The subjective form in a particular actual entity, he tells us, unlike the abstract eternal object, is an «element in the private
definiteness of that actuality» (PR 444), and the subjective form can not be torn apart from its particular subject without becoming a mere universal (PR 354, 356).
It is obvious that if
the definiteness of an actuality preexists the actuality as a possibility, the actuality preexists itself, granting that definiteness is actuality.
Well, Harts - home will reiterate that possibilities, however restricted, fall short of
the definiteness of actuality, and he will remind us that when we speak of Shakespeare we are referring to actuality (actual states of a man).
Not exact matches
Thus for Whitehead the «eternal objects,» or pure «forms
of definiteness,» as such, precisely do not constitute
actuality.
Insofar as «form,» thus understood as a real ground, brings a natural entity, or more exactly, its «matter,» to its requisite
definiteness, it must be regarded as the ground
of the
actuality of the entity.
Concreteness refers to the
definiteness, the
actuality of an event (like the grandmother's death); limitedness refers to everything that this concrete event can mean — which is not absolutely everything, but everything this event means.
Hartshorne's identification
of actuality with
definiteness means that
actuality is the limit — the zero case —
of indefiniteness.
Charles Hartshorne holds that concrete reality is
actuality and that
actuality is definite or determinate.1 Does he mean only that
definiteness or determinateness is a distinguishing mark
of concrete reality?
Hartshorne's view that
definiteness is the touchstone by which the actual is distinguished from the possible, and indeed the very meaning
of actuality, is familiar to process scholars.
On the basis
of our prior discussions, it can be said that coming to a knowledge about anything, be it God or other
actualities, is a process
of moving from depth (molar bodily valuation in the adverbial mode) to clarity (the abstracted
definiteness of the accusative mode).
It is a real ingression into
actuality, but it is a restricted ingression with mere potentiality withholding the immediate realization
of its function
of conferring
definiteness» (PR 290 - 91 / 445, my italics; cf. PR 44 / 70).
God is deficient in concrete
actuality, as Whitehead said, because every time the adjusting
of abstract possibilities to concrete events butts up against complete
definiteness, the existence that makes the final decision shifts from God to the presently emerging creatures.
In the case
of these actual entities also, however, concrescence would always mean an increase in
definiteness, in actualized characteristics, even though those actual entities either completely avoided or greatly postponed the attainment
of a satisfaction,
of a total
actuality.
The account
of this totality to which Wieman referred was clearly an early formulation
of the process
of concretion which, in Process and Reality, is the process by which individual
actualities acquire concreteness, or
definiteness.