Process & Dialectic Through the Ages

Process & Dialectic Through the Ages

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Scholarly articles for whitehead v dialectic

click here to see a list by Google

Sample articles

• [PDF]From Dialectics to Inclusionality: J Whitehead, A Rayner - A naturally inclusive approach to, 2009 - m.actionresearch.net. The last 2,500 years have seen an unresolved conflict between propositional and dialectical logicians. Here, whilst acknowledging the partial validity of their views, we trace the …

• Whitehead's Metaphysics and the Law: A Dialogue: J Tidmarsh - Alb. L. Rev., 1998 - HeinOnline. Whitehead himself devoted little attention to the nature of law. Therefore, … Whitehead's thought for the nature of law, this Article is structured in the form of a dialogue between "Whitehead…

• Organic categories in Whitehead: G Vlastos - The Journal of Philosophy, 1937 - JSTOR. This homogeneous dialectical idealism we have the equally homogeneous dialectical … The result is an equally vigorous, constructive use of the dialectic, though in a quite different …

• Dialectics of Difference: Barth, Whitehead, Modern Theology and the Uses of Worldviews: G Dorrien - American journal of theology & philosophy, 2009 - JSTOR. VV whether I will speak as a social ethicist or a historical theologian. I am hopelessly both, and my work divides almost equally between these fields. This lecture began as a social …

• [PDF] On Whitehead's reformed metaphysics and the dialectics of Hegel and Marx: A discourse on resistance: CE UKACHUKWU - Philosophia: E-Journal of Philosophy and …, 2019 - academia.edu. … found against the dialectical idealism of Hegel and the dialectical materialism of Marx. For… in Whitehead is able to overcome the conundrum generated by the inadequate dialectics...

• [PDF] Dialectical v. Di-Polar Theology: TJJ Altizer - Process Studies, 1971 - Citeseer. Although Whitehead confessed in 1931 that he Iacked firsthand acquaintance with Hegel~ …of the Hegelian dialectic. (1 :253...62) May we ask to what extent Whitehead's understanding...

• Metaphysics, Negative Dialectic, and the Expression of the Inexpressible: FJ Streng - Philosophy East and West, 1975 - JSTOR. … In the context of the growing discussion of the relation between Whitehead's thought and that of … First, we will analyze the way in which Whitehead and Nagarjuna understand the use of...

• On letting the dialectic go: M Code - Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social …, 2007 - go.gale.com. … As for the now burning question what such a dialectic might look like, it is at least clear from Whitehead's extensive work in philosophy that one of his principal aims is to do proper...

• Whitehead at Infinite Speed: R Faber - … eds), Schleiermacher and Whitehead: Open Systems in …, 2004 - degruyter.com. … Plato, on the one hand, appealed to system in order to understand the dialectic of unity and plurality, Aristotle, on the other hand, for animal organisms. First effectively used in Stoic …

Process & Dialectic Through the Ages by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT 1 Hi. Let's talk about the various modes of dialectic as it matured from Socrates to Plato to Aristotle to the Medeival period, then Hegel and afterwards. Please succinctly summarize each of these periods before proceeding. ChatGPT The development of dialectical thought through these key thinkers reflects a progression in the understanding and application of reasoning and argumentation: Socrates (469–399 BCE): Socratic dialectic, known for its method of elencus, involved questioning and cross-examining to stimulate critical thinking. Socrates focused on defining ethical concepts by revealing contradictions in his interlocutors' beliefs, ultimately leading to the discovery of a more refined understanding through cooperative dialogue. Plato (427–347 BCE): Plato's dialectic took Socratic questioning further by embedding it within a more systematic framework. His method emphasized dialectical reasoning as a way to ascend from the sensible world to the world of Forms, aiming for the apprehension of universal truths. In dialogues such as The Republic, dialectic plays a central role in uncovering the nature of justice, knowledge, and the ideal state. Aristotle (384–322 BCE): Aristotle systematized dialectical methods in his work on logic, particularly in his Organon. His syllogistic reasoning and categorization of logical fallacies represented a more formalized approach to dialectic, focusing on clear argument structures and deductive reasoning. Aristotle's emphasis on empirical observation and classification of knowledge also marked a shift toward more scientific inquiry. Medieval Period (5th–15th centuries): During the Medieval period, dialectic was influenced by Christian theology and the scholastic tradition. Thinkers like Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas engaged in scholastic dialectics, which combined Aristotelian logic with theological discussions. The goal was often to reconcile faith with reason, addressing questions of existence, God, and morality. The dialectical method in this period was also used for theological disputation and philosophical inquiry. Hegel (1770–1831): In the modern period, Hegel's dialectic marked a dramatic shift. For him, dialectics is not merely a method of argumentation but a fundamental principle of reality. Hegel's dialectical idealism posits that history and reality unfold through a process of contradictions and their resolution, a triadic movement of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. This process culminates in the development of self-consciousness and freedom, which he saw as the driving force of historical progress. Each of these periods reflects evolving views on how truth is arrived at, from the Socratic focus on ethics through conversation to the Hegelian conception of dialectic as a dynamic process that encompasses history and reality itself.

