Shakespeare's Hamlet was written over 400 years ago, drawing from stories Shakespeare himself inherited and wove into new forms. Whitehead's writings were composed nearly 100 years ago, and he, too, drew from inherited sources and wove them into new forms. Both were deeply imaginative writers, one literary and one philosophical. They are rich in their vitality, not because they offer final answers, but because they refuse to suffocate life with "final answers" that foreclose further adventures of ideas. They offer likely stories about what the world is like. Their sparkle, their beauty, lies in their capacity to take us on journeys ourselves, amid which we, too, seek stories to live by, but not final stories. If we read them rightly, we move forward in a spirit of adventure. To use Whitehead's language, they function for us "lures for feeling."
How can Whitehead be read
one hundred years from now?
On September 27, 2024, a conference will be held at Harvard titled A Century of Process Thought: Commemorating Whitehead's Legacy at Harvard and Beyond. This conference will celebrate the 100th anniversary of Alfred North Whitehead’s appointment at Harvard University, exploring the impact of his philosophical ideas on various disciplines and his influence on Chinese scholars and thought. Through scholarly presentations and discussions, the event will delve into the development of Whitehead's thought during his tenure at Harvard, his Chinese disciples at Harvard and their contributions, and the broader interaction between Whitehead's philosophy and Chinese intellectual traditions.
While this conference will look back at the richness of the past, a complementary question arises: What about the next 100 years, both in the West and in China? Will Whitehead be read in the decades to come? I suggest that his works will be read only if we approach his philosophy similarly to how we approach works of art—a Shakespearean play, for example—and not simply as an answer machine. Here I have in mind his philosophical works, his works in history, and his works in mathematics. They can be read freely, in an open-ended way, evocative of further questions. Only then will they be read a hundred years from now.
My point here stems mainly from my impression of enthusiasts in the West, whom I might call "fervent Whiteheadians." I may be one of them. Many fervent enthusiasts of process philosophy are especially interested in Whitehead’s metaphysics as articulated most systematically in Process and Reality. They find it attractive because it provides "answers" to cosmological, epistemological, aesthetic, and theological questions. Increasingly, people appreciate it for its implications for society and life on earth, including economic, political, and, most importantly, ecological implications. However, there's a potential trap that, I believe,
Whitehead himself would reject: the trap of approaching Whitehead as an "answer machine." This approach can become a form of idolatry, shutting off questioning, curiosity about the world, and a willingness to consider alternative and competing points of view. It also stifles a sense of open-ended adventure, both intellectual and spiritual. Whitehead's philosophy can then seem like a magic box into which one inputs questions, only to receive answers in an almost algorithmic way, even if personalized by the questioner.
There is an irony here. Strangely and ironically, Whitehead's philosophy can become an obstacle to the kind of "process" it ostensibly advocates. This is why it can be helpful to approach Whitehead's philosophy not simply as a set of answers to questions but rather as a Shakespearean play, offering countless "lures for feeling" (Whitehead's phrase)—some poetic, some analytic, some metaphysical, and some mathematical—that inspire further thought and creativity.
One of the most dramatic examples of this, perhaps Shakespeare's most famous play globally, is Hamlet. It is often described as a play of questions, not answers, with questions emerging from contrasts that are not easily reconciled. Consider the complexity of Hamlet's character. He embodies a range of unreconciled contraries—action and inaction, reason and emotion, duty and desire, vengeance and compassion, life and death—which Whitehead would call "contrasts" that contribute to the richness of his character. He is a young prince grappling with profound existential questions, caught in a web of moral dilemmas, emotional turmoil, and philosophical introspection.
Hamlet's introspective nature and his quest for meaning and truth resonate with the spirit of process philosophy, which emphasizes the importance of lived experience and the constant flux of becoming. Whitehead himself had a restless mind, always interested in new and different ways of thinking. Just as Hamlet cannot be easily understood or categorized, Whitehead's ideas resist simplistic interpretations. They invite us to delve deeper, embrace ambiguity, and explore the myriad possibilities of existence. In this way, both Hamlet and Whitehead's philosophy serve as reminders of the richness and complexity of life, urging us to approach it with a spirit of openness and curiosity.
My point is not that Whitehead is an artist. It is not that Whitehead's philosophy presents characters as would a playwright or, in our time, a gifted filmmaker. Whitehead often speaks poetically, but not as poetically as Shakespeare or Wordsworth, a poet whom he greatly admired. My point is that his written texts can be approached and enjoyed as if they are poems, plays, or films.
