No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2022
In the opinion of many, the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead is a novel emergent which, like the magician's rabbit, amazes the naive but does not seriously impress the enlightened.
One of the most fundamental criticisms of the philosophy of Whitehead has come from Professor Wilbur Urban. To The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead (The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. 3) Urban has contributed a very thought provoking article entitled: “Whitehead's Philosophy of Language and Its Relation to His Metaphysics.” This, we are told, is a restatement of previous studies.
1 Whitehead's Philosophy of Language, (The Philosophy of A. N. Whitehead) p. 304. (Hereafter this article will be referred to as: “Language”.)
2 W. M. Urban, Elements of Unintelligibility in Whitehead's Metaphysics, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 35; no. 23, p. 617. (Hereafter this article will be referred to as: “Elements”.)
3 Elements, p. 637.
4 “Language”, p. 305.
5 “Language”, p. 306.
6 Strangely enough, Urban indicates a faint awareness of this fact. See “Language”, p. 314.
7 A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality (Macmillan, New York Edition) p. v. (Hereafter this book will be referred to as “P.R.”)
8 “P.R.”, p. 29.
9 “P.R.”, p. 222.
10 See article by Percy Hughes, Comments and Criticisms, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 104.
11 Language, p. 304.
12 “P.R.”, p. 16.
13 Language, p. 308 (words in brackets, mine).
14 Language, p. 310.
15 Language, p. 310.
16 Language, p. 307.
17 Language, p. 319.
18 Language, p. 307.
19 Language, p. 316.
20 Language, p. 317.
21 “P.R.”, p. 6.
22 “P.R.”, p. 12.
23 “P.R.”, p. 19–20.
24 “P.R.”, p. 12.
25 “P.R.”, p. 15–16.
26 P. Hughes, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 104.
27 This fact has also been pointed out by Hughes in the above article.
28 Language, p. 315.
29 Elements, p. 619.
30 Language, p. 320.
31 “P.R.”, p. 319 (underlining mine).
32 F. H. Bradley, Essays on Truth and Reality, p. 159.
33 A. N. Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas, (Cambridge Edition) p. 297.
34 A. N. Whitehead, Modes of Thought, p. 228.
35 “P.R.”, p. 254.
36 “P.R.”, p. 89.
37 “P.R.”, p. 338.
38 “P.R.”, p. 136.
39 Further, it is obvious that Urban is unfair in charging that Whitehead rejects the category, “subject” and then unwittingly makes use of it. As has been noted Whitehead deliberately uses the category “subject”; but claims that it is only applicable to an actual entity in the later stages of its self-development.
40 “P.R.”, p. 43.
41 William James and Whitehead's Doctrine of Prehensions, The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 38, no. 5, p. 124.
42 L. Sears. The Meanings of History, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 39, No. 15, p. 396.
43 Language, p. 326.
44 Language, p. 323.
45 Essentials, p. 628.
46 Language, p. 324.
47 Language, p. 326.
48 Language, p. 326.
49 Language, p. 323.
50 A. N. Whitehead, Science and the Modern World, p. 116 (Cambridge cheap ed.).
51 A. N. Whitehead, Science and the Modern World, p. 116.
52 A. N. Whitehead, Religion in the Making, p. 100.
53 G. Morgan, Whitehead's Theory of Value, International Journal of Ethics, Vol. 47, No. 3, p. 308. This article is an excellent brief discussion of the topic. Reference may also be profitably made to articles in The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead by John Goheen and P. A. Schlipp.
54 Language, p. 321.
55 Essentials, p. 627.
56 “P.R.”, p. 365.