2

Were there any major dialectitioners since Hegel excluding Marx?

ChatGPT

Yes, several major thinkers since Hegel, excluding Marx, have further developed or critiqued dialectical methods. Here are a few key figures:

1. Kierkegaard (1813–1855): Søren Kierkegaard’s dialectic was more focused on individual existence and the relationship between faith and reason. He critiqued Hegel's systematic approach, emphasizing the paradoxical and subjective nature of human experience. Kierkegaard's dialectic explores the tension between the finite and the infinite, particularly in his work on faith and existential choice.

2. Schopenhauer (1788–1860): Arthur Schopenhauer, influenced by Kant and Hegel, developed a pessimistic dialectic grounded in the concept of the will. For him, human life and history are driven by an irrational will-to-live, leading to endless conflict. Schopenhauer’s dialectic centers on the struggle between individual desires and the universal will, emphasizing suffering as a core aspect of human existence.

3. Fichte (1762–1814): Johann Gottlieb Fichte advanced a dialectical method that stressed the self-consciousness of the subject. In his Science of Knowledge (Wissenschaftslehre), Fichte proposed a dynamic interaction between the I (the subject) and the Not-I (the object or external world), a process that constitutes reality itself. His idealism and emphasis on the ego shaped subsequent German Idealism.

4. Hegel’s Influence on 20th-century Thinkers:

   • Phenomenology of Spirit had a significant impact on existentialism and phenomenology, notably influencing Heidegger, Sartre, and Merleau-Ponty, who adapted and critiqued Hegel’s dialectic within existential and phenomenological frameworks.
   • Martin Heidegger (1889–1976): Though not strictly a dialectician in the Hegelian sense, Heidegger engaged with dialectical themes, particularly around the Being and its historical unfolding. His work is critical of Hegel’s teleological view of history and instead explores being-in-the-world and the existential conditions of human experience.

5. The Frankfurt School (1920s–1960s): Thinkers such as Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Herbert Marcuse advanced Hegelian dialectics through the lens of Critical Theory. They sought to integrate Marxist critiques with Hegel’s dialectic, focusing on the alienation and contradictions within capitalist societies. Adorno’s Negative Dialectics rejected the idea of synthesis and emphasized the irreducible contradictions of thought and reality.

6. Poststructuralism:

   • Jacques Derrida (1930–2004): Derrida's deconstruction critiqued traditional dialectical reasoning, particularly Hegel's logic. He argued that dialectical oppositions (like thesis-antithesis) inherently involve a logocentric bias, and his work sought to expose the undecidability and complexity of meanings and oppositions in texts.
   • Michel Foucault (1926–1984): While Foucault did not use dialectical reasoning directly, his exploration of power relations and historical contingency echoes dialectical themes. His work challenges traditional structures of knowledge and argues that historical development is not linear or teleological, but fragmented and discontinuous.

