Major Global Philosophies, the Christian Church, and Science, Part 4 of 4

amazon link

Major Global Philosophies,

the Christian Church, and Science

Part 4 of 4

Whitehead's Metaphysical Cosmology

Observation 12

Let's backup... I mentioned these several older categories of medieval scholasticism, modern Enlightenment, German Idealism, and Calvinistic Evangelicalism, above but perhaps there are wider, more pertinent philosophic categories which the church is currently struggling?

ChatGPT

The Church and Contemporary Philosophy

Below are some broader contemporary philosophical/cultural categories—beyond medieval scholasticism, Enlightenment rationalism, German Idealism, and Calvinistic Evangelicalism—that many churches today find themselves grappling with. Each poses new questions about truth, ethics, social structures, and even the very nature of faith:

---

1. Postmodern & Post-Structuralist Skepticism

• Key Idea: Challenges the existence of absolute truths, viewing reality as socially constructed.
• Church Struggle: Reconciling Christian claims of universality (e.g., the gospel) with cultural relativism and deconstruction of grand narratives.

2. Critical Theory & Intersectionality

• Key Idea: Interprets society through lenses of power, oppression, and liberation (e.g., race, class, gender).
• Church Struggle: Facing calls for social justice and examining structures of privilege within the church, while balancing scriptural interpretations.

3. Scientism & Strict Naturalism

• Key Idea: Holds that empirical science alone provides valid knowledge, often excluding any talk of the supernatural.
• Church Struggle: Maintaining theological claims about God, miracles, or spiritual realities without dismissing rigorous science.

4. Post-Humanism & Transhumanism

• Key Idea: Questions what it means to be human, especially in light of AI, genetic engineering, and rapid technological advances.
• Church Struggle: Addressing theological anthropology (the “image of God”) when human nature may be artificially altered or extended.

5. Eco-Philosophy & New Materialism

• Key Idea: Emphasizes the agency of the nonhuman world (animals, ecosystems), seeing matter as active rather than inert.
• Church Struggle: Reinterpreting doctrines of creation, stewardship, and eschatology in light of climate change and environmental crises.

6. Political & Ideological Polarization

• Key Idea: Ideologies (e.g., MAGA/trumpian conservatism, populism) merge with religious identity, potentially overshadowing theological nuance.
• Church Struggle: Discerning how to remain faithful to gospel ethics rather than conflating faith with partisan politics or nationalist agendas.

7. Neo-Liberal Capitalism & Consumerism

• Key Idea: Portrays market principles as shaping human life, from global economics to individual worth.
• Church Struggle: Resisting the commodification of religion and the temptation to fit the church’s mission into market-driven metrics of success.

8. New Atheism & Secular Humanism

• Key Idea: Critiques religion as irrational or harmful, proposes a purely secular ethic grounded in human reasoning.
• Church Struggle: Engaging skeptics who demand a rational, evidence-based faith while preserving core spiritual convictions and values.

9. Metamodernism

• Key Idea: A response to postmodern irony and modern earnestness, suggesting a “both/and” oscillation between sincerity and skepticism.
• Church Struggle: Navigating a cultural ethos that is simultaneously cynical and hopeful, requiring authentic but adaptable forms of witness.

10. Integral & Holistic Approaches

• Key Idea: Seeks an inclusive framework uniting science, spirituality, personal development, and social progress (e.g., Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory).
• Church Struggle: Incorporating a broad range of insights (psychology, ecology, sociology) while retaining a distinctly Christian narrative and identity.

---

Why These Categories Matter

• Each of these philosophical/cultural domains raises new kinds of questions about the nature of reality, truth, and the good life, pressing the church to adapt or respond creatively.
• Many congregations find themselves ill-prepared for such multifaceted challenges if they only lean on traditional dogmatic or older philosophical systems (e.g., medieval scholasticism or Enlightenment rationalism).
• Process thought (à la Whitehead) can offer a more relational, dynamic, and evolving framework that dialogues well with each of these currents—rather than dismissing or clashing with them outright.

These broader categories, then, reflect where much of the theological “struggle” is taking place today: at the intersection of rapidly shifting worldviews, emerging sciences, political polarizations, and cultural discourses that demand fresh theological engagement.

Observation 13

The above categories you mentioned are very helpful. In general, can they be more broadly categorized philosophically?

ChatGPT

Below is one way to cluster the previously listed philosophical/cultural categories into broader groupings. Of course, these groupings overlap, but they can help us see the larger frameworks in which these ideas operate:

---

1. Post/Neo/Meta Paradigms

• Postmodern & Post-Structuralist Skepticism
• Metamodernism

Broad Marker:

• Focus on the limits of grand narratives and the oscillation between irony and sincerity.
• Often questions notions of absolute truth, while simultaneously seeking new, authentic ways to engage reality.

---

2. Socio-Political Frameworks

• Critical Theory & Intersectionality
• Political & Ideological Polarization (e.g., MAGA/Trumpian Christianity)
• Neo-Liberal Capitalism & Consumerism

Broad Marker:

• Concerned with power structures, social justice, and the economic underpinnings shaping society.
• Churches grapple with the ethical, moral, and communal implications of these frameworks.

