Probing Process & Reality - "Why Whitehead?"

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 23 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 94

  • @geoffreynhill2833
    @geoffreynhill2833 Год назад +9

    This might well have been subtitled, "Why No Cosmology?" Dr. Cobb outlines the revolution in Philosophy brought about by Whitehead in a refreshingly jargon-free inspiring way. 🤔 (Green Fire UK) 🌈🦉

  • @JanetWilson-q3c
    @JanetWilson-q3c 4 месяца назад +3

    What an EXCEPTIONAL educator. Very clear. Defines complex ideas in context! Wonderful!!!

  • @activedreamr
    @activedreamr 3 года назад +34

    What a beautiful, thoughtful, engaging and admirably humble lecture! I could listen for hours and hours more.

    • @stephenwinter5958
      @stephenwinter5958 Год назад +4

      Your reflection is one that I also had while listening to Dr Cobb. I feel that if I can speak something like with his clarity, simplicity, humility and wisdom when I have reached his age I will have lived my life quite well.

  • @johnvonachen1672
    @johnvonachen1672 Год назад +4

    I attended Washburn University in the late 90’s and had a couple of classes under Jorge Luis Nobo, now deceased, who had undertaken the task described here. Had I known what I know now after watching this video, I can’t help but feel regret at leaving when I did. I guess it’s never too late. All paths are blind alleys but some are better than others and we have new blind alleys to discover for ourselves and make our own.

  • @paulkelly1162
    @paulkelly1162 3 года назад +16

    Dr. Cobb's "Whitehead Word Book" is a brilliant, accessible introduction to Whitehead. It is also a great reference book. I couldn't get through Process and Reality without it.

  • @sebastianverney7851
    @sebastianverney7851 2 года назад +3

    admirably slow and clear speaker

  • @simonhanson5990
    @simonhanson5990 Год назад +4

    inspirational, thank you very much

  • @tasneemrasool8222
    @tasneemrasool8222 9 месяцев назад +2

    So true,,❤❤,,the science and philosophy are not working in the most comprehensive way ,,,where in the quantum world and existentialism is so crucial to study to understand.❤❤ thankyou so much ❤❤

  • @sinisterminister3322
    @sinisterminister3322 2 года назад +8

    I studied Whitehead under David Griffen at the Claremont School of Theology way back in the 1980s and have been a disciple of Whitehead ever since. What I especially appreciate about Whitehead‘s philosophy is in jettisoning the conventional two realm conception of reality made up of the really real, objective realm, and the not so real, subjective realm. There is instead only one reality. That of experience.

    • @Dystisis
      @Dystisis 10 месяцев назад

      Sounds like phenomenology.

  • @joelskannyana9661
    @joelskannyana9661 3 года назад +14

    “Process and Reality” is an extremely complicated book on its own, but many thanks to Proffesor Cobb for simplifying to us the Cosmology involving technical terminologies found in Whiteheadian philosophy.

    • @sonarbangla8711
      @sonarbangla8711 2 года назад

      There is nothing complicated about 'process and reality', Whitehead found a simple solution to creation as 'accident' explain everything to him. But to me the answer was not scientific and not even metaphysical.

    • @gariusjarfar1341
      @gariusjarfar1341 Год назад

      Technical terminologies of Whitehead's philosophy. Out of the mind that wasn't aware of the torrid meteor field. That wasn't aware of the possibility of a meteor field that we pass through 2 times a yr; that has been destroying life for at least 66 million yrs. Rome after 70 AD, the formation of Christianity and the and end of Sanhedrin, free age of the Rabbi. Mithra became Christianity, the Rabbi's invented a new Palestine. Forgotten the old technology of compression crystal electricity.

    • @Impaled_Onion-thatsmine
      @Impaled_Onion-thatsmine 10 месяцев назад

      Is this the symbolic logic food guy?

  • @dvepps6780
    @dvepps6780 Месяц назад +1

    Thanks for sharing your learning & work.

  • @charlesbruno990
    @charlesbruno990 10 месяцев назад +1

    I have a limited education, (2 yr engineering degree) but Whithead's "process" philosophy was not difficult for me to understand. However, I believe it encompasses much more than "cosmology".

  • @PrimitiveBaroque
    @PrimitiveBaroque 2 года назад +3

    I've had Whitehead's book for many years. I had so much trouble understanding, but after doing a serious study of Aristotle it does clarify a lot of Whitehead's train of thought. It's easier to think of Whitehead's theory of actual occasions/entities as Aristotelian substances (potentiality/actuality) on steroids, but a shift from "substance"/object thinking to "event" thinking. Obviously Whitehead is much more than this but it does help.

  • @SeekersofUnity
    @SeekersofUnity 4 года назад +4

    This is fantastic. Thank you.