I realize that this will never be the only way they are approached. They will also be approached by those who yearn for answers, including systematic answers, albeit never "final." I am among the tentative answer-lovers. But I also know the dangers of this approach and, dare I say, the immaturity of this approach. But I suggest that if we approach his texts in both ways—as open-ended plays filled with lures for feeling and as philosophical texts purporting to offer answers, often oscillating between the two approaches and sometimes combining them—we will be approaching his philosophy in a more mature, indeed Whiteheadian, way.
Additionally, and happily, we can see the systematic side of Whitehead as emerging from within, not outside of, his imaginative side. He was an explorer, and the "systems" he offers are themselves lures for feeling, not boxes into which life is ensconced, or, to use a metaphor from Hamlet, not dead skulls of the sort Hamlet gazes into. In the graveyard scene, Hamlet contemplates the skull of Yorick, the court jester, and reflects on the inevitability of death and the transient nature of life. Whitehead would speak of this as the "perpetual perishing" of life. This moment encapsulates the complexity and depth of existence: a complexity that cannot be reduced to simple or final answers. If we turn Whitehead into an answer-machine, it becomes a skull, not a living organism.
I realize this short note is parochial. I speak from a Western perspective steeped in the history of Western literature. For those among us who are unfamiliar with Shakespeare or, for that matter, Hamlet, the same point can be made with reference to film, poetry, music, or dance. We can read Whitehead's philosophy in the spirit with which we might approach a complex and nuanced film that leaves us with more questions than we began with. And certainly, if we are Chinese, we can draw from Chinese sources. For instance, consider the Chinese classic novel Journey to the West, which, much like Whitehead's works, offers a rich potpourri of allegorical and philosophical themes.
The story's characters and events are not mere answers to moral or spiritual questions but are instead evocative of deeper reflections on human nature and the cosmos. The key is to avoid letting Whitehead's writing devolve into a Whitehead answer-machine or a box into which we feed questions seeking definitive answers, like a calculator. Then, and only then, will our approach be open and relational, creative and free-spirited. Then, and only then, will Whitehead's writings continue to sparkle.
One way that it will sparkle, freed from idolatries named above, it to be studied in universities. And here, the remarkable insights of Whitehead on so many fronts will be explored, hopefully, by scholars and artists.
While this conference will look back at the richness of the past, a complementary question arises: What about the next 100 years, both in the West and in China? Will Whitehead be read in the decades to come? I suggest that his works will be read only if we approach his philosophy similarly to how we approach works of art—a Shakespearean play, for example—and not simply as an answer machine. Here I have in mind his philosophical works, his works in history, and his works in mathematics. They can be read freely, in an open-ended way, evocative of further questions. Only then will they be read a hundred years from now.
My point here stems mainly from my impression of enthusiasts in the West, whom I might call "fervent Whiteheadians." I may be one of them. Many fervent enthusiasts of process philosophy are especially interested in Whitehead’s metaphysics as articulated most systematically in Process and Reality. They find it attractive because it provides "answers" to cosmological, epistemological, aesthetic, and theological questions. Increasingly, people appreciate it for its implications for society and life on earth, including economic, political, and, most importantly, ecological implications. However, there's a potential trap that, I believe,
Whitehead himself would reject: the trap of approaching Whitehead as an "answer machine." This approach can become a form of idolatry, shutting off questioning, curiosity about the world, and a willingness to consider alternative and competing points of view. It also stifles a sense of open-ended adventure, both intellectual and spiritual. Whitehead's philosophy can then seem like a magic box into which one inputs questions, only to receive answers in an almost algorithmic way, even if personalized by the questioner.
There is an irony here. Strangely and ironically, Whitehead's philosophy can become an obstacle to the kind of "process" it ostensibly advocates. This is why it can be helpful to approach Whitehead's philosophy not simply as a set of answers to questions but rather as a Shakespearean play, offering countless "lures for feeling" (Whitehead's phrase)—some poetic, some analytic, some metaphysical, and some mathematical—that inspire further thought and creativity.
One of the most dramatic examples of this, perhaps Shakespeare's most famous play globally, is Hamlet. It is often described as a play of questions, not answers, with questions emerging from contrasts that are not easily reconciled. Consider the complexity of Hamlet's character. He embodies a range of unreconciled contraries—action and inaction, reason and emotion, duty and desire, vengeance and compassion, life and death—which Whitehead would call "contrasts" that contribute to the richness of his character. He is a young prince grappling with profound existential questions, caught in a web of moral dilemmas, emotional turmoil, and philosophical introspection.