---

3. Science-Centered Worldviews

• Scientism & Strict Naturalism
• New Atheism & Secular Humanism

Broad Marker:

• Prioritize empirical data as the primary or sole means of understanding reality.
• Challenge religious or supernatural claims, pushing churches to articulate how faith aligns with or diverges from scientific explanations.

---

4. Human (and Post-Human) Questions

• Post-Humanism & Transhumanism

Broad Marker:

• Explore what it means to be human in light of rapidly advancing technology, AI, genetic engineering, etc.
• Churches face theological questions about the image of God, free will, morality, and embodiment when humanity itself seems malleable.

---

5. Philosophies of Nature & Materiality

• Eco-Philosophy & New Materialism

Broad Marker:

• Elevate the role and agency of the nonhuman (environment, matter, animals) and critique the notion of nature as a passive resource.
• Challenge the church to revise doctrines of creation, eschatology, and human stewardship in ways that respect and include the broader Earth community.

---

6. Integrative or Holistic Approaches

• Integral & Holistic Theories (e.g., Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory)

Broad Marker:

• Seek a comprehensive framework that unites science, spirituality, psychology, and social progress.
• Encourage inter-disciplinary dialogue and a synthesis of multiple viewpoints, nudging churches to think beyond traditional theological silos.

---

Why These Broader Categories Matter

• The Church’s Ongoing Dialogue: Each grouping underscores a distinct set of challenges the church must address—whether about truth, ethics, authority, human identity, or the environment.
• Potential for Conflict or Renewal: These categories can clash with older theological paradigms or spur innovative perspectives and theological growth (e.g., process thought).
• Need for Adaptive Frameworks: A more dynamic, relational philosophy—like Whitehead’s process approach—can engage these broad trends by offering a flexible, inclusive lens that affirms science, fosters ethical inquiry, and remains open to ongoing cultural developments.

By viewing contemporary issues through these broader philosophical and cultural lenses, the church can more readily identify points of tension or synergy, thereby shaping a more nuanced and up-to-date theological response.

Observation 14

Besides Whiteheadian process thought what other philosophical approaches may address the above cultural "prenumerations"?

ChatGPT

Below are some alternative philosophical/theological approaches (beyond Whitehead’s process thought) that can engage many of today’s cultural “pre-numerations”—from postmodern skepticism and political polarization to new materialism and transhumanism. While each differs in emphasis, they offer frameworks that can speak constructively to contemporary social, scientific, and ethical challenges.

---

1. Pragmatism / Neo-Pragmatism

• Key Idea: Truth is what works in practice. Emphasizes community inquiry, adaptable beliefs, and problem-solving.
• Major Figures: Charles Peirce, William James, John Dewey, and later Richard Rorty.
• Relevance: Encourages churches to adopt a flexible, dialogical approach to theology that’s open to scientific and cultural feedback, focusing on practical outcomes rather than fixed dogmas.

---

2. Critical Realism

• Key Idea: A middle ground affirming that objective reality exists but is always interpreted through human lenses.
• Major Figures: Roy Bhaskar (philosophy of science), N.T. Wright (biblical scholarship).
• Relevance: Invites theological engagement with science and culture without collapsing into either naive realism (everything is purely objective) or radical relativism (all views are equally valid).

---

3. Philosophical Hermeneutics

• Key Idea: Stresses interpretation, historical context, and the fusion of horizons between texts and readers.
• Major Figures: Hans-Georg Gadamer, Paul Ricoeur.
• Relevance: Churches can use hermeneutics to re-interpret Scripture and tradition in light of evolving cultural contexts—helpful when navigating postmodern or intersectional critiques.

---

4. Integral Theory

• Key Idea: Seeks a comprehensive framework uniting science, spirituality, culture, and consciousness in multiple “quadrants.”
• Major Figure: Ken Wilber.
• Relevance: Offers a holistic lens for churches dealing with complex cultural phenomena (social justice, ecology, neuroscience) by integrating them under one broad, tiered model.

---

5. Radical Orthodoxy

• Key Idea: Critiques secular modernity, reasserting a theologically grounded vision for philosophy, society, and culture.
• Major Figures: John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, Graham Ward.
• Relevance: Seeks to reclaim Christian thought’s robust metaphysical heritage as a viable alternative to both secularism and simplistic Christian fundamentalism—often engaging contemporary social/political issues with a “high” sacramental and communal vision.

---

6. Liberationist and Contextual Theologies

• Key Idea: Prioritizes social justice, the experience of marginalized communities, and structural critique.
• Major Figures: Gustavo Gutiérrez (Liberation Theology), James Cone (Black Theology), Rosemary Radford Ruether (Feminist Theology).
• Relevance: Helps churches address intersectionality, political polarization, and systemic injustice from within a theological framework—particularly salient in debates over MAGA/trumpian Christianity or other power-based ideologies.

