... so I'm reading a book entitled Philosophers of Process
... it's a collection of essays, and I've really been enjoying it ... Peirce, James, Nietzsche, Alexander, Bergson, Dewey (who I just quoted above) - all have been highly readable and full of ideas that make my neurons light up ... so I come to the section on Whitehead - and the editor says Whitehead's Process and Reality
"represents the culmination of process metaphysics" ... "Wow!" I say to myself, "This is going to be great!"
... not ...
I was thoroughly unprepared for what I found ... none of the preceding essays gave any hint ... heck, even Rescher's Process Metaphysics
gave little clue (now I understand why he kept saying that process philosophy is not just Whitehead!).
First, Whitehead looks to be one of those unreadable philosophers - lots of sentences where "actuality" and "potentiality" make up about half of the words, all in a fury that signifies nothing ... still, I plodded on because this is the man
when it comes to process philosophy ... but after wading through 30 or so pages, I threw in the towel ... not simply because of the unreadability, but because of the fact that what sense I could
make of it just wasn't making sense: processes of becoming that terminate in satisfaction once they've reached their teleological goal of union with God's primordial nature
... say what?! ... we were supposed to be headed for home plate! - how did we end up out in left field?! ... I mean, c'mon! - how many people do you know of who have died of satisfaction?!
I dunno - maybe I've got it all wrong ... maybe the essays in this volume aren't representative; maybe I'm just stupid ... but if these Whitehead essays really are where process philosophy is today, then they are not the culmination as far as I'm concerned - they're on the wrong side of the summit, headed down ... ... ...