In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

WHITEHEAD: CHALLENGING A CHALLENGE IN A RECENT article Walter E. Stokes, S. J., stated his aim in the first sentence: "Whitehead's insight into the unity of order in the universe presents a unique challenge to theistic realists in the Catholic tradition, who may in the broadest sense be called followers of Aquinas." 1 Although the author of this assertion admits that he will " deal with Thomism dialectically and characterize it by certain tendencies and modes of thought," 2 the tendencies and modes of thought which he appears to expose are hardly Thomistic at all. Is this perhaps the reason Fr. Stokes rather arbitrarily restricts" theistic realism" to "Thomism "? More germanely, the error is in placing Alfred North Whitehead in the general stream of Greek philosophy. This is the small mistake at the beginning which is a great one in the end.3 Ignoring post-Kantian German philosophy , the article seems rather to depict all philosophers as either Platonic or Aristotelian: into this Procrustean bed must be placed all subsequent philosophers.4 Nevertheless, the author should have recognized the tremendous Hegelian influence upon Whitehead; Fr. Stokes does recognize the deep inspiration of Wordsworth upon Whitehead.5 Yet, what can the appellation " romantic poet " mean? Does it imply that Wordsworth was a Platonist? an Aristotelian? On the contrary, no one attributes the romantic label to either of these Greek philoso1 The Rev. Walter E. Stokes, S. J., "Whitehead's Challenge to Theistic Realism," THE NEw ScHOLASTICISM, XXXVIII (1964) 1-21. This same challenge appeared in the Proceedings of The American Catholic Philosophical Association, XXXVI (1962) 134-142, and in the Papers for Discussion at the Twenty-Fifth Annual Convention of the Jesuit Philosophical Association (Woodstock, 1963) 18-38. •" Whitehead's Challenge to Theistic Realism," p. 1. 3 Aristotle, De Coelo, I, 5, 271 b 13. • Because Thomists are likewise " heirs to the wisdom of Plato and Aristotle, they essentially agree with Whitehead's approach to philosophy." Stokes, art. cit., p. 5. 5 Ibid., p. 3. 80 WHITEHEAD: CHALLENGING A CHALLENGE 81 phers.6 It is, in fact, only because of the strong idealistic 7 cocktails of which Whitehead imbibed that the latter's notion of " solidarity " is rendered intelligible-that notion which is at the very basis of Fr. Stokes' article.8 Also indicative of this idealistic element in Whitehead's metaphysics is the interminable emphasis on relations: Unlike Plato and Aristotle, both Hegel and Whitehead unambiguously inculcate a doctrine of internal relations. Here, also, Fr. Stokes manifestly approaches the Hegelian archway 9 but fails to make contact with the nineteenth century. Is this idealistic entry-like the palatial gates of the Lion of Judah-guarded by two hungry lions named Plato and Aristotle? 10 Obviously overlooking Whitehead's indebtedness to Hegel, the article proposes that, when Whitehead concerned himself with "the central problem of philosophy," he placed himself "in the tradition of Plato and Aristotle." 11 This assigning of Whitehead to the Greek tradition may be acceptable only if we 6 This romantic influence upon Whitehead is discernible throughout his works. Thus, for example, in summarizing his philosophical views ("Immortality," The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead ed. P. Schilpp [New York, 1951], Whitehead unambiguously accentuates the notion of value, and in Science and The Modem World (New York, 1948), p. 96, he explicitly declares: "The romantic reaction was a protest on behalf of value." Cf. ibid., pp. 95, 199. Religion in The Making (New York, 1957), p. 144. 7 In his "Autobiographical Notes," The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, op. cit., p. 7, Whitehead confesses that he "nearly knew by heart parts of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason." Reference to Friedrich Schelling can be found in The Concept of Nature (Cambridge, Eng., 1955), p. 47. And pervading at least his major works is the constant reference to Francis Bradley; see, for instance, Adventures of Ideas (Middlesex, Eng., 1948), pp. 269-270. Cf. also Process and Reality (New York, 1929), pp. 304-305. Now, can we seriously believe that Kant, Schelling , Hegel, and Bradley are Platonists? Aristotelians? 8 "Let us explore the possibility of assimilating Whitehead's notion of the solidarity of the universe into a living Thomism." Stokes, art...

pdf

Share