---

7. Speculative Realism & Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO)

• Key Idea: Argues that reality extends beyond human concepts—emphasizing nonhuman agency, withdrawn essences, and the limits of correlationism (the idea that being is always “for us”).
• Major Figures: Quentin Meillassoux, Graham Harman, Levi Bryant.
• Relevance: Offers a post-anthropocentric perspective that can resonate with ecological concerns, transhumanist questions, and new materialist insights on matter and agency, challenging church anthropocentrism.

---

8. Neo-Thomism or “New Thomism”

• Key Idea: Revisits Aquinas’s synthesis of faith and reason, incorporating contemporary philosophy and science.
• Major Figures: Étienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, W. Norris Clarke.
• Relevance: Retains a classical metaphysics but strives to update it in dialogue with modern scientific developments—potentially bridging scholastic theology and current intellectual climates without sacrificing a robust doctrine of God.

---

Why These Alternatives Matter

1. Dialogue with Science: Many of these approaches emphasize interdisciplinary engagement, refusing to silo theology away from empirical inquiry.
2. Ethical & Social Relevance: Whether through liberationism or hermeneutics, they strive to address contemporary injustices and global challenges in ways older frameworks may not.
3. Metaphysical Depth: Like Whitehead’s process thought, some of these philosophies (speculative realism, neo-Thomism) offer a deep account of being that can accommodate evolving scientific paradigms.
4. Cultural Critique & Transformation: Postmodern critiques, radical orthodoxy, and integral theory all propose fresh ways for churches to stand both critically and creatively within today’s cultural matrix.

In short, while Whiteheadian process philosophy excels at weaving together science, theology, and a dynamic cosmos, each of these alternative frameworks likewise offers its own toolkit for navigating the complexities of the modern (and postmodern) world—and for forging a meaningful faith that speaks to our era’s pressing questions.

Observation 15

I suspected you would answer in this way as I duplicated your first responses from a similar perspective. Please take your last response and compare the pros and cons of each to process philosophy...

ChatGPT

Below is a comparative overview of each listed philosophical/theological alternative vis-à-vis Whiteheadian process philosophy. Each approach has strengths (pros) and weaknesses (cons) when placed alongside process thought’s emphasis on relationality, becoming, and a dynamic God-world relationship.

---

1. Pragmatism / Neo-Pragmatism

• Pros:
  • Emphasizes practical, community-driven inquiry, which resonates with process thought’s insistence on contextual and evolving understanding.
  • Encourages adaptability and a non-dogmatic approach similar to process theology’s flexibility.
• Cons:
  • Pragmatism can be light on metaphysics; it sometimes avoids deeper ontological questions about what reality ultimately is.
  • Lacks the strong cosmological vision of Whitehead (no robust metaphysical “process” of actual entities or occasions).

---

2. Critical Realism

• Pros:
  • Balances the idea of an objective reality with the recognition that humans interpret this reality—compatible with Whitehead’s emphasis on perception as relational.
  • Promotes constructive dialogue between theology and science (similar to Whitehead’s aim of integrating both).
• Cons:
  • Tends to center on epistemology (“how we know reality”) more than the nature of reality itself.
  • May not fully engage with the idea of an evolving cosmos or the metaphysical depth of Whitehead’s “creative advance into novelty.”

---

3. Philosophical Hermeneutics

• Pros:
  • Focus on interpretation and context aligns with process thought’s recognition that reality is always in flux and meaning is co-created.
  • Sees understanding as a dialogical process, echoing Whitehead’s relational emphasis.
• Cons:
  • Primarily a methodology for interpreting texts, culture, and history, not as comprehensive a cosmology as Whitehead’s.
  • May not address detailed scientific or metaphysical questions about cosmic becoming in the way process thought does.

---

4. Integral Theory

• Pros:
  • Shares process philosophy’s desire to integrate multiple domains (science, spirituality, psychology, social systems).
  • Emphasizes a holistic, evolving worldview, akin to Whitehead’s relational cosmos.
• Cons:
  • Can become overly schematic (e.g., quadrant models) and sometimes glosses over finer metaphysical distinctions.
  • Whitehead’s system is more philosophically rigorous in its understanding of how actual entities become, whereas Integral Theory can feel “all-inclusive” without as much ontological specificity.

---

5. Radical Orthodoxy

• Pros:
  • Offers a theologically rich critique of secular modernity and can be open to creative theological reflection.
  • Emphasizes a sacramental, communal vision that resonates with relational aspects found in process theology.
• Cons:
  • Leans heavily on Augustinian-Neoplatonic traditions rather than a fully process metaphysic of becoming.
  • Can be suspicious of attempts to integrate secular philosophies (including certain strands of science), whereas Whitehead welcomes dialogue with them.

---

6. Liberationist and Contextual Theologies

• Pros:
  • Share with process theology a strong ethical orientation, prioritizing transformation, justice, and the communal well-being.
  • Emphasize embodied practice and social awareness, aligning with process thought’s sense of interconnectedness.
• Cons:
  • Often focus more on socio-political liberation than on detailed cosmological or metaphysical systems.
  • May not provide a unified metaphysical basis for bridging theology and science (though they can integrate well with process thought).

