Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Saving Creativity in Whitehead and Saving Whitehead through Zhu Xi

Saving Creativity in Whitehead and Saving Whitehead through Zhu Xi Gregory Aisemberg University of California, Riverside Gaise001@ucr.edu At the fore of concern within Whitehead scholarship are the main interpretive issues revolving around the relationships of God, creativity, and the world. Some critics have charged that Whitehead's mature thought suffers from a lack of coherence in his formulation of the relationship between God and creativity as they function in cosmic generativity, a charge proven difficult to overcome. Such critics have posed the following question. In light of Whitehead's commitment to the Ontological Principle, how can God and creativity stand as separate formative elements in the world's creative advance? This question illustrates, some say, how the separation of God from creativity within Whitehead's process philosophy marks an internal incoherence that imperils its very foundations. If Whitehead refuses to regulate agency to anything other than actual occasions, then to have creativity as somehow prior to, separate from, or distinct from God would run afoul of the Ontological Principle and thus prove a devastating mistake. One of the issues of this essay is whether Whitehead's system can be rescued from the charge of incoherence between first principles. I argue that it can be saved by (1) John Berthrong's reading of both Zhu http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Philosophy East and West University of Hawai'I Press

Saving Creativity in Whitehead and Saving Whitehead through Zhu Xi

Philosophy East and West , Volume 65 (4) – Oct 23, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/saving-creativity-in-whitehead-and-saving-whitehead-through-zhu-xi-0n04Yp30pR
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1529-1898
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Gregory Aisemberg University of California, Riverside Gaise001@ucr.edu At the fore of concern within Whitehead scholarship are the main interpretive issues revolving around the relationships of God, creativity, and the world. Some critics have charged that Whitehead's mature thought suffers from a lack of coherence in his formulation of the relationship between God and creativity as they function in cosmic generativity, a charge proven difficult to overcome. Such critics have posed the following question. In light of Whitehead's commitment to the Ontological Principle, how can God and creativity stand as separate formative elements in the world's creative advance? This question illustrates, some say, how the separation of God from creativity within Whitehead's process philosophy marks an internal incoherence that imperils its very foundations. If Whitehead refuses to regulate agency to anything other than actual occasions, then to have creativity as somehow prior to, separate from, or distinct from God would run afoul of the Ontological Principle and thus prove a devastating mistake. One of the issues of this essay is whether Whitehead's system can be rescued from the charge of incoherence between first principles. I argue that it can be saved by (1) John Berthrong's reading of both Zhu

Journal

Philosophy East and WestUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Oct 23, 2015

There are no references for this article.