Hamlet's introspective nature and his quest for meaning and truth resonate with the spirit of process philosophy, which emphasizes the importance of lived experience and the constant flux of becoming. Whitehead himself had a restless mind, always interested in new and different ways of thinking. Just as Hamlet cannot be easily understood or categorized, Whitehead's ideas resist simplistic interpretations. They invite us to delve deeper, embrace ambiguity, and explore the myriad possibilities of existence. In this way, both Hamlet and Whitehead's philosophy serve as reminders of the richness and complexity of life, urging us to approach it with a spirit of openness and curiosity.
My point is not that Whitehead is an artist. It is not that Whitehead's philosophy presents characters as would a playwright or, in our time, a gifted filmmaker. Whitehead often speaks poetically, but not as poetically as Shakespeare or Wordsworth, a poet whom he greatly admired. My point is that his written texts can be approached and enjoyed as if they are poems, plays, or films.
I realize that this will never be the only way they are approached. They will also be approached by those who yearn for answers, including systematic answers, albeit never "final." I am among the tentative answer-lovers. But I also know the dangers of this approach and, dare I say, the immaturity of this approach. But I suggest that if we approach his texts in both ways—as open-ended plays filled with lures for feeling and as philosophical texts purporting to offer answers, often oscillating between the two approaches and sometimes combining them—we will be approaching his philosophy in a more mature, indeed Whiteheadian, way.
Additionally, and happily, we can see the systematic side of Whitehead as emerging from within, not outside of, his imaginative side. He was an explorer, and the "systems" he offers are themselves lures for feeling, not boxes into which life is ensconced, or, to use a metaphor from Hamlet, not dead skulls of the sort Hamlet gazes into. In the graveyard scene, Hamlet contemplates the skull of Yorick, the court jester, and reflects on the inevitability of death and the transient nature of life. Whitehead would speak of this as the "perpetual perishing" of life. This moment encapsulates the complexity and depth of existence: a complexity that cannot be reduced to simple or final answers. If we turn Whitehead into an answer-machine, it becomes a skull, not a living organism.
I realize this short note is parochial. I speak from a Western perspective steeped in the history of Western literature. For those among us who are unfamiliar with Shakespeare or, for that matter, Hamlet, the same point can be made with reference to film, poetry, music, or dance. We can read Whitehead's philosophy in the spirit with which we might approach a complex and nuanced film that leaves us with more questions than we began with. And certainly, if we are Chinese, we can draw from Chinese sources. For instance, consider the Chinese classic novel Journey to the West, which, much like Whitehead's works, offers a rich potpourri of allegorical and philosophical themes.
The story's characters and events are not mere answers to moral or spiritual questions but are instead evocative of deeper reflections on human nature and the cosmos. The key is to avoid letting Whitehead's writing devolve into a Whitehead answer-machine or a box into which we feed questions seeking definitive answers, like a calculator. Then, and only then, will our approach be open and relational, creative and free-spirited. Then, and only then, will Whitehead's writings continue to sparkle.
One way that it will sparkle, freed from idolatries named above, it to be studied in universities. And here, the remarkable insights of Whitehead on so many fronts will be explored, hopefully, by scholars and artists.
Who and Where will Whitehead be Read
one hundred years from now?
Philosophy and Metaphysics
- Integration into Mainstream Philosophy: Whitehead's process philosophy might become a foundational perspective in mainstream metaphysics, with his ideas on the nature of reality and experience forming a core component of philosophical education.
- Advanced Metaphysical Theories: New metaphysical theories may emerge, building on Whitehead's concepts of becoming, prehension, and actual entities, potentially blending them with insights from quantum mechanics, neuroscience, and other scientific advancements.
Theology and Spirituality
- Process Theology's Evolution: Process theology could evolve into a major theological movement, influencing religious practices and spiritual understanding across various traditions. Whitehead's ideas might be central to new forms of interfaith dialogue and spiritual practice.
- Global Spiritual Philosophy: Whitehead's emphasis on interconnectedness and relationality might resonate with global philosophical trends, contributing to a more holistic and integrated understanding of spirituality and ethics.
Science and Technology
- Philosophy of Technology and AI: Whitehead's process-oriented philosophy could offer valuable insights into the philosophy of technology, particularly in understanding artificial intelligence, robotics, and the nature of consciousness in machines.
- Environmental Philosophy: As environmental concerns continue to grow, Whitehead's holistic view of nature and critique of mechanistic thinking might be increasingly relevant, informing environmental ethics and policies.
