A key consideration in the selection of these eight titles was the scarcity of the original editions - most have never been reprinted and should therefore supplement existing library holdings of 17th and 18th century British thought. The only title published more recently, Luce's definitive biography of Berkeley, was selected because of its exceptional importance for modern scholarship - here it is included with a new introduction by David Berman.

Whitehead had an extraordinary capacity for inventing new concepts and getting beyond accepted categories. Even after nearly thirty years Process and Reality remains almost as baffling as the day it was published, and the task of evaluating its complex metaphysics has barely been begun. There are so many loose ends and apparent contradictions in it that it is very tempting to dismiss it as mere undisciplined speculation, suggestive perhaps, but of no great value as a system. Still, there is (...) no doubt that Whitehead had the capacity for sustained analysis, and it remains possible that he has not been understood. Mr. Lawrence has simplified the first steps towards a better understanding of these complex doctrines, and given us sufficient glimpses of what lies ahead to make it appear worthwhile persevering. (shrink)

Introduction I. The Aim: Defining Whitehead's Categories of Existence Ontology is the study of being or beings. But what is being? Which are the beings? ...

This is a very good and important book: good as a piece of philosophical exposition, important because of its subject-matter. The quality of the author’s writing reminds one of Gilson, whom he often quotes. Dr. Leclerc has the two qualities most admired in Gilson, lucidity and a capacity for bringing out the distinctive characters of the doctrines he discusses. The great temptation of the expositor is to reduce an original theory to terms, either of ordinary language or of some other (...) theory, in which the differences between one philosopher and another are reduced to matters of emphasis, or of arbitrary decision between a priori alternatives. The only satisfactory way of expounding any worthwhile philosophy is to give life and clarity to its own characteristic terms and ways of argument. (shrink)

The article elucidates and defends whitehead's claim that john locke anticipated the main positions of the philosophy of organism. It is argued that the major philosophical categories of locke's epistemology and whitehead's process philosophy perform similar functions. The functional parallels between the mind and the actual entity, Simple ideas and objectified actual entities, Mental operations and concrescence, Ideas and objects, And power and the ontological principle are delineated and examined. The conclusion extends a necessary caveat in assessing (...) the philosophy of organism via locke's epistemology. (shrink)

Both Hegel and Whitehead endeavored to develop a philosophy that was comprehensive. Yet there is little direct contact from the one to the other. This makes any comparison a creative venture. George R. Lucas, Jr. has found the appropriate forum for meeting such a challenge. In 1984 he organized an international symposium on Hegel and Whitehead at Fordham University, and this book contains a selection of the papers presented. The result is appropriately dialectical. Some, like E. E. Harris, (...) argue that in essence Hegel and Whitehead, despite the difference in vocabulary, are saying the same thing. And George Kline concludes that "what for Hegel is the concept's reconciling mediation of contradictory opposites is for Whitehead the concrescent occasion's reconciling conversion of exclusion". In a similar vein Ernest Wolf-Gazo discovers a parallel between Hegel's negation and Whitehead's contrast. Others stress the differences, and opt for one to the prejudice of the other. Klaus Hartmann claims that Hegel's type of explanation is more successful than that of Whitehead; Tom Rockmore suggests that Hegel's self-reflexive moment is more thoroughgoing than anything Whitehead advances; and J. N. Findlay looks at Whitehead from the perspective of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature. In contrast Ivor Leclerc concludes that Whitehead's was "the greatest attempt after Kant to provide a solid and secure foundation for scientific theory and the knowledge of nature" ; and Jan Van der Veken prefers Whitehead's more open and humble interpretation of God and Creativity to Hegel's arrogance. A third group of papers, like John Smith's "The Meaning of Religious Experience" and Curtis Carter's "On Aesthetic Symbols" explore the diversity while remarking on the relative advantages of one or the other on this feature or that. (shrink)

Whitehead had an extraordinary capacity for inventing new concepts and getting beyond accepted categories. Even after nearly thirty years Process and Reality remains almost as baffling as the day it was published, and the task of evaluating its complex metaphysics has barely been begun. There are so many loose ends and apparent contradictions in it that it is very tempting to dismiss it as mere undisciplined speculation, suggestive perhaps, but of no great value as a system. Still, there is (...) no doubt that Whitehead had the capacity for sustained analysis, and it remains possible that he has not been understood. Mr. Lawrence has simplified the first steps towards a better understanding of these complex doctrines, and given us sufficient glimpses of what lies ahead to make it appear worthwhile persevering. (shrink)

A cross-cultural comparsion of creativity that introduces Neo-Confucian discourse as a sophisticated dialogue partner with modern western speculative philosophy and theology.

The Repugnant Conclusion served an important purpose in catalyzing and inspiring the pioneering stage of population ethics research. We believe, however, that the Repugnant Conclusion now receives too much focus. Avoiding the Repugnant Conclusion should no longer be the central goal driving population ethics research, despite its importance to the fundamental accomplishments of the existing literature.

Pure Land Buddhism ascribes to Amida some of the roles ascribed to God by Whitehead. The failure of Whiteheadians to clarify how God can play these roles also leaves doubtful the claim of Pure Land Buddhism. On the other hand, Whitehead’s emphasis on perpetual perishing reinforces the original Buddhist teaching of impermanence and together they provide the basic insight for authentic life.

The principal goal of this essay is to examine the manner and extent to which one actual occasion can have value for others according to Whitehead. This question divides into two, depending upon whether we are considering the relation of an entity to its past or to its future. The essay closes with a defense of the monistic interpretation of creativity in Whitehead.

This is a very good and important book: good as a piece of philosophical exposition, important because of its subject-matter. The quality of the author’s writing reminds one of Gilson, whom he often quotes. Dr. Leclerc has the two qualities most admired in Gilson, lucidity and a capacity for bringing out the distinctive characters of the doctrines he discusses. The great temptation of the expositor is to reduce an original theory to terms, either of ordinary language or of some other (...) theory, in which the differences between one philosopher and another are reduced to matters of emphasis, or of arbitrary decision between a priori alternatives. The only satisfactory way of expounding any worthwhile philosophy is to give life and clarity to its own characteristic terms and ways of argument. (shrink)