These thinkers, while diverging in their specific approaches, have all engaged with dialectical thinking in various forms, critiquing, adapting, and extending its principles beyond Hegel’s original framework.

"Where Hegel Was, There Deconstruction Shall Be"

3

Thank you. Let's posit process philosophy as a known entity from ancient times. How might it's development have appeared to each of these thinkers? Be brief but pithy.

ChatGPT

If we imagine process philosophy as a continuous thread through history, each thinker would have encountered it in different ways:

1. Socrates: Process philosophy might have appeared to Socrates as the dynamic unfolding of ethical truths through dialogue. He would have seen it as a method of constant inquiry, where understanding is never static but always evolving.

2. Plato: For Plato, process philosophy would likely be seen in terms of the becoming of the Forms, with a tension between the changing world of sensory experience and the eternal, unchanging realm of ideal forms. He might view process as a movement toward perfection but not as a self-sustaining, immanent evolution.

3. Aristotle: Aristotle would appreciate the actualization of potentiality within process philosophy, aligning it with his concept of entelechy—the realization of an organism's purpose. However, he might reject process philosophy’s fluidity, emphasizing stable, defined categories in nature and thought.

4. Medieval Thinkers (Aquinas, Augustine): For medieval thinkers, process philosophy would likely be framed as God’s unfolding creation, a continuous act of divine will. However, they would likely emphasize the timelessness and immutability of God, viewing process as secondary to divine perfection.

5. Kierkegaard: Kierkegaard would see process philosophy as the dialectical tension between faith and reason, where existential movement unfolds through choices and leaps of faith. He would emphasize the individual’s subjective journey in a world of change, often at odds with any rational or systematized worldview.

6. Schopenhauer: Schopenhauer would interpret process philosophy through the lens of the Will, where all processes are driven by an irrational force, leading to suffering and conflict. He would likely view the unfolding of the world as a tragic, endless cycle, devoid of true progress.

7. Fichte: For Fichte, process philosophy would manifest in the dialectical development of self-consciousness. He would likely embrace its idea of becoming as the evolving relation between the I (self) and the Not-I (world), a constant self-creation.

8. Hegel: Hegel would see process philosophy as the dialectical unfolding of Absolute Spirit, with all history moving toward an absolute synthesis. He would view process as the self-realization of freedom through contradictions and their resolution in a grand teleological narrative.

9. Frankfurt School: For the Frankfurt School, process philosophy would be viewed as a potential model for historical materialism and the dialectical contradictions inherent in capitalism. They might appreciate its dynamic, transformative nature but critique its idealism and insufficient attention to social structures.

10. Derrida: Derrida would likely critique process philosophy’s teleological progression, deconstructing the idea of a linear, purposeful unfolding. He would view it as undecidable, emphasizing the ruptures and differences within any supposed process of becoming.

11. Foucault: Foucault would be intrigued by process philosophy’s discontinuities and the power relations embedded in historical change. He would likely focus on how processes of knowledge and social order are contingent and fragmented, rejecting any universal, teleological framework.

In short, process philosophy would be seen as a living, evolving force by many of these thinkers, though often reframed or critiqued through their own distinct lenses of ethics, metaphysics, and history.

4

Awesome. I am assuming that you're summary emanates from a Whiteheadian perspective. If not, how might Whitehead encapsulate the previous centuries surmised hypothesis, it's development of, and reaction to, process thought?

ChatGPT

From a Whiteheadian perspective, the development of process thought through history could be encapsulated as follows:

1. Ancient Thinkers (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle): Whitehead would likely see these thinkers as grappling with becoming and actualization. Socrates’ dialectic could be viewed as a primitive form of process thinking, focusing on the unfolding of truth through inquiry. Plato's Forms would be understood as a static idealization, contrasting with Whitehead’s view that reality is constantly in process. Aristotle’s notion of potentiality and actuality aligns more closely with Whitehead’s actual occasions but remains more rigid and static in its categories.

