by habit and instinct, without even thinking about it. Moreover, animals do the same thing. Using the same example, Whitehead points out that a dog "would have acted immediately on the hypothesis of a chair and would have jumped onto it by way of using it as such." In this way symbolic reference is a fusion of pure sense perceptions on the one hand and causal relations on the other, and that it is in fact the causal relationships that dominate the more basic mentality (as the dog illustrates), while it is the sense perceptions which indicate a higher grade mentality (as the artist illustrates).
EVOLUTION AND VALUE
Whitehead believed that when asking questions about the basic facts of existence, questions about value and purpose can never be fully escaped. This is borne out in his thoughts on abiogenesis , or the hypothetical natural process by which life arises from simple organic compounds.
Whitehead makes the startling observation that "life is comparatively deficient in survival value." If humans can only exist for about a hundred years, and rocks for eight hundred million, then one is forced to ask why complex organisms ever evolved in the first place; as Whitehead humorously notes, "they certainly did not appear because they were better at that game than the rocks around them." He then observes that the mark of higher forms of life is that they are actively engaged in modifying their environment, an activity which he theorizes is directed toward the three-fold goal of living, living well, and living better. In other words, Whitehead sees life as directed toward the purpose of increasing its own satisfaction. Without such a goal, he sees the rise of life as totally unintelligible.
For Whitehead, there is no such thing as wholly inert matter .
Instead, all things have some measure of freedom or creativity ,
however small, which allows them to be at least partly self-directed.
David Ray Griffin
Whitehead's idea of
"It does not emphasize the ruling Caesar, or the ruthless moralist, or the unmoved mover. It dwells upon the tender elements in the world, which slowly and in quietness operates by love; and it finds purpose in the present immediacy of a kingdom not of this world. Love neither rules, nor is it unmoved; also it is a little oblivious as to morals . It does not look to the future; for it finds its own reward in the immediate present."
It should be emphasized, however, that for Whitehead
The primordial nature he described as "the unlimited conceptual realization of the absolute wealth of potentiality," i.e., the unlimited possibility of the universe. This primordial nature is eternal and unchanging , providing entities in the universe with possibilities for realization. Whitehead also calls this primordial aspect "the lure for feeling , the eternal urge of desire," pulling the entities in the universe toward as-yet unrealized possibilities.
God's consequent nature, on the other hand, is anything but
unchanging – it is God's reception of the world's activity. As
Whitehead puts it, " saves the world as it passes into the immediacy
of his own life. It is the judgment of a tenderness which loses
nothing that can be saved." In other words,
Whitehead thus sees
"In this way
"It is as true to say that, in comparison with the World,
"It is as true to say that the World is immanent in God, as that God is immanent in the World.
"It is as true to say that
"It is as true to say that
The above is some of Whitehead's most evocative writing about God, and was powerful enough to inspire the movement known as process theology , a vibrant theological school of thought that continues to thrive today.
For Whitehead the core of religion was individual. While he acknowledged that individuals cannot ever be fully separated from their society, he argued that life is an internal fact for its own sake before it is an external fact relating to others. His most famous remark on religion is that "religion is what the individual does with his own solitariness ... and if you are never solitary, you are never religious." Whitehead saw religion as a system of general truths that transformed a person's character . He took special care to note that while religion is often a good influence, it is not necessarily good – an idea which he called a "dangerous delusion" (e.g., a religion might encourage the violent extermination of a rival religion's adherents).
However, while Whitehead saw religion as beginning in solitariness,
he also saw religion as necessarily expanding beyond the individual.
In keeping with his process metaphysics in which relations are
primary, he wrote that religion necessitates the realization of "the
value of the objective world which is a community derivative from the
interrelations of its component individuals." In other words, the
universe is a community which makes itself whole through the
relatedness of each individual entity to all the others – meaning
and value do not exist for the individual alone, but only in the
context of the universal community. Whitehead writes further that each
entity "can find no such value till it has merged its individual claim
with that of the objective universe.
Whitehead also described religion more technically as "an ultimate craving to infuse into the insistent particularity of emotion that non-temporal generality which primarily belongs to conceptual thought alone." In other words, religion takes deeply felt emotions and contextualizes them within a system of general truths about the world, helping people to identify their wider meaning and significance. For Whitehead, religion served as a kind of bridge between philosophy and the emotions and purposes of a particular society. It is the task of religion to make philosophy applicable to the everyday lives of ordinary people.