---

7. Speculative Realism & Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO)

• Pros:
  • Move away from anthropocentrism, highlighting the reality and agency of objects, which can resonate with process philosophy’s emphasis on the subjectivity/agency of all actual entities.
  • Offer a fresh, creative challenge to correlationism (the idea that being is always tied to human experience).
• Cons:
  • Tend to downplay or sideline the experiential and relational aspects crucial to Whitehead; OOO sees objects as withdrawn from each other rather than constitutively relational.
  • Lack the panexperiential dimension of process thought (i.e., Whitehead’s sense that all entities have an experiential or subjective side).

---

8. Neo-Thomism or “New Thomism”

• Pros:
  • Provides a rigorous metaphysical framework that has historically engaged science (e.g., in Catholic scholarship).
  • Like Whitehead, affirms a robust sense of causality and a created order that can be studied both theologically and scientifically.
• Cons:
  • Tends to emphasize static essence and substance metaphysics (from Aristotle), contrasting with Whitehead’s dynamic process cosmology.
  • May not be as open to radical novelty or creativity at the metaphysical level as Whitehead’s “creative advance.”

---

Summary of Pros and Cons Relative to Whiteheadian Process Thought

Approach	Pros	Cons
Pragmatism / Neo-Pragmatism	Flexible, practical, community-based, aligns with process fluidity	Light on metaphysics; lacks robust cosmological vision
Critical Realism	Balances objective reality & interpretation; fosters science-theology dialogue	More focused on epistemology than processual ontology; less cosmic “becoming” emphasis
Philosophical Hermeneutics	Dialogical, contextual, emphasizes interpretive process	Primarily methodological, not a full cosmology
Integral Theory	Inclusive, holistic, multi-perspective approach	Can be overly schematic; lacks Whitehead’s rigorous metaphysical detail
Radical Orthodoxy	Richly theological, sacramental, communal vision	Tends to rely on older metaphysical traditions and can be wary of modern science-philosophy dialogue
Liberationist / Contextual	Strong ethical/political orientation, aligns with process focus on justice/relationality	Less emphasis on developing a unifying metaphysical framework
Speculative Realism / OOO	Highlights nonhuman agency, challenges anthropocentrism	Objects often viewed as “withdrawn”; lacks the panexperiential, relational dimension central to process thought
Neo-Thomism	Classical, rigorous metaphysical system, open to science in certain respects	Substance-based metaphysics often contrasts with processual “becoming,” novelty, and relational ontology

In conclusion, each alternative can fruitfully engage contemporary social and scientific developments, yet they diverge from Whitehead in how deeply they integrate:

1. Dynamic Becoming – Whitehead posits a universe in a state of creative advance, whereas many of these approaches preserve more static or hierarchical structures.
2. Metaphysical Relationality – Process thought’s hallmark is relational ontology, while some alternatives focus on discrete entities or interpretive frameworks.
3. Science-Theology Symbiosis – Whitehead’s vision is explicitly designed to bridge science and theology; many alternatives do so implicitly or only partially.

Thus, while all offer valuable tools, Whiteheadian process philosophy remains unique for its robust cosmological metaphysics, relational ontology, and explicit aim to marry theological and scientific discourse under a unified processual framework.

Observation 16

Based on today's dialogue is there anything further which should be referenced?

ChatGPT

Below is a short collection of references—both primary and secondary—to help expand on today’s discussion topics. They include key works in process thought, natural theology, and the alternative philosophical/theological approaches we’ve mentioned. Of course, this list isn’t exhaustive, but it can serve as a starting point for deeper exploration.

---

1. Whiteheadian Process Thought

• Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality (Corrected Edition), ed. David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne (Free Press, 1978).

  • Whitehead’s seminal work, presenting his cosmology of “actual occasions” and “creative advance.”

• Alfred North Whitehead, Science and the Modern World (Free Press, 1997).

  • Explores how modern science developed and how a process perspective might reorient our thinking.

• John B. Cobb Jr. and David Ray Griffin, Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition (Westminster John Knox Press, 1976).

  • Classic introduction to process theology, explaining how Whitehead’s ideas reshape Christian doctrines.

• Timothy E. Eastman, Untying the Gordian Knot: Process, Reality, and Context (Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2020).

  • Merges Whiteheadian process philosophy with contemporary physics, including quantum and plasma physics.

---

2. Natural Theology & Science-Religion Dialogue

• Ian Barbour, When Science Meets Religion (HarperOne, 2000).

  • Classic categorization of four ways (conflict, independence, dialogue, integration) science and religion interact.

• Arthur Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age (Fortress Press, 1993).

  • A priest-biochemist exploring how scientific insights can inform Christian theology.

• John Polkinghorne, Science and Providence (Templeton Press, 1989).

  • A physicist-turned-priest’s reflections on divine action and the scientific worldview.

---

3. Broader Philosophical/Cultural Frameworks

Pragmatism / Neo-Pragmatism

• William James, Pragmatism (Hackett Publishing, 1981 [1907]).
• John Dewey, Experience and Nature (Open Court, 1929).
• Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton University Press, 1979).

Critical Realism

• Roy Bhaskar, A Realist Theory of Science (Routledge, 2008 [1975]).
• N.T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (Fortress Press, 1992) — see the introduction for his “critical realist” approach in biblical scholarship.

