Sentences with phrase «principles of relativity»

He may in this regard have been happier with approaches to quantum gravity that stay closer to the core principles of relativity.

This statement, together with Whitehead's discussion of the relation of the reformed subjectivist principle to the principles of relativity and of process (PR 252) also makes clear Whitehead's repudiation of dualism and of the notion of «vacuous actuality.»

In the second place, this sentence occurs in a paragraph in which Whitehead is explaining the meaning of the reformed subjectivist principle and its relation to the fourth and ninth of his categories of explanation (the principles of relativity and process respectively).

Later this third metaphysical principle (the principle of relativity) becomes the fourth category of explanation.

This distinction is more fundamental because it is directly related to the primary principle of relativity in opposition to substance metaphysics.

But far more specific than this was his abandonment of the principle of concretion and the correlative principle of relativity, or universal relatedness.

in conjunction with his description of how he arrived at the philosophical realization that all actual entities exist as an interlocked community (principle of relativity).

Thus, the principle of creativity is ultimate in one sense, and the principle of relativity is basic in another; thus, too, what is indefinable in one notion is presupposed by, or is relevant to, what is indefinable in the other.

But actual entities do fall under the principle of relativity; therefore, the view in question must be false.

This explains how the principle of relativity was meant to «blur the sharp distinction between what is universal and what is particular» (PR 76).

Which of these alternatives we ought to opt for, and what bearing the principle of relativity (and with it the notion of «repetition») has on the ontological principle, Whitehead himself tells us in the following passage:

This is a sort of extension of the principle of relativity.

Interestingly, however, Hartshorne himself balks at the absoluteness of his own principle of relativity: «God knows fully and feels fully... what our unhappy fears are like for us, and this without being afraid for himself» (CSPM 263, original italics).

I must confess that I have never seen such an abuse of the principle of relativity!

Fortunately, throughout Process and Reality, Whitehead makes frequent and illuminating references to the principle of relativity.

This is the «principle of relativity.»

Next, let me indicate also that Whitehead makes it abundantly clear that an actual entity falls under the principle of relativity only when it is a satisfaction or superject.

This is one reason (it is not the only one) why Whitehead refuses to identify «universal» with «eternal object»: «The term «universal» is unfortunate in its application to eternal objects; for it seems to deny, and in fact it was meant to deny, that actual entities also fall within the scope of the principle of relativity.

From other passages where Whitehead discusses the principle of relativity, we can safely infer that what all entities have in common — and thus what «entity», «being», «object», and «thing» connote in common — is their capacity to contribute determination to every actuality whose becoming finds those entities already existing (PR 366, 371, 392).

(3) Kraus also insists that only a «tota simul» in God is compatible with faith, arguing much as she did above that the Hartshornean alternative is by the principle of relativity irreconcilable with faith as well as freedom — with free faith, that is.

This deterministic outcome of Hartshorne's theology is supposedly entailed by «the principle of relativity» (p. 163).

My contention that the principle of relativity implicitly asserts the repeatability of all entities, including actual entities, has now received its initial substantiation.

This conclusion has already been employed under the title of the «principle of relativity.»

Hence, the Category of the Ultimate, or principle of creativity, is self - contradictory — unless, of course, it be interpreted in light of the two-fold reality of completed occasions that is implied by the principle of relativity.

The ontological principle, however, is less fundamental (because more specialized) than the principle of relativity.

It is essential here to comprehend that the principle of relativity (which states that all actual entities are internally related) is not simply applied to physiology or psychology, etc., but rather, in each instance the principle is arrived at in an original way from within the particular facts of the particular field of learning in question.

This distinction provides an important clue to the meaning of the principle of relativity.

This principle of relativity is the axiom by which the ontological principle is rescued from issuing in an extreme monism.

Accordingly, the principle of relativity, as I construe it, not only saves the ontological principle from issuing in an extreme monism, but also explains how there can be «one world without and within.»

Suffice it to note, in this last regard, that the reformed subjectivist principle, on which Whitehead based his metaphysical theory of memory, perception, and knowledge, was for him «merely an alternative statement of the principle of relativity...» (PR 252).

To that end, let me first indicate that Whitehead is quoting from his principle of relativity when he says that «it belongs to the nature of every «being» that it is a potential for every «becoming».»

Aside from the fact that the principle of relativity entails no such conclusions, it should also be observed that Kraus's position here entails a strange conflation of divine and human subjectivities.

This is the physical basis for Whitehead's principle of relativity and for the religious sense of the «value of the diverse individuals of the world» (RM 59).

This is the contrast which is illustrated by the principle of relativity and is experienced in the causal efficacy of life.

Dr. Graham declares the ultimacy of three of these: The «one» (the ontological principle), the «many» (the principle of relativity), and «creativity» (the principle of process).

For process also involves both «becoming» and «being,» which entails interrelation of the ontological principle and the principle of relativity.

Two descriptions are required for an actual entity: (a) one which is analytical of its potentiality for «objectification» in the becoming of other actual entities [i.e., the principle of relativity], and (b) another which is analytical of the process which constitutes its own becoming [i.e., the ontological principle].

The principle of process involves interrelation of the ontological principle and the principle of relativity.

Whitehead contrasts «being» and «becoming» in order to maintain the principle of relativity, that «it belongs to the nature of a «being» that it is a potential for every «becoming»» (PR 22).

The principle of relativity (CE 4), however, also describes the objective character of the actual entity:

«The reformed subjectivist principle adopted by the philosophy of organism is merely an alternative statement of the principle of relativity....

The «principle of relativity» applies the doctrine of the relativity of all things to the very definition of «being.»

Disagreements with the principle of relativity (that it belongs to the nature of every being to be a potential ingredient in the becoming of actual entities), the principle of process (that how an actual entity becomes constitutes what it is), or the ontological principle (that only actual entities can exert influence) would be of this type.

Even within eternal being itself there is a principle of relativity, which is its power of existing and of being known, so that motion and life and soul and mind can be present with it.

But by the principle of relativity there can only be one non-derivative actuality, unbounded by its prehensions of an actual world.

exception to the principle of relativity.

According to the principle of relativity, every physical actuality of the past has an effect on each becoming occasion (PR 33, 101).

In this way the Whiteheadian cosmology incorporates the principle of the relativity of simultaneity, actually the principle of the causal independence of contemporary events, characteristic of modern theories of relativity.

Whitehead's «principle of process,» his «ontological principle,» and his «principle of relativity» can be regarded as a consistent continuation of Aristotle's doctrine on becoming as it looks when one suppresses the notion of a passive and static Aristotelian matter.

However, the «ontological principle» and the «principle of relativity» preclude the unity of «extreme monism» (PR 148).