INFLUENCE AND LEGACY
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. One of the first theologians to attempt to interact with Whitehead's thought was the future Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple . In Temple's Gifford Lectures of 1932-1934 (subsequently published as "Nature, Man and God"), Whitehead is one of a number of philosophers of the emergent evolution approach Temple interacts with. However, it was not until the 1970s and 1980s that Whitehead's thought drew much attention outside of a small group of philosophers and theologians, primarily Americans, and even today he is not considered especially influential outside of relatively specialized circles.
Early followers of Whitehead were found primarily at the University
of Chicago\'s Divinity School , where
Henry Nelson Wieman initiated an
interest in Whitehead's work that would last for about thirty years.
Professors such as Wieman,
Charles Hartshorne ,
Bernard Loomer ,
Bernard Meland, and
Daniel Day Williams made Whitehead's philosophy
arguably the most important intellectual thread running through the
Divinity School. They taught generations of Whitehead scholars, the
most notable of which is
John B. Cobb
Although interest in Whitehead has since faded at Chicago's Divinity
School, Cobb effectively grabbed the torch and planted it firmly in
But while Claremont remains the most concentrated hub of Whiteheadian
activity, the place where Whitehead's thought currently seems to be
growing the most quickly is in China. In order to address the
challenges of modernization and industrialization , China has begun to
blend traditions of
Overall, however, Whitehead's influence is very difficult to
characterize. In English-speaking countries, his primary works are
little-studied outside of Claremont and a select number of liberal
graduate-level theology and philosophy programs. Outside of these
circles his influence is relatively small and diffuse, and has tended
to come chiefly through the work of his students and admirers rather
than Whitehead himself. For instance, Whitehead was a teacher and
long-time friend and collaborator of
Deleuze's and Latour's opinions, however, are minority ones, as Whitehead has not been recognized as particularly influential within the most dominant philosophical schools. It is impossible to say exactly why Whitehead's influence has not been more widespread, but it may be partly due to his metaphysical ideas seeming somewhat counter-intuitive (such as his assertion that matter is an abstraction ), or his inclusion of theistic elements in his philosophy, or the perception of metaphysics itself as passé, or simply the sheer difficulty and density of his prose.
PROCESS PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY
Historically Whitehead's work has been most influential in the field
of American progressive theology . The most important early
proponent of Whitehead's thought in a theological context was Charles
Hartshorne , who spent a semester at
Process theology typically stresses God's relational nature. Rather
In fact, process theology is difficult to define because process
theologians are so diverse and transdisciplinary in their views and
John B. Cobb, Jr. is a process theologian who has also
written books on biology and economics.
Roland Faber and Catherine
Keller integrate Whitehead with poststructuralist , postcolonialist ,
and feminist theory.
Charles Birch was both a theologian and a
Franklin I. Gamwell writes on theology and political
theory. In Syntheism - Creating
Process philosophy is even more difficult to pin down than process
theology. In practice, the two fields cannot be neatly separated. The
State University of New York
One philosophical school which has historically had a close
relationship with process philosophy is American pragmatism .
Whitehead himself thought highly of
In addition, while they might not properly be called process
philosophers, Whitehead has been influential in the philosophy of
Gilles Deleuze ,
Milič Čapek ,
Isabelle Stengers ,
Bruno Latour ,
Scientists of the early 20th century for whom Whitehead's work has
been influential include physical chemist
In physics, Whitehead\'s theory of gravitation articulated a view
that might perhaps be regarded as dual to
In the 21 st century, Whiteheadian thought is still a stimulating
influence: Timothy E. Eastman and Hank Keeton's
ECOLOGY, ECONOMY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
Theologian, philosopher, and environmentalist John B. Cobb, Jr.
Center for Process Studies in
One of the most promising applications of Whitehead's thought in recent years has been in the area of ecological civilization, sustainability , and environmental ethics .
"Because Whitehead's holistic metaphysics of value lends itself so readily to an ecological point of view, many see his work as a promising alternative to the traditional mechanistic worldview, providing a detailed metaphysical picture of a world constituted by a web of interdependent relations."
This work has been pioneered by
John B. Cobb
Whitehead is widely known for his influence in education theory . His
philosophy inspired the formation of the Association for Process
One such model is the ANISA model developed by Daniel C. Jordan, which sought to address a lack of understanding of the nature of people in current education systems. As Jordan and Raymond P. Shepard put it: "Because it has not defined the nature of man, education is in the untenable position of having to devote its energies to the development of curricula without any coherent ideas about the nature of the creature for whom they are intended."
Another model is the FEELS model developed by Xie Bangxiu and deployed successfully in China. "FEELS" stands for five things in curriculum and education: Flexible-goals, Engaged-learner, Embodied-knowledge, Learning-through-interactions, and Supportive-teacher. It is used for understanding and evaluating educational curriculum under the assumption that the purpose of education is to "help a person become whole." This work is in part the product of cooperation between Chinese government organizations and the Institute for the Postmodern Development of China.