Philosophical Hermeneutics

• Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method (Continuum, 2004 [1960]).
• Paul Ricoeur, Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning (Texas Christian University Press, 1976).

Integral Theory

• Ken Wilber, A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision for Business, Politics, Science, and Spirituality (Shambhala, 2001).

Radical Orthodoxy

• John Milbank, Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason (Wiley-Blackwell, 2006 [1990]).
• Catherine Pickstock, After Writing: On the Liturgical Consummation of Philosophy (Wiley-Blackwell, 1998).

Liberationist & Contextual Theologies

• Gustavo Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation (Orbis Books, 1973).
• James H. Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation (Orbis Books, 1990).
• Rosemary Radford Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Beacon Press, 1993).

Speculative Realism & OOO

• Quentin Meillassoux, After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (Bloomsbury Academic, 2008).
• Graham Harman, Tool-Being: Heidegger and the Metaphysics of Objects (Open Court, 2002).

Neo-Thomism / New Thomism

• Jacques Maritain, Existence and the Existent (Pantheon, 1948).
• W. Norris Clarke, Explorations in Metaphysics: Being—God—Person (University of Notre Dame Press, 1994).

---

Why These References?

1. Process Thought Foundations: Whitehead’s primary texts remain essential for anyone exploring process metaphysics or theology. Works by Cobb, Griffin, and Eastman show how these ideas integrate with Christian doctrine and modern science.
2. Science-Theology Nexus: Barbour, Peacocke, and Polkinghorne highlight the nuanced ways science and theology can complement rather than contradict each other—an approach in line with Whitehead’s integrative vision.
3. Alternative Approaches: Each of the philosophical frameworks (Pragmatism, Critical Realism, etc.) has key texts that clarify how they engage knowledge, ethics, society, and belief—making it easier to see where they resonate (or conflict) with process perspectives.

---

With these resources, one can explore how churches might navigate today’s complex landscape—intellectually, ethically, and spiritually—while remaining open to science and the evolving cultural spheres.

Return to Part 1 of this discussion....

Major Global Philosophies, the Christian Church, and Science, Part 3 of 4

amazon link

Major Global Philosophies,

the Christian Church, and Science

Part 3 of 4

Whitehead's Metaphysical Contributions

Church & Science

Observation 8

In light of observations 6-7 from Part 2 briefly list contemporary scientific philosophies which rival Whitehead's process philosophy....

ChatGPT

Here are some contemporary scientific philosophies that rival Whitehead's process philosophy, each offering distinct frameworks for understanding science and reality:

---

1. Scientific Realism

• Focus: Science seeks to describe the world as it really is, independent of human perception.
• Key Figures: Hilary Putnam, Bas van Fraassen (constructive empiricism challenges this directly).
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Emphasizes static, objective truths rather than relational and dynamic processes.

---

2. Mechanistic Reductionism

• Focus: Complex phenomena can be fully explained by breaking them into their constituent parts and underlying mechanisms.
• Key Figures: Derived from Newton, Descartes; defended in modern biology by figures like Francis Crick.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Opposes relational emergence and prioritizes parts over wholes.

---

3. Emergentism

• Focus: Complex systems exhibit emergent properties that cannot be reduced to the sum of their parts.
• Key Figures: Terrence Deacon, Mark Bedau.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Shares similarities but lacks Whitehead’s metaphysical emphasis on interconnectedness and cosmic becoming.

---

4. Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM)

• Focus: Reality is fundamentally relational; physical properties depend on the interaction between systems.
• Key Figures: Carlo Rovelli.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Similar relational approach but limited to quantum contexts, without a broader metaphysical framework.

---

5. Information-Theoretic Ontology

• Focus: Reality is fundamentally informational rather than material.
• Key Figures: John Wheeler (“It from Bit”), Luciano Floridi.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Focuses on information as primary, rather than dynamic processes and experience.

---

6. Structural Realism

• Focus: The structure of scientific theories reflects the real structure of the world, even if the entities themselves are unknown.
• Key Figures: John Worrall, James Ladyman.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Prioritizes abstract structures over the evolving nature of entities.

---

7. Naturalism (Pragmatic and Scientific)

• Focus: Science is the best method for understanding reality, grounded in empirical observation and human practices.
• Key Figures: W.V.O. Quine, Richard Dawkins (biological naturalism).
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Rejects metaphysical speculation and focuses only on what science can empirically validate.

---

8. Neo-Materialism

• Focus: A revitalized materialist view emphasizing matter’s dynamism and agency.
• Key Figures: Karen Barad (agential realism), Manuel DeLanda.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Material-centric rather than prioritizing relationality and creativity of processes.

---

9. Complexity Theory

• Focus: Studies how complex systems and patterns arise from simple rules and interactions.
• Key Figures: Stuart Kauffman, Geoffrey West.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Focused on systems and emergent behavior, but lacks metaphysical grounding in cosmic relationality.

---

10. Integral Theory

• Focus: Integrates science, spirituality, and psychology into a comprehensive framework for understanding reality.
• Key Figures: Ken Wilber.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Emphasizes hierarchical integration of disciplines rather than metaphysical relationality of all entities.