2. Medieval Thinkers: Whitehead would critique the Medieval emphasis on eternal truths and the immutability of God. He would view thinkers like Aquinas and Augustine as constraining process by seeking to reconcile divine perfection with a universe that is inherently temporal and evolving. For Whitehead, this tension would be seen as the dialectic of God and the world, where God’s nature as the Primordial and the Consecutive should be seen as working together in a processual cosmology, not as separate or opposed.

3. Kierkegaard & Schopenhauer: Whitehead would likely see Kierkegaard’s existential dialectic as the subjective, internal process of becoming, where the individual is confronted with the paradoxical nature of existence. Schopenhauer’s will would be recognized as a force within the process, but Whitehead would critique its one-sidedness and lack of constructive creativity, instead of seeing process as inherently creative and moving toward novelty.

4. Fichte: Whitehead would see Fichte’s self-creation as closely aligned with his own actual occasions. Fichte’s dialectic of the self and other would resonate with Whitehead’s emphasis on interrelatedness and creative advance. However, Whitehead would go beyond Fichte’s idealism to include a more comprehensive cosmology where all entities, not just the self, are engaged in mutual influence.

5. Hegel: Hegel’s dialectical process, especially the triadic synthesis of thesis-antithesis-synthesis, would be something Whitehead could embrace in a dynamic, relational sense. However, Whitehead would challenge Hegel’s absolute finality, emphasizing that the process of becoming is ongoing, with no final state of absolute knowledge or reality. For Whitehead, even the Absolute is in process, continually evolving with each new event.

6. Frankfurt School: Whitehead would likely sympathize with the Frankfurt School's critique of static social structures and their emphasis on historical change. He would see their dialectic as part of the social process but critique their tendency to abstract away from creativity. Whitehead’s view would insist on the creative possibilities within historical moments, where actual occasions of social change emerge from concrete, lived experiences rather than from mere theory.

7. Derrida: Whitehead would appreciate Derrida’s critique of logocentrism and binary oppositions, viewing it as a form of deconstruction of fixed categories. However, Whitehead would argue that Derrida’s focus on indeterminacy misses the creative advance in the process—the way novelty emerges out of the complex interplay of forces. For Whitehead, even within deconstruction, there is a creative process at work, and meaning always evolves.

8. Foucault: Whitehead would see Foucault’s power-knowledge dialectic as a reflection of societal processes that continually shift. However, Whitehead would critique Foucault's focus on fragmentation and discontinuity by arguing that even fragmentation is a part of the larger, creative process of becoming. For Whitehead, each historical moment still connects to a larger cosmological process.

In summary, Whitehead would see the history of dialectical thought as a series of progressive attempts to understand reality as a dynamic, relational process. While each thinker contributed valuable insights into the process, Whitehead would highlight the need for a cosmology of creative advance, where novelty, interconnectedness, and continuous becoming are central.

5

The above summary relates to my next question that if contemporary process philosophers and theologians were to review the past eras of dialectic thinking what would they wish to add to these hypothesized discussions that may have been overlooked?

ChatGPT

Contemporary process philosophers and theologians, when reviewing the history of dialectical thinking, would likely wish to add several key perspectives that were either overlooked or underdeveloped in earlier eras. Here are some possible contributions they might make:

1. Emphasis on Creativity and Novelty

• Whiteheadian Creativity: Unlike earlier dialecticians who often focused on conflict and resolution (e.g., Hegel’s dialectic of synthesis), contemporary process thinkers would stress the centrality of creativity as the fundamental element of reality. They would emphasize that novelty and new possibilities emerge not just from the resolution of contradictions but as part of an ongoing, open-ended creative process. This would challenge static or deterministic views of progress, underscoring the unexpected and unpredictable nature of change.

2. Interconnectedness and Relationality

• Process Theology and the Pluriverse: Contemporary process philosophers and theologians would highlight the interconnectedness of all entities in the cosmos, which previous dialecticians—especially those like Hegel who focused on absolute unity—may have overlooked. The relationality of all things (e.g., the idea that everything is in a process of becoming with everything else) would be stressed as a central feature of existence. This is especially true in the theological sense, where God and the world are in relationship, and the world itself is seen as a pluriverse of interdependent actors, not a singular, unified system.