Whitehead's philosophy of education has also found institutional
support in Canada, where the
University of Saskatchewan created a
Three recent books which further develop Whitehead's philosophy of education include: Modes of Learning: Whitehead's Metaphysics and the Stages of Education (2012) by George Allan; and The Adventure of Education: Process Philosophers on Learning, Teaching, and Research (2009) by Adam Scarfe, and "Educating for an Ecological Civilization: Interdisciplinary, Experiential, and Relational Learning" (2017) edited by Marcus Ford and Stephen Rowe. "Beyond the Modern University: Toward a Constructive Postmodern University," (2002) is another text that explores the importance of Whitehead's metaphysics for thinking about higher education.
Whitehead has had some influence on philosophy of business
administration and organizational theory . This has led in part to a
focus on identifying and investigating the effect of temporal events
(as opposed to static things) within organizations through an
“organization studies” discourse that accommodates a variety of
'weak' and 'strong' process perspectives from a number of
philosophers. One of the leading figures having an explicitly
Whiteheadian and panexperientialist stance towards management is Mark
Dibben, who works in what he calls "applied process thought" to
articulate a philosophy of management and business administration as
part of a wider examination of the social sciences through the lens of
process metaphysics . For Dibben, this allows "a comprehensive
exploration of life as perpetually active experiencing, as opposed to
occasional – and thoroughly passive – happening." Dibben has
published two books on applied process thought, Applied Process
Margaret Stout and Carrie M. Staton have also written recently on the
mutual influence of Whitehead and
Mary Parker Follett , a pioneer in
the fields of organizational theory and organizational behavior .
Stout and Staton see both Whitehead and Follett as sharing an ontology
that "understands becoming as a relational process; difference as
being related, yet unique; and the purpose of becoming as harmonizing
difference." This connection is further analyzed by Stout and
Jeannine M. Love in Integrative Process: Follettian Thinking from
Whitehead's political views sometimes appear to be Libertarian without the label. He wrote:
Now the intercourse between individuals and between social groups
takes one of two forms, force or persuasion.
On the other hand, many Whitehead scholars read his work as providing a philosophical foundation for the social liberalism of the New Liberal movement that was prominent throughout Whitehead's adult life. Morris wrote that "...there is good reason for claiming that Whitehead shared the social and political ideals of the new liberals."
Books written by Whitehead, listed by date of publication.
* A Treatise on Universal Algebra. Cambridge:
* ^ A B C Alfred North Whitehead,
Process and Reality (New York:
The Free Press, 1978), 39.
* ^ A B C D E Alfred North Whitehead,
Process and Reality (New
York: The Free Press, 1978), xii.
* ^ Alfred North Whitehead,
Process and Reality (New York: The Free
Press, 1978), xiii.
* ^ A B C Alfred North Whitehead,
Process and Reality (New York:
The Free Press, 1978), xi.
* ^ A B C D
Michel Weber and Will Desmond, eds., Handbook of
Whiteheadian Process Thought, Volume 1 (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag,
* ^ A B C D E John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin, Process
Theology: An Introductory Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
* ^ A B C D
Michel Weber and Will Desmond, eds., Handbook of
Whiteheadian Process Thought, Volume 1 (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag,
Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, Dialogues II, Columbia
University Press, 2007, p. vii.
* ^ A B John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin, Process Theology:
An Introductory Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976),
* ^ John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin, Process Theology: An
Introductory Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), 175.
* ^ Thomas J. Fararo, "On the Foundations of the Theory of Action
in Whitehead and Parsons", in Explorations in General Theory in Social
Science, ed. Jan J. Loubser et al. (New York: The Free Press, 1976),
Michel Weber and Will Desmond, eds., Handbook of Whiteheadian
Process Thought, Volume 1 (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag, 2008), 25.
* ^ "
Alfred North Whitehead
For the most comprehensive list of resources related to Whitehead, see the thematic bibliography of the Center for Process Studies.
* Casati, Roberto, and Achille C. Varzi. Parts and Places: The
Structures of Spatial Representation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The
MIT Press, 1999.
* Ford, Lewis. Emergence of Whitehead's Metaphysics, 1925–1929.
State University of New York
* v * t * e
Abstract object theory
* Action theory
* Abstract object
* v * t * e
Metatheory of science
* thermal and statistical * Motion
* Artificial intelligence
PHILOSOPHERS OF SCIENCE BY ERA
* Alfred North Whitehead
* WorldCat Identities * VIAF : 17265242 * LCCN : n79058622 * ISNI : 0000 0001 2277 0020 * GND : 118632175 *