  • @VOCATUS123
    @VOCATUS123 Год назад +2

    I was introduced to Whitehead at the University of West Georgia while getting my MA in psychology! It was a very humanistic program then.

    • @stephenbarrell7821
      @stephenbarrell7821 10 месяцев назад

      Fascinating! Who was it that introduced Whitehead's ideas at UWG, and what it in any way connected with their (para)psychology department?

    • @VOCATUS123
      @VOCATUS123 10 месяцев назад

      For me it was Chris Anstoos, now retired professor in the psychology department@@stephenbarrell7821

  • @independencemp3
    @independencemp3 Год назад +3

    When the candle goes out, does the room evaporate?

    • @blakestewart7200
      @blakestewart7200 4 месяца назад

      Ooh here’s the good shit. It does not. All processes are an accumulation.

  • @StephenPaulKing
    @StephenPaulKing 2 года назад +1

    The Dualism that Prof Cobb speaks against is the Substance of Descartes and others. When we replace Substance with Process, we can remake Dualism into a workable form. I recommend the ideas that where put forward by Prof Vaughan Pratt in his paper Rational Mechanics and Natural Mathematics.

  • @raycosmic9019
    @raycosmic9019 Год назад +2

    Epistemology = the systematic study of Knowledge, Understanding and Wisdom.
    Reality = That which is/That I am.
    Knowledge = the portion of Reality that is known experientially (Gnosis).
    Understanding = Knowing how to apply what has been learned from experience to experience.
    Wisdom = Competent application of Knowledge (expertise, excellence).
    The Light of Wisdom and Understanding dispels the darkness of ignorance and folly.
    The Word of Truth is ever faithful (loyal, true, isomorphic) to Reality (That which is).
    The smallest atomic unit of experience is an impression. An impression is a bundle of qualities received through the 5 senses, which the brain organizes into something recognizable we call a perception.
    Perception is the brain's identification system, answering the questions of what, who, how, why, where, when, etc.
    What we actually experience are the qualities of our perception. The brain derives meaning from the 'drivers'; those qualities that change our inner state of Being as they change.
    Someone with a visual driver of distance will feel more or less positive, negative or neutral as an image moves farther away, becoming smaller and darker, and feel the opposite as the image moves closer, getting bigger and brighter.
    Perspective provides the context of meaning. Perspectives are formed and emerge from 4 primary metaprograms:
    Inner/Outer
    More/Less
    Better/Worse
    For/not For
    Creative Process/Inquiry/Insight:
    Mentation - Metanoia - Mutation
    1. Immersion (mentation)
    2. Saturation
    3. Incubation
    4. Fruition (metanoia)
    5. Confirmation (mutation)
    6. Implementation
    7. Calibration
    Ask a compelling question as you fall asleep, receive a compelling answer as you wake up.

  • @losgrillosloopeandenoche
    @losgrillosloopeandenoche 4 года назад +5

    Excelente!!! En breve voy a ponerme a leer Proces and Reality de Whithead. Estoy terminando mi tesis de Licenciatura en la noción de cuerpo en el Discurso de Metafísica de Leibniz y encuentro grandes similitudes entre sus ideas. Saludos desde Argentina!!

  • @chillysoup
    @chillysoup 2 года назад +3

    This book is a work of art

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 7 дней назад

    This is an invitation to see a theory where light is a wave with particle characteristics as a probabilistic future unfolds with with each photon electron interaction. Light photon energy is continuously converting potential energy into the kinetic energy of matter in the form of electrons. Kinetic energy is the energy of motion, a process!

  • @RosembergSantos
    @RosembergSantos 2 года назад +2

    Hello, friends! Wonderful class by Professor Cobb. Would you allow me to translate this video and make it available in Brazilian Portuguese. Thank you!

  • @avicgimbusta9255
    @avicgimbusta9255 3 года назад +2

    Thank you

  • @NoName-lq7kt
    @NoName-lq7kt 3 года назад +3

    Look into Debrogile-Bohm, the quantum level of our world relates to the structure of what we would call biological determinism. Biology has a place in quantum physics.

  • @arockiasamy249
    @arockiasamy249 4 года назад +2

    Excellent....

  • @blakestewart7200
    @blakestewart7200 4 месяца назад +1

    This is so fucking beautiful. Thank you.

  • @leiferiksson5548
    @leiferiksson5548 3 года назад +5

    I haven't started this book yet, really looking forward to it though.

    • @word-pictures
      @word-pictures 3 года назад +4

      It's a tough one- especially because Whitehead uses his own unique terms to describe concepts that aren't always clear or concise. I dug into it for 8+ months for my undergrad thesis and, in some ways, still felt like I hadn't fully grasped it. If you have a background in physics you'll be much better off though.

    • @leiferiksson5548
      @leiferiksson5548 3 года назад +3

      @@word-pictures I don’t have a background in physics. I have never taken a single physics course at university. I do find cosmology, astronomy and quantum physics interesting however.

    • @word-pictures
      @word-pictures 3 года назад +4

      @@leiferiksson5548 I didn't either. Either way, I think you'll enjoy it if you're attracted to Whitehead's thinking and process philosophy in general :)

    • @leolllmaihoferll6350
      @leolllmaihoferll6350 3 года назад

      same

  • @EinSofVirtuoso
    @EinSofVirtuoso 4 года назад +2

    One who I have always enjoyed is Xavier Zubiri. He seems to have looked at the same problems of cosmology and developed a philosophy that focused on the dynamic structures of reality. Most of his work is in Spanish but I really enjoyed reading him. He was quite the polymath and studied with several great minds of the era (such as Schrodinger and Zermelo). Whitehead is among my favorites, especially through the work of the late Fr. Bernard Lee who drew me deeper towards Whitehead during my days in college.

    • @brynbstn
      @brynbstn 2 года назад

      What would you recommend by Zubiri in English?

    • @EinSofVirtuoso
      @EinSofVirtuoso 2 года назад +1

      @@brynbstn I would suggest his essays in “Nature History and God” and the book “Dynamic Structure of Reality” as good introductions. His main book is “On Essence” which breaks down his mature philosophy. For his theological ideas, “Man and God” is his best. His last book, Sentient Intelligence was his magnum opus for epistemology.

  • @tasneemrasool8222
    @tasneemrasool8222 9 месяцев назад

    Profound way of world view,,,so true.these things are all mentioned in Torah and Bible and Quran.. Spirituality and imagination to see beyond the seen and see from your mind's eye the unseen as well❤❤

  • @bachamadu2076
    @bachamadu2076 Год назад +2

    I didn't read much Whitehead's work. But i was introduced to his work many years ago in philosophy of religión lecturer. Quite faschinating. However, if i'm not wrong, he made God a becoming being. Not a Being as such but one who becomes. In that sense, God is no more than exalted and a little bit sophesticated being who is becoming in parralel with created beings. As Dr. Cobb, points out why Whitehead is bcos of the emergence of new Scientfic knoweldge. In other, it seems to me, what he set out to do was to harmonize his philosophy not only with Darwinian evolutionary biology but also the evolution of cosmos. Indeed, the advance of knoweldge from premitive age, in microlevel, seem to coincide with this macro level evolution as the basis of becoming or process philosophy and thelogy. It's an ambitious attempt at explaining reality. Yet, some of us are not convinced just bcos of the disagreement on the very fundamental issue i.e. God. The God of Bible He who said I Am who Am, with no Beginning and no End, can't be a becoming being.

    • @InterestedInDansk
      @InterestedInDansk 3 месяца назад

      On the contrary God has become man, God does not become absorbed by Man because everyone including God must have their own individuality and at the same time their absolute unity
      God is not a limited being

  • @abeg.6738
    @abeg.6738 5 месяцев назад

    Amen, brother.

  • @ravissary79
    @ravissary79 3 года назад +1

    I do wish he got more into process and reality.

  • @fractalnomics
    @fractalnomics Год назад

    Interesting, important.

  • @BestCosmologist
    @BestCosmologist 4 года назад

    This is the tip of the information spear.

  • @ysu2460
    @ysu2460 Год назад

    Are the course recordings available anywhere, if they were recorded?

    • @CobbInstitute
      @CobbInstitute  Год назад +1

      Yes, you can sign up and access them here: cobb.institute/learning-lab/probing-process-and-reality/

  • @kjlkathandjohn6061
    @kjlkathandjohn6061 2 года назад +3

    Whitehead sought to define what Aristotle demonstrated as meaningless, the continuous is not divisible: a line is not composed of points (dimensionless); time is not composed of 'nows'. 'Now' is not in time, having no dimension of duration, and would not be missed if subtracted from a 'second'. Hume and Kant ignored Aristotle, who can be the basis of cosmological thought that includes quantum reality by being fully true to his Categories, On Interpretation, etc.

  • @muniekz5581
    @muniekz5581 3 года назад

    Piękne! Beautiful lecture :)

  • @mohammadsaqibkhan1845
    @mohammadsaqibkhan1845 2 года назад

    Please someone tell me the name of this professor
    Wonderful explanation ❤️

  • @dylanvera7841
    @dylanvera7841 3 года назад

    Is the course still open? I signed up for it yesterday and never got any email

    • @CobbInstitute
      @CobbInstitute  3 года назад +2

      Thanks for letting us know Dylan. I contacted Tripp, and he should be getting in touch soon. Please let us know (at cobb.institute/contact/) if you don't hear back within the next few days.

  • @CGMaat
    @CGMaat Год назад +1

    Why is not whitehead more in our measure like sacred geometry !

  • @ravissary79
    @ravissary79 3 года назад +2

    I've come to abandon the moral and non-coersive assumptions that undergird process theology... but his vision of how reality works? The definitions? The hard parts? I've never seen a vision more brilliant than whiteheads.

    • @brynbstn
      @brynbstn 2 года назад

      What non-cohesive assumptions?

    • @ravissary79
      @ravissary79 2 года назад

      @@brynbstn non-coercive. As in, process theology is rooted in assumptions about God's method of divine intervention being totally non-coersive... and by non-coercive they mean, no overt applications of force that impose his will will anything sentient at all ever. Which rules out most miracle claims.

    • @brynbstn
      @brynbstn 2 года назад

      @@ravissary79 ohhhh. “Coercive”

    • @ravissary79
      @ravissary79 2 года назад

      @@brynbstn yeah I misspelled it by accident.

  • @tulliusagrippa5752
    @tulliusagrippa5752 2 года назад +1

    Define cosmology. In fact, provide definitions for all your terms.

  • @chargerification
    @chargerification 3 года назад +1

    The 20th century GOAT imo

  • @bernardputersznit64
    @bernardputersznit64 Год назад +1

    i thought cosmology was about the big bang etc - never heard it was about humans

  • @TheYoungIdealist
    @TheYoungIdealist 4 года назад +4

    F.W.J. Schelling

  • @frederickanderson1860
    @frederickanderson1860 4 месяца назад

    8:31 if we can't live in this planet or in the cosmos,we can colonise moon or mars or any planets,we just do same.

  • @elel2608
    @elel2608 Год назад

    15:00

  • @avicgimbusta9255
    @avicgimbusta9255 3 года назад

    Anand Veeraraj

  • @elizabethwinsor-strumpetqueen
    @elizabethwinsor-strumpetqueen 4 года назад +4

    do you want to see the cosmos ? DMT will show you in a way that no other thing can - don't be shy , give it a try !

    • @BestCosmologist
      @BestCosmologist 4 года назад +1

      I bet you're cool.

    • @paulkelly1162
      @paulkelly1162 3 года назад

      Dr. Cobb discusses psychedelics at some length in some interviews. Some searches should yield results.

  • @StephenPaulKing
    @StephenPaulKing 2 года назад

    Kant set Philosophy make at least 100 years! 😞

  • @davidgill9638
    @davidgill9638 2 года назад +1

    An interesting lecture but failed to cover the subject title in any depth. The lecture should really be titled a lecture on cosmology, not the work of Whitehead.

  • @jugika
    @jugika 10 месяцев назад

    Oh this is some Jesus stuff...

  • @williammabon6430
    @williammabon6430 3 года назад +2

    Here is the proof for the Construct theory:
    Infinity = 1/x(change) + 1
    This equation is God's mathematical name.
    God's name in this equation reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God.
    Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity
    In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore man is a fraction of God
    Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind.
    Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something.
    There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something or someone is complete and individual from all the rest.
    Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed ( delta) With (+) God (1).
    Scientific Method
    Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4
    Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth?
    Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist He should be found in the house of mathematics
    Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation
    Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1))
    Again: All and any number is a set in space that change with space
    Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise
    This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance but they represent changes in their measurement of distance.
    Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consist of 3 domains of space
    a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space or the whole of knowledge a.k.a. information

    Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exist otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
    As we can see God is fundamental in the cross between information and physical relationships
    I wrote a research doc looking deeper into this matter. Anyone who wants a free copy can contact me at:
    william.mabon@yahoo.com
    God's Mind Is Man Changed With God

  • @celal777
    @celal777 4 года назад +8

    I just realised that Jordan Peterson is actually more of a cosmologist than anything else.

    • @orgiophant93
      @orgiophant93 4 года назад +19

      He's more of a charlatan than anything else.

    • @vasey6635
      @vasey6635 4 года назад +10

      he is very Whiteheadian in cosmological/metaphysical orientation.
      also at general philosophical home with James, Peirce, Dewey...
      value-realist/denounces scientific materialism as nihilistic & lacking any coherent description of teleological causation (final/formal causes); although he is highly inclusive of the scientific enterprise in his overall approach, as pertains to energy dynamics/ mathematical models as critical/relevant tools.
      +
      considers reality, most precisely, as a process of actualizing potential/possibilities... and that there are intuitive, archetypal forms that guide this process towards MORE GOOD, MORE BEAUTIFUL possibilities...
      the parallels are there. he just isn't explicit about the idealism/possible panpsychism...

    • @grandtheftyoga8471
      @grandtheftyoga8471 4 года назад

      @@vasey6635 either I like you, or yoy carrying a card. Lijed what you wrote though. So why did JP end up with brain damage in your understanding ? What was the exact etiology of his most serious blow?

    • @blakestewart7200
      @blakestewart7200 4 