3. Environmental and Ecological Considerations

• Eco-Process Thinking: Process philosophers today would emphasize the need to integrate environmental and ecological dimensions into dialectical thinking. Where past thinkers often focused on human or metaphysical processes, contemporary thinkers would point out the importance of the cosmic and ecological contexts in which all processes unfold. This would involve rethinking dialectics as not just a human-centered process but as part of a larger cosmological ecology of interdependent life forms, systems, and forces.

4. Panexperientialism and the Expanding Nature of Consciousness

• Consciousness and Experience Beyond Humans: Process thinkers would also emphasize that experience is not limited to humans or even to animals, as is often assumed in traditional dialectical reasoning. In line with panpsychism, they would argue that all entities—from particles to planets—possess some form of experience or subjectivity, and this should be accounted for in any dialectical framework. This would challenge the more human-centered or materialist assumptions of earlier dialecticians.

5. Open and Relational Theology

• God as a Co-Creator: In contrast to static or immutable conceptions of God in the past (especially in medieval theology), contemporary process theologians would insist on a view of God as a co-creator in the ongoing process of the universe. God, they would argue, is not just the unchanging origin of the world but is also in a dynamic relationship with creation, guiding and responding to the evolving process. This idea of an open, relational God is a key contribution from contemporary process thought that challenges deterministic or hierarchical notions of divine sovereignty.

6. Dialectical Materialism and Historical Change

• Beyond Marx and Hegel’s Limitations: While Marx inherited Hegel’s dialectical method, contemporary process thinkers would critique both Hegel and Marx for their teleological assumptions—that history moves inevitably toward a final end or goal. Instead, they would argue for a non-teleological process in which history is driven by openness and possibility, not a preordained path. They would highlight the unfinished nature of history and social change, emphasizing that human agency and creativity are central to this open-ended process, rather than any predetermined outcome.

7. Ethics of Becoming and the Responsibility of Co-Creation

• Ethical Implications of Process Thought: A major addition would be the focus on ethics—particularly a process ethics that encourages responsibility for co-creating the future. This would stress the importance of humanity’s role in shaping the future through creative choices that influence not just other humans but the entire cosmic process. In contrast to past dialectics, which often focused on resolving philosophical contradictions, contemporary process thinkers would urge us to recognize our responsibility to future generations and the ongoing world.

8. Process as an Incomplete, Unfinished Event

• An Unfinished Universe: Where earlier dialecticians often sought the final synthesis (whether in the form of an ideal state, absolute knowledge, or historical end), contemporary process thinkers, especially those influenced by Whitehead, would argue that process is always incomplete. There is no final resolution—becoming is always becoming. This shifts the focus from end states (e.g., the final synthesis in Hegel or Marx) to a continual, unfolding process where all events and entities contribute to a shared, open-ended future.

In sum, contemporary process philosophers and theologians would add an emphasis on creativity, relationality, ecological responsibility, and an open-ended, unfinished universe—all of which move beyond static or teleological dialectical models to a richer, more dynamic, and inclusive view of reality.

6

What also could be said about panpsychism?

ChatGPT

Panpsychism—the view that consciousness or experience is a fundamental and pervasive feature of the universe—has gained significant attention within contemporary philosophy, particularly in process thought. Here are some key insights about panpsychism, especially from a process philosophy and theological perspective:

1. Consciousness as Ubiquitous and Gradual

• In panpsychism, consciousness is not limited to humans or animals but is inherent in all aspects of reality, from subatomic particles to galaxies. This contrasts with traditional materialist views, which typically see consciousness as emerging only from complex brain processes in certain organisms.
• From a process perspective, panpsychism suggests that experience is a fundamental feature of the cosmos, and all entities, whether living or non-living, have some degree of subjectivity. Whitehead himself advanced a panexperientialist view, arguing that all entities have experience—even at the atomic or subatomic level, in a rudimentary form.