---

11. Phenomenology of Science

• Focus: Studies science as a human practice embedded in experience and interpretation.
• Key Figures: Edmund Husserl, Maurice Merleau-Ponty.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Prioritizes subjective experience without extending to metaphysical claims about reality.

---

12. Posthumanism and New Materialism

• Focus: Rethinks the role of humans in the universe, emphasizing non-human agency and interconnectedness.
• Key Figures: Rosi Braidotti, Bruno Latour.
• Contrast with Process Philosophy: Often critiques traditional metaphysics, while process philosophy expands metaphysical concepts.

Observation 9 - To the Reader:

Over the years my attraction to Whitehead has been twofold:

• Firstly, in developing a process-based supernatural theology as a Christian 'theology qua theology' on its own in juxtaposition with the church's traditional theology however it leans - whether in neo-Platonic Hellenistic terms, Catholic Scholastic, or Protestant Lutheran, Methodist, Reformed terms, or in neo-orthodox and radical liberal terms.

• And secondly, in recognition that the church continues to struggle to develop a sufficient natural theology which connects God to science as it sways between the influences of a mythical-magical faith and the movements of religious anti-intellectualism. Perhaps Whitehead may help here as well.

Why? In Whitehead I find that both theology and science are more easily wedded together without the existential conflict ripping the church apart as it fights to keep God in both the pews and academia. Whitehead's processual cosmology provides a very roomy and intelligent framework for God and science to play well together.

Thus my blog here at Relevancy22 (circa 2009+). I have developed this site to connect both theology andn science with one another. It wasn't necessary to restate a biblical or systematic theology so much as to use those subjects in developing a new philosophical language and foundation on which religious faith might be helped.

I

In Whitehead I have found that the church is better helped in forcing it back out of it's more mystical forms of 'naive realism' and rather back into conversation with the world's many cultural conversations. This would include conversations with radical ethics, political division, environmentalism, anthropological evolution, and relevant social conversations re liberation theology, women's medical-and-cultural rights, LGBTQ+, world cooperation, etc.

So then, at this point in my work of reconstructing a sufficient Christian faith irrespective of it's past historical forms it seems that Whitehead's process thought is the rock on which to build a God-ly theology.... But certainly not the sands of modern Scientific Enlightenment, older forms of German Idealism such as Karl Barth, any of the newer forms of Catholic Scholasticism, Calvinistic Evangelic thought, and such like. All of which in some part of their teachings have each glommed onto their own specific religious adaptations of anti-intellectualism and religious secularity because of each-and-all's present inadequate theistic and natural theistic doctrinnaires.

II

I would also like to note re my own scientific criticism, that a few articles back I had put up a lecture series with Dr. Tim Eastman's exploration of how the natural sciences might better connect with nature using Whiteheadian thought than it would when using scientific realism. Whitehead's process philosophy gives to both the church and to science a better organic connection between one to the other and to creation at large. It is why I feel Whitehead's process philosophy appears to be so fundamental to my own exploration of Process-based Theism and Natural Theology. I find it centrally located to the most persistent questions which many, if not all, global religions and cultures, and science itself, are facing today.... Whether economically, politically, socially, psychologically, scientifically, or spiriturally.

III

Finally, I might term this latter exploration of "spirituality" in processual terms as process-based panpsychism which allows for the non-physical, perhaps quantum, and immaterial exploration of the universe's more psychic categories using such non-scientific, psychic human terminologies as feelings, lure, urgency, freedom, hope, existential conflict, consciousness, and etc.

Observation 10

In Tim Eastman's Logoi framework "quantum physics meets Whitehead" giving to the sciences such as AI and neuroscience a process-based cosmological metaphysic and ontology whcih seems to be more helpful than the mechanical, reductionist clock-work framework used by Newton and Einstein.

To show why plasma-radiation physicist Eastman's process title, "Untying the Gordian Knot" is pertinent I'll leave a 2-day old discussion by Brian Greene of WSF in the comments explaining how Neils Bohr thought any cosmological philosophy was unnecessary (Bohr proposed an assumed nativity in his preference for a science-only-reality).

Please respond...

ChatGPT

Your statement highlights a significant shift in how science can integrate with philosophy, particularly through frameworks like Tim Eastman’s Logoi framework, which draws on Whitehead's process philosophy. This approach challenges the reductionist, mechanistic views associated with Newtonian and Einsteinian paradigms by proposing a relational, dynamic cosmology more fitting for contemporary advancements like quantum physics, AI, and neuroscience.

In this context:

Tim Eastman’s Contribution:

• His book, "Untying the Gordian Knot," explores how process philosophy can resolve metaphysical and ontological tensions in modern science.

• By adopting Whiteheadian relational metaphysics, Eastman provides a framework that incorporates interconnectedness, becoming, and emergent properties, addressing the limitations of static and mechanistic paradigms.

Brian Greene and Neils Bohr:

• Neils Bohr's dismissal of philosophy as unnecessary reflects a common sentiment in 20th-century physics, where empirical results seemed sufficient without deeper metaphysical underpinnings.