Interdisciplinary and Cross-Cultural Studies
- Cross-Disciplinary Integration: Whitehead's ideas may continue to be explored in interdisciplinary contexts, bridging philosophy, science, art, and spirituality. His work could be a touchstone for discussions on the nature of reality, creativity, and the human experience.
- Cross-Cultural Dialogues: Whitehead's thought may play a key role in cross-cultural philosophical dialogues, particularly as global communication and collaboration deepen, highlighting universal themes of interconnectedness and processual change.
Education and Public Discourse
- Educational Curriculum: Whitehead's ideas might become integral to educational curricula, not only in philosophy but also in science, literature, and arts courses. His emphasis on creativity and the processual nature of learning could influence educational philosophies and pedagogies.
- Public Philosophy: Whitehead's thought may continue to engage the public, inspiring discussions on topics ranging from the nature of consciousness to the meaning of life. Public intellectuals, artists, and thinkers may draw on his ideas to address contemporary issues.
Future Technological and Scientific Developments
- Whiteheadian Thought in Future Sciences: Advances in fields like physics, biology, and artificial intelligence might find parallels or inspiration in Whitehead's process philosophy, leading to new theoretical developments that incorporate his ideas on relationality and process.
- Virtual and Augmented Reality: As technology evolves, Whitehead's ideas on perception and reality could influence the development and understanding of virtual and augmented reality environments, shaping how these technologies are conceptualized and experienced.
Art, Music, and Aesthetics
- Artistic Expressions and Process Philosophy: By 2124, Whitehead's process philosophy might significantly influence the arts, encouraging exploration of interconnectedness, becoming, and the fluid nature of reality. His notion of "creative advance into novelty" could inspire new forms of artistic expression, emphasizing innovation, spontaneity, and the dynamic nature of existence.
- Process Aesthetics: An aesthetic theory grounded in Whitehead's philosophy could become a significant field of study, focusing on art as a processual activity that reflects the continuous emergence of new possibilities. This perspective may shape the creation and interpretation of visual arts, literature, dance, and performance art.
- Music and Temporality: Whitehead's ideas on the importance of time and rhythm could uniquely influence music, affecting both composition and performance. Musicians might explore how music, as a temporal art form, embodies the flow of experience and the unfolding of events, resonating with Whitehead's processual view of reality.
- Digital and Interactive Arts: As digital and interactive arts evolve, Whitehead's emphasis on relationality and interaction might provide a philosophical framework for understanding these mediums. Interactive installations, virtual reality experiences, and generative art could exemplify the interconnectedness and dynamism central to process philosophy.
- Art as a Mode of Inquiry: Whitehead's philosophy could position art as a means of exploring and understanding the world, alongside scientific and philosophical inquiries. This approach might lead to new interdisciplinary collaborations, where artists and scholars work together to explore complex questions about existence, perception, and meaning.
In this envisioned future, Whitehead's ideas might inspire a rich and diverse range of explorations and applications, influencing both academic and public discourse across multiple domains.
More on Whitehead in the Arts and among Culture Creatives
In addition to university settings, Whitehead's writings may find resonance outside academic circles, particularly among artists and creative professionals. His imaginative and evocative approach can inspire those in the arts, encouraging them to explore new ways of thinking and expressing themselves. For artists, Whitehead's philosophy may serve as a rich source of metaphors, concepts, and ideas that can be translated into visual, literary, or performance art. His emphasis on creativity, novelty, and the interconnectedness of all things aligns well with artistic pursuits, making his work a fertile ground for artistic exploration.
Moreover, Whitehead's ideas about the nature of reality, the process of becoming, and the importance of aesthetic experience can offer valuable insights to artists seeking to understand and convey the complexities of the world. His focus on the fluid and dynamic nature of existence can encourage artists to experiment with form, medium, and content, breaking away from traditional boundaries and exploring the ever-evolving nature of art itself.
Beyond the arts, Whitehead's work might also resonate with individuals in fields such as economics, politics, and education. In economics, his process-oriented perspective could inspire alternative approaches to understanding market dynamics and economic behavior, emphasizing the fluid and evolving nature of economic systems. In politics, his ideas on interconnectedness and the collective nature of reality might provide a fresh lens for considering social and political issues, encouraging more holistic and inclusive approaches to policy-making.
In education, Whitehead's emphasis on the importance of experience and the aesthetic dimension of learning can inspire innovative pedagogical methods that prioritize creativity and critical thinking. His philosophy can offer educators a framework for fostering a more holistic and experiential form of education that values not only intellectual development but also emotional and aesthetic growth.