2. The Continuity of Experience

• Process philosophers see consciousness not as an isolated phenomenon but as part of a continuum. For them, consciousness is not an "all-or-nothing" trait. Instead, it exists along a spectrum, with more complex forms of consciousness emerging in higher organisms, while even atoms or fields of energy possess rudimentary forms of experience.
• This aligns with panpsychism’s gradualism, where even the most basic constituents of the universe have proto-consciousness, which becomes more complex and integrated in larger systems, such as human minds.

3. Subjectivity and the Cosmos as Alive

• Panpsychism implies that the cosmos is not inanimate or a mere mechanical system, but rather is alive with experience. This gives the universe a qualitative dimension, where subjectivity and experience are not just features of organisms but of the entire cosmic order.
• In process thought, this is closely tied to the idea that all things are interconnected and part of a shared process of becoming. Even the cosmos itself is viewed as a dynamic, ever-evolving entity, in which every part contributes to the whole process and has some form of subjective experience.

4. Metaphysical Implications: The "Mind-Body Problem"

• One of the central challenges in philosophy is the mind-body problem—how consciousness relates to the physical world. Panpsychism offers a potential solution by suggesting that mind is not separate from matter, but that all matter has some form of experience.
• In process philosophy, this view resonates with the idea that the universe is made up of actual occasions (the basic units of reality) that are both physical and mental. Each actual occasion has a physical aspect (its material constitution) and a mental aspect (its experiential dimension). This dual-aspect view challenges the separation of mind and matter and proposes that experience is woven into the fabric of reality.

5. Ethical Dimensions: Interconnectedness and Responsibility

• Panpsychism, especially in the context of process theology, can have profound ethical implications. If all beings have some form of experience, then humans might need to rethink their relationship to non-human entities—including animals, plants, and even the earth itself.
• The ethical responsibility in this framework is to recognize the value of all forms of experience and treat the interconnectedness of life with respect. In process theology, this would extend to the idea that humans are co-creators with God in the ongoing process of becoming, shaping the world in a way that respects the inherent experience of all things.

6. Panpsychism and God in Process Theology

• For process theologians like Whitehead, panpsychism is often linked with a dynamic view of God. God’s immanence is closely tied to the experiential quality of the universe. God’s Primordial Nature is the source of potentiality and order, while God’s Consecutive Nature involves direct interaction with the evolving world through the experience of each actual occasion.
• In this view, God’s experience is continuous with the experiences of the world, but at the same time, God offers guidance for the unfolding of creativity and novelty. This view of God aligns with the idea that divinity is interwoven with the cosmos, not separate from it.

7. Panpsychism and Quantum Mechanics

• Some contemporary thinkers, especially those influenced by process thought, also draw connections between panpsychism and quantum mechanics. In quantum theory, there are often mysterious and non-local phenomena that cannot be fully explained by traditional mechanistic models. Some have speculated that consciousness or subjective experience might be intrinsic to the very fabric of reality, potentially aligning with panpsychism.
• Whitehead himself was influenced by quantum theory and believed that processes at the quantum level may involve a kind of primitive experience or feeling at the core of reality.

8. Relational Process and Panpsychism

• Panpsychism, in the process tradition, also challenges the traditional view that consciousness is a feature of individual entities alone. Instead, consciousness (or experience) is seen as relational—interactions between entities are always infused with experiential qualities. This relational process opens up a new way of understanding how consciousness arises not from isolated entities but from interconnectedness and shared experience.
• For Whitehead, every actual occasion has a prehensive relationship to others, meaning that its experience is shaped by its past, but also influences the future through its creative advance. This interconnected process of mutual influence is central to both panpsychism and process thought.

Conclusion

Panpsychism, from a process philosophy perspective, offers a more inclusive and holistic view of consciousness—one that permeates the entire cosmos, rather than being confined to certain organisms. This view not only challenges materialist conceptions of mind but also provides a framework in which the subjectivity of all things—human and non-human, cosmic and microscopic—plays a role in the unfolding process of becoming, thus enriching both metaphysics and ethics.