60 likes | 182 Views
W and H. RP. Whitehead and Hartmann. W: 1861-1947; H: 1882-1950 Superficially widely different systems; very close as far as their underlining attitudes are considered Scientifically informed philosophies Process-based philosophies Articulated theory of categories
E N D
W and H RP
Whitehead and Hartmann • W: 1861-1947; H: 1882-1950 • Superficially widely different systems; very closeas far as their underlining attitudes are considered • Scientifically informed philosophies • Process-based philosophies • Articulated theory of categories • Knowledge rests on an emotional basis • Values are part of the overall frame • Against closed systems but in favor of a systematic attitude • Principle of identity left on the periphery of the framework • Deeply focused on their work; very reserved attitude
Whitehead and Hartmann • 2+2 structure • W: Two primary types of entities (actual entities; eternal objects) and two hybrid types (feelings; propositions) (PR 287) • H: Two primary spheres of being (real; ideal) and two secondary spheres (knowledge; logic) (G; M) • Actuality precedes possibility (against the mainstream idea that possibility precedes actuality) • Both have problems with the genus-species structure • W: useful for certain scientific purposes in their early stages; it does not satisfy the highest needs of abstraction • H: limits the genus-species structure to the ideal sphere and to the first step of categorial analysis • Relevance of process/event/time. Limited role for substance. Limited role for object/complex/system
Contact-points between W and H • Reality: • W: “stubborn facts” within actual entities • H: “reality is the absolute determination of being and not-being” (M.150-1) • Events happen only once; they pass but do not change • W: “an actual event, … is divested of all possibility” (PNK.66); “is just what it is and is just how it is related and nothing else” (PNK.61) • H: Actuality maintains itself in the flow of time; it is not fleeting. In this sense, the actual is an “eternal present” (N.13g) • Both past (and future) have being • W: being past does not take away being; what is lost is subjective immediacy • H: if past and future are non-being, they cannot exert any influence over the present because non-being cannot influence being. “A causal connection between something irreal and something real is a non-ens” (N.12d). Both past and future are. The difference among past, present and future is a difference between being actual and being non actual
Contact-points between W and H • The contact-points between W and H I have shortly presented do not exhaust the series of contact-points between these two thinkers • Many more can be detected. Those that I have selected are only the most apparent, those that are easier to detect. A thoroughgoing study of the convergences between H and W is still in wait • For a preliminary inquiry: J.N. Mohanty, Nicolai Hartmann and Alfred North Whitehead. A Study in Recent Platonism. Calcutta, Progressive Publishers, 1957 • If this conference will contribute to a more articulated understanding of W and H, it will have achieved its goal