- Jan 2024
-
-
for - adjacency - John Cobb - Whitehead - process relational ontology
-
-
-
there's always a little bit of novelty with each new drop of experience and so 00:17:17 there's a kind of uh reality at its fundamental basis is a kind of evolving relationship among all of these white heads technical term again 00:17:30 actual occasions of experience
for - definition - actual occasion of experience - Whitehead - definition - society - Whitehead - Whitehead - process relational ontology - adjacency - Whitehead's philosophy - morphic resonance
definition - actual occasion of experience - Whitehead question - does Whitehead mean that reality itself is intrinsically evolutionary in nature and that it is constantly metamorphosizing? Is he making a claim similiar to Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance? Or we might say Sheldrake follows Whitehead
Explanation - Whitehead's Process Relational Ontology - Passage below is explanation of Whitehead's Process Relational Ontology
- There's always a little bit of novelty with each new drop of experience and so
- There's a kind of reality
- At its fundamental basis is a kind of evolving relationship among all of these
- Whitehead's technical term again actual occasions of experience and
- as they co-evolve new habits emerge and these habits allow nature at various scales to form what Whitehead calls societies
- An example of a society of occasions or experiential events would be hydrogen atoms
- The first hydrogen atoms which emerge i think a few hundred thousand years after the big bang represent the growing together of what had been distinct processes
- protons and electrons
- to form this relationship that would be enduring which we call the hydrogen atom
- That's a society of actual occasions of experience that has formed
- and then hydrogen atoms continue this evolutionary process and collect together into the first stars
- and a star would be another example of a society of actual occasions of experience
- and as these new forms of social organization are emerging over the course of cosmic evolution
- what physics describes in terms of laws begin to take shape
- but again for Whitehead these are not eternally fixed laws imposed on the process of evolution that's unfolding
- Rather what we call laws
- emerge from out of that process itself
- as a result of the creative relationships being formed by these actual occasions of experience
- So rather than speaking of laws imposed from outside,
- Whitehead understands uh physical law
- in terms of the habits which emerge over the course of time
- as a result of relationships
- So for Whitehead, the task of philosophy is really
- to situate us in our experience
- His is a is an experiential metaphysics and
- as we've seen in our study of Goethe
- the idea here is not to look behind or beyond experience for something which might be the cause of experience
- The participatory approach to science that Goethe and Whitehead were both attempting to articulate
- requires that we stay with experience
- so metaphysics then
- is not an effort to explain away our common sense experience
- it's really the effort to bring logical coherence and consistency to experience
- to find the all-pervasive relationships among various aspects of experience
- so metaphysics then
- requires that we stay with experience
- And so science becomes the search for those relationships within experience
- rather than the search for some mechanical explanation which would be
- before,
- behind or
- beneath experience
- rather than the search for some mechanical explanation which would be
-
whitehead says that philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe in terms of the limitations of language
for - Whitehead's philosophy - Whitehead - limitations of language - Indra's Net - Whitehead - process relational ontology
-
Whitehead says that
- philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe
- in terms of the LIMITATIONS OF LANGUAGE
- philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe
-
And i think this image of the spiderweb with the dewdrops each reflecting the others is the perfect analogy for whitehead's ontology
- You may have heard of indra's net from madhyamaka buddhism
- the idea of dependent co-origination of all things
- that nothing has independent abiding existence
- but is rather caught up in a network of
- relations or
- causes and conditions
- but is rather caught up in a network of
- and so you can't remove any of the nodes in the network without destroying the node and totally changing the rest of the network that it was embedded within
- that nothing has independent abiding existence
- the idea of dependent co-origination of all things
- This is the key to what a process RELATIONAL ONTOLOGY is trying to reveal to us about the nature of reality
- Dependent co-origination or you could say
- the inter-penetration of all things
- though in Whitehead's cosmology there really are no
things
- if by thing you mean an inert isolated entity
- Whiteheads ontology is really composed of events or processes
- You could say and these processes for whitehead are
- drops of experience
- So for whitehead, there's no node in the network of reality that is not there for itself
- It is not enjoying some degree of experience or subjectivity or has some degree or capacity for feeling
-
-
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
for - Whitehead's philosophy of Organism
-