Not exact matches
They are communitarians, that is, «if
philosophical liberals are those who believe that all our
problems can be solved by autonomous individuals, a market economy, and a procedural state, whereas communitarians believe that
more substantive ethical identities and a
more active participation in a democratic polity are necessary for the functioning of any decent society.»
Fundamentally, they constitute an understanding about how blacks should respond to the great
philosophical and political
problems created by our history of degradation,
more recently followed by our unequal citizenship.
In this way Whiteheadian metaphysics represents a
more adequate solution to the
problems of meaning and consciousness, while at the same time providing a strong
philosophical basis for the realism and causalism of science.
I think it would be beneficial both to Whitehead studies and to relevant portions of analytic philosophy to bring Whitehead
more back into the American
philosophical mainstream by considering his specific
problems and solutions in light of current interests and as susceptible to criticisms from current perspectives.
On a
more practical level, there is the
problem of actually putting
philosophical ideas to work in the classroom.
This
problem of the connection between the physical and the mathematical is one not merely of
philosophical interest; it is one of the greatest relevance and importance for science,
more particularly at the present time, which is why Whitehead, himself a scientist, made this
problem central to his endeavor.
Was this due to his interest for new considerations, perhaps
more theological than
philosophical, such as the
problem of everlastingness?
While the issue of consciousness is of great
philosophical interest, the high humanism at stake in such discussions is often
more of a
problem for theology than the denial that consciousness is necessary to sustain human uniqueness.
Thereby evolved Whitehead's basic
philosophical problem — at first as a dark motor of his intellectual development, then, increasingly and
more clearly, as the discernible, formulated center of his theory.
He gives voice to the
philosophical problem of evil perhaps
more clearly and cogently than any other speaker or actor, any other philosopher or theologian, in the whole of world literature.
The
problem he saw was that although positing a natural end for man outside of God guaranteed the gratuity of God's gift to man of a supernatural end, it also reduced the relationship between nature and supernature to the level of accidental (in the
philosophical sense) or incidental (in
more commonplace parlance).
Although this
problem is
more philosophical than experimental, I mention it here because of the striking relevance of the theory of affective continuity to it.
I suggest further that many of the
problems with which theologians now wrestle arise out of assumptions formed for them by
more or less consciously accepted ideas of a
philosophical sort.
The relation between a
more culturalistic and naturalistic orientation of developmental science is sketched by referring to the fact that the distinction between nature and culture is drawn within culture, by stating some
philosophical problems like the emergence of thought and the
problem of developmental change.