Isabelle Stengers’ work on Whitehead was a long time in the making — as a work on Whitehead’s work, as an outcome of her thinking with. Thinking with Whitehead has 23 ratings and 2 reviews. as both introduction and erudite commentary, Isabelle Stengers one of today s leading philosophers of. THINKING WITH WHITEHEAD A Free and Wild Creation of Concepts ISABELLE STENGERS Translated by Michael Chase FOREWORD BY BRUNO LATOUR.
|Published (Last):||10 April 2016|
|PDF File Size:||13.83 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.14 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The speculative operation attempted by Whitehead could well be more relevant today than it was in his day, because it breaks with the claim to anonymity that inhabits us and constitutes us, still and again, as “the thinking head of humanity. The first fourteen chapters that discuss the “temporal” development of Whitehead’s thought “From the Philosophy of Nature to Metaphysics” begin with a hermeneutical invitation to the reader to view the Whiteheadian adventure of thought as a dislocation from all commonly held beliefs and theories about nature and the world in general because it asks “questions that will separate them from every consensus.
Arthur Witherall rated it it was amazing Oct 08, As far as the “technical” notes arc concerned, most of them would have referred to the network of discussions and controversies that weave the links between process philosophers.
Thinking with Whitehead
English] Thinking with Whitehead: A very careful walk with Whitehead’s major books but a with a refusal to grant him ultimate authority even of his own work. He also suffers from the terrible stigma of hav- ing indulged in metaphysics, something one is no longer supposed to do after the edicts of the first “W,” even iwth those who think that meta- physics is passe know usually much less science than Whitehead and swallow — without an ounce of criticism — hook, line, and sinker the en- tirety of metaphysical beliefs about nature that one can easily derive by lumping together the least-common-denominator views of geneticists and so-called cognitive scientists.
Yet he did not devote himself to mathematics alone. Stephen Williamson marked it as to-read May 25, Living actuality is not a given, but an achievement won at the cost of alternatives, and maintained at the cost of the robbery of other actualities of their life. Stengers probes the uniqueness and necessity of speculative philosophy and its “intellectual intuition” by exploring its criterion of reciprocal presupposition.
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. The community picked out by this “we” is the one Whitehead is addressing in the first instance.
Importance is a Whiteheadian generic notion. This article has no associated abstract.
The secrecy derives from the legacy of a philosopher who, discretely and without polemics, without ever ask- ing his readers to thrill to the audacity and radicalism of the risk or to the threat of isolation, but with an obstinate tenderness, undertook to forge a conceptual language that forces those who acquire a taste for it to think. Whitehead’s contemporaries could, with amusement, perplexity, or scandal, wonder whether one should really incur the risks of a specula- tive operation, moving Heaven and Earth, God and matter, to remedy difficulties that are ultimately secondary: Une lihre et sauvage creation de concepts.
May Stengers’ rendering of such an alternative congregation of thought for a new future of civilization steer us toward a more peaceful, polite, and less viciously violent vision. What defi- nition of what matters do I share with them? Bryanbannon added it Aug 10, Instead, it proposes a way of addressing those who are divided into two antagonistic poles.
Full text of “Isabelle Stengers – Thinking With Whitehead (Foreword & Introduction)”
This is one of the most difficult books I have ever attempted to read even though I have been reading Whitehead off and on for at wjth 55 years. Stephanie rated it it was amazing Mar 01, Another testimony to this choice is the absence in the index of the “great Whiteheadian concepts. Quite the contrary, one would discern the possible destruction of the experimental adventure if the knowledge econ- omy were to prevail and transform competent colleagues into complacent colleagues, because they share the same dependencies.
Being a standpoint, a perspective, paying attention to the aspects of its own integration, such a characterization of an event is meant to generate Whitehead’s argument, as unfolded in Science and the Modern Worldagainst the “fallacy of misplaced concreteness” which excludes standpoints by introducing exactness in describing vacuous matter and, thereby, the bifurcation of nature.
Yet they have im- posed themselves upon me as themes, in the musical sense of the term, and I thought that the index might help those who might encounter one of these themes in the manner of “well, here it is again” and would wonder where it has already intervened. Those “psychic additions,” as Whitehead calls them, are parts of common sense, to be sure, but they are unfortunately of no use to science, since they have no reality, even though they are the stuff out of which dreams and values are made.
Alfred North Whitehead has never gone out of print, but for a time he was decidedly out of fashion in the English-speaking world. How could one fash- ion a textual apparatus that could introduce the unforeseen nature of the objection that hinders the unfolding of a sovereign intentionality?
As the title indicates so well, the aim is to think with Whitehead. Nor is anyone supposed to be unaware that GddePs famous theorem sounded the death-knoll for this undertaking. In both cases, a reciprocal influence is implied, that puts to the test both what brings about and what is brought about. The God conceived by Whitehead, and affirmed by the blind man Ork, thus earned him an improbable survival through the intermediary of American theology.
Yale University Press, Whitehead, Modes of Thought New York: A creative and insightful work that will infect my thought for quite sometime. No more than laboratory experimentation can be reduced to careful, systematic observation, can experience or the transformation of experience brought about by a scientific proposition be reduced to a new way of seeing.
Jeffrey Tallane rated it it was amazing Oct 03, What do you expect? Amy Karofsky – – Philosophy and Theology 15 2: Whitehead’s speculative philosophy is indeed situated “after Kant,” after the shock constituted for philosophy by the Kantian prohibi- tions, because this philosophy does not communicate with a “right to think.