• However, as Greene and his guest (likely Sabine Hossenfelder or another physicist) suggest, the increasing complexities of quantum phenomena, neuroscience, and AI demand a cosmological metaphysic and ontology capable of handling probability, emergence, and interrelation—concepts absent from classical physics.

Why the Shift is Pertinent:

• The reductionist view of the universe as a clockwork mechanism breaks down in quantum physics, where uncertainty, superposition, and entanglement defy simple cause-and-effect relationships.

• A process-based metaphysic, like Eastman's Logoi, aligns more naturally with the dynamic, relational nature of quantum phenomena, providing a cosmological lens for exploring not only the universe’s complexities but also the interplay between consciousness and matter.

Relevance for AI and Neuroscience:

• AI and neuroscience grapple with emergent phenomena, such as consciousness, learning, and relationality, which are not reducible to deterministic inputs and outputs.

• A process-oriented cosmology supports the idea of interconnected, adaptive systems evolving over time, enabling a richer understanding of intelligence—both artificial and natural.

Conclusion

This shift reflects the growing recognition (even among empirically-minded scientists like Greene) that science cannot advance in isolation from a robust philosophical grounding.

• Would you like to explore Eastman’s Logoi framework further or unpack its implications for specific fields like AI, neuroscience, or cosmology?

• Would you like to delve deeper into how one of these philosophies compares to Whitehead’s process philosophy in more detail?

Observation 11

Please discuss Whitehead in comparison with today's religious and scientific disconnects between one another...

ChatGPT

Here’s a concise restatement and reflection on your observation:

1. A Need for Better “Natural Theology”

   • You highlight the church’s struggle to reconcile faith and science when relying on inadequate or outdated theological frameworks.
   • In your view, many traditional approaches (e.g., medieval scholasticism, modern Enlightenment, German Idealism, or Calvinistic Evangelicalism) have either minimized science or framed it in ways that stifle open intellectual inquiry.

2. Whitehead’s Processual Cosmology

   • Whitehead’s emphasis on becoming rather than static being creates a flexible yet rich context in which theology and science can co-inform each other without conflict.
   • This cosmology offers a “roomy and intelligent framework” where concepts like God, natural processes, evolution, and human culture can coexist meaningfully.
   • It also combats “naive realism” by insisting on continual, relational interactions—both theological and scientific.

3. Impact on Your Work (Relevancy22 Blog)

   • Since 2009, you’ve been developing what you call a “Christian naturalized theology”—an approach integrating contemporary science (e.g., cosmology, anthropology, cultural studies) and theology.
   • This approach rejects both “magical mysticism” and anti-intellectualism, seeing them as barriers to honest engagement with the modern world.

4. A “Rock” for Theological Construction

   • You liken process thought to a solid foundation (“the rock”) that allows the church to grapple with modern ethical, social, and political questions (e.g., MAGA/Trumpian Christianity, radical ethics, cultural transformations) without losing theological grounding.
   • In contrast, other frameworks (e.g., modern Enlightenment rationalism, German Idealism, Catholic Scholasticism, or Calvinistic Evangelicalism) may function like “sands,” prone to fragmentation or over-rigidity in the face of new scientific and cultural developments.

5. Why This Matters

   • By rooting theology in Whitehead’s process perspective, you see a collaborative, evolving conversation between faith and science—one that honors complexity, emergent understanding, and the continuous re-creation of meaning.
   • Such a stance can revitalize Christian thought, shedding anti-intellectual tendencies and rediscovering a robust “natural theology” that thrives in dialogue rather than in isolation.

Overall, your observation underscores Whitehead’s process philosophy as a bridge that prevents conflict between theological commitments and scientific inquiry, encouraging the church to actively and intelligently engage with modern knowledge and diverse cultural challenges.

Continue to Part 4 of this discussion....

Major Global Philosophies, the Christian Church, and Science, Part 2 of 4

amazon link

Major Global Philosophies,

the Christian Church, and Science

Part 2 of 4

Whitehead's Metaphysical Contributions

Observation 6

Explain how Whitehead relates to each of the metaphysical subfields listed:

1. Cosmology

2. Philosophical Theology

3. Modality (Philosophy of Possibility and Necessity)

4. Causation and Causal Theory

5. Identity and Change

6. Free Will and Determinism

7. Meta-Ontology

8. Philosophy of Time

9. Philosophy of Space

ChatGPT

Whitehead’s metaphysical contributions

Below is a brief survey showing how Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy speaks to various subfields of metaphysics.

In Whitehead’s view, reality is fundamentally in process: each actual entity or “occasion” is momentarily becoming through its relations and prehensions of other entities.

 

1. Cosmology

• Key Idea: Whitehead’s universe is an ongoing creative advance composed of interrelated events (or “actual occasions”).

• Processual Cosmos:

• Reality unfolds through an interplay of creativity and relationality.

• The cosmos is not static but constantly evolving, with novelty emerging at each phase.

• Contrast to Mechanistic Views:

• Unlike Newton’s clockwork cosmos or Einstein’s geometric spacetime, Whitehead’s cosmos is organic and event-based, emphasizing becoming over being.

2. Philosophical Theology

• Key Idea: God and the world exist in dynamic relationship: God has two “natures”—primordial and consequent.

• Dipolar Theism:

• Primordial Nature: God’s conceptual “pole,” where all possibilities (eternal objects) are envisioned.

• Consequent Nature: God’s responsive “pole,” where God feels and integrates the world’s experiences.

• Relevance:

• Overcomes the classical view of an impassible deity by portraying God as co-creative and intimately engaged with creation’s process.

What are Eternal Objects

[ = The Pure Potentials of the Universe ]

by Andrew Davis

3. Modality (Philosophy of Possibility and Necessity)

• Key Idea: Whitehead’s ontology incorporates eternal objects (pure possibilities) that actual occasions select and actualize.

• Possibility & Creativity:

• All possibilities exist in God’s primordial nature, but how they become actual [or actualized] depends on the creative advance of the universe.

• Necessity is typically linked to the laws or patterns that emerge in these processes, but they remain open to novelty in subsequent occasions.

4. Causation and Causal Theory ~ Prehensions

• Key Idea: Causation is internal and relational, described via “prehensions”—the ways an actual occasion feels and integrates the data of previous occasions.

• Efficient & Final Causes:

• Each new occasion is “caused” both by i) what has come before (efficient cause) and by ii) the lure of creative possibilities (final cause).

• Whitehead merges these classical categories into concrescence, the process whereby an actual entity integrates past data and aims at a new unity.

    

5. Identity and Change

• Key Idea: Entities do not remain the “same” by static essence; rather, “personal identity” emerges through an ongoing series (or “society”) of interrelated events.

• Societies of Occasions:

• A “society” (e.g., a living organism, a human self) maintains continuity of pattern and subjective aim through successive actual occasions.

• Change is inherent; identity is the coherence maintained across these changing moments of becoming.

6. Free Will and Determinism

• Key Idea: Each actual occasion has some degree of self-determination or “subjective aim,” influenced but not wholly determined by the past.

• Balanced Approach:

• The past constrains each new occasion (deterministic element), but the final synthesis within the occasion includes creative freedom in choosing how to integrate possibilities.

• God’s “lure” offers ideal possibilities, but actual entities freely concresce them into a unique outcome.

Typical Freewill v Determinism Model

What exists in the universe? Whitehead’s 8 categories of existence
as presented in chapter 2 of Process and Reality (1929/1985).

7. Meta-Ontology

• Key Idea: Whitehead provides a category-rich system describing the fundamental building blocks of reality.

• Core Categories:

• Actual Occasions: The final real entities constituting the universe.

• Prehensions: The relational “graspings” by which occasions incorporate others.

• Eternal Objects: Pure possibilities that occasions can actualize.

• Creativity: The ultimate principle enabling becoming.

• Why It’s Meta-Ontological:

• Whitehead redefines what “to be” means: to be is to be in process, in relation, and in becoming.

8. Philosophy of Time

• Key Idea: Time is not a single continuum but a succession of creative events—each actual occasion arises, integrates the past, and perishes as it becomes part of the new past.

• Concrescence & Transition:

• Concrescence: The internal process of an occasion’s formation in subjective immediacy.

• Transition: Once complete, the occasion becomes an objective datum for subsequent occasions.

• Processual Temporality:

• Time is thus the ongoing chain of emergent “drops of experience,” each adding something new to the flow of reality.

9. Philosophy of Space

• Key Idea: Whitehead conceptualizes space (and time) through the “extensive continuum,” a network of potential relationships among occasions.

• Relational Space:

• Space is not an empty container but a set of potential relationships or regions that actual occasions occupy and define through their mutual prehensions.

• This continuum is abstract; actual occasions realize portions of it.

• Contrast with Absolute Space:

• Unlike Newton’s absolute space or Einstein’s geometric spacetime, Whitehead emphasizes the dynamic interplay of events shaping spatial relations.

Conclusion: Whitehead’s Metaphysical Reach

By recasting reality as a continuum of becoming, Whitehead’s process philosophy intersects deeply with each major subfield of metaphysics. It prioritizes relationships, novelty, and creative interplay—moving away from static substance models toward a fluid, event-based ontology. This not only redefines classical concepts like time, space, and causation but also reshapes how we view identity, free will, and even God in a universe perpetually in the making.

Observation 7

Sketch a table of Whitehead's metaphysical subfields as compared to traditional subfields:

1. Cosmology

2. Philosophical Theology

3. Modality (Philosophy of Possibility and Necessity)

4. Causation and Causal Theory

5. Identity and Change

6. Free Will and Determinism

7. Meta-Ontology

8. Philosophy of Time

9. Philosophy of Space

ChatGPT

Below is a concise table summarizing how Whitehead’s process philosophy speaks to each of the nine subfields of metaphysics. It highlights key ideas, brief explanations, and contrast points with more traditional views. 

In summary, Whitehead’s process philosophy reconfigures the metaphysical subfields around a relational, event-based view of reality. Instead of static substances or rigid determinism, we have constant becoming, cosmic interactivity, and divine co-creativity at every level of existence.

Continue to Part 3 of this discussion....