Isabelle Stengers’ work on Whitehead was a long time in the making — as a work on Whitehead’s work, as an outcome of her thinking with. Thinking with Whitehead has 23 ratings and 2 reviews. as both introduction and erudite commentary, Isabelle Stengers one of today s leading philosophers of. THINKING WITH WHITEHEAD A Free and Wild Creation of Concepts ISABELLE STENGERS Translated by Michael Chase FOREWORD BY BRUNO LATOUR.
|Published (Last):||13 January 2005|
|PDF File Size:||19.57 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.79 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Such materialist modes must become imaginative enough to conceive of freedom and matter, the human knower and the thing known, in a more coherent way.
Once a proposition is given, to what convention does it refer, what is the habit that constitutes its concept? Thinking with Whitehead Thinking with Whitehead today therefore means accepting an adventure from which none of the words that serve as our reference points should emerge unscathed, but from which none will be disqualified or denounced as a vector of illusion. Vvv marked it as to-read Apr 09, The secrecy derives from the legacy of a philosopher who, discretely and without polemics, without ever ask- ing his readers to thrill to the audacity and radicalism of the risk or to the threat of isolation, but with an obstinate tenderness, undertook to forge a conceptual language that forces those who acquire a taste for it to think.
The consequence of considering this question is radical indeed: This article has no associated abstract. Ronny Desmet – – Chromatikon: But Stengers redresses the usual imbalance and places Whitehead’s invention of a God implicated squarely inside the world — and unable to “expli- cate” it, nor to “extricate” himself out of it — as the most daring but also the most indispensable consequence of his early refusal to let nature bi- furcate.
Then, after a long moment: Most of his philosophical writings have their origin in lectures, which he later worked up. This is why one cannot say that the Whiteheadian proposition constitutes “the answer,” finally discov- ered. Kristen Case rated it it was amazing Oct 25, If they dare, they will be the ones to topple the present into an obsolete past, a past in which “people still believed that. The roles have been distributed, with the scientists on the side of innovation, and those who dispute their proposition on the side of inertia, habits, and what will eventually give in, for “you can’t stop progress.
John rated it really liked it Feb 07, It is in this context that “Whitehead’s metaphysical God does not recognize his own, he does not read our hearts, he does not understand us better than we do ourselves, he does not demand our recognition or our gratitude, and we shall never contemplate him in his truth. Of those virtues the book is stuffed full.
Yet it is much harder to give voice to a nonhuman knowledge, more ancient than humankind, able to see farther than the insignificant ripple they create in the river of time. Is your success that of Grendel? Commentators have often tried either to drag Whitehead in theology seminars — forgetting that his God is there to solve very pre- cisely a technical wiyh of philosophy, not of belief — or to get rid of this embarrassing appendix altogether.
There are concepts wherever there whiethead habits, and habits are made and unmade on the plane of immanence and radical experience: I have, however, privileged certain transversal themes that characterize the way I have inhabited the Whiteheadian movement.
Time and again, the monster will perceive that negation and refutation are isabele the affirmation of the superiority of those who have become capable of denying and refuting that in which others believed.
Yet Thinking with Whitehead does not belong, properly speaking, to the history of philosophy.
Wc arc all contemplations, and there- fore habits. There once was an old Bedouin, who, sensing that his death was immi- nent, gathered together his three sons and signified his last wishes to them. Diego Gil rated it really liked it Jun 07, Moggette rated whitdhead it was amazing Nov 27, Newton Phelps Stallknecht – – Princeton: Une lihre et sauvage creation de concepts.
Keith Robinson – – Process Studies thin,ing 2: On the Re-Materialization of the Virtual.
Isabelle Stengers, Thinking with Whitehead: A Free and Wild Creation of Concepts – PhilPapers
This is a “slightly secret school” as Dcleuze wrote in he Pli LP,and here the secret is not associated with a desire for mystery, quite the contrary: Published May 31st by Harvard University Press first published There is no doubt that material energy and spiritual energy hold together and are prolonged by something. His youth, which was happy, was that of a student as gifted for studies as he was for sports.
Andrew Goffey – – Process Studies 37 2: And the dogs are all the more useful in that the caravan in question is transporting only goods that are not very interesting at all: Unless we produce the all-embracing relations, we are faced with stengeers bifurcated nature; namely, warmth and redness on one side, and molecules, electrons and ether on the other side. Whitehead’s name, in contrast, has escaped the “Russell-and-Whitehead” association only gradually, and in the aftermath, to vibrate with its own resonance: Deborah Bird Rose – – Environmental Philosophy 5 issabelle Thinking with Stengers and Whitehead.
By another aspect, the index bears witness to the way this book tries to prolong the Whiteheadian movement outside of the usual categories of philosophy: Stengers’ distinctive mode of thought tries to avoid common dichotomies and to always highlight Whitehead’s alternative, carved out of the always present aura of complexities that surrounds any activity of becoming, interpretation and reflection.
It does not constitute a vision of the world or a “new paradigm” — indeed, this is prob- ably the worst confusion that can occur with regard to it. For him, nihilistic rage is just as absurd as belief, for everything is tied together, everything goes hand in hand, creation and destruction, lies and authenticity.
To think with Whitehead today, Stengers writes, means to sign on in advance to an adventure that will leave none of the terms we normally use as they were.
Whitehead’s contemporaries could, with amusement, perplexity, or scandal, whitehaed whether one should really incur the risks of a specula- tive operation, moving Heaven and Earth, God and matter, to remedy difficulties that are ultimately secondary: Hw rated it really liked it Nov 20, However, for a philosopher like me, interested in science, what is no doubt most important is the way Whitehead suggests putting things in perspective.
What is at stake here enables me ztengers to characterize Whitehead’s approach as “construc- tivist” and to defend the constructivist position against the curse that weighs it down today, a weight it transfers to the situations in which it intervenes.
Yet this norm is isabellr one way of answering the problem.
Sign in Create an account. Teilhard was a scientist at thinkinv in this bookand left such speculative statements to the metaphysician. One section consists of what science finds to be real, but valueless, and the other of that which constitutes mind — a setup that reduces the first section to senseless motion and the second to mere “psychic additions.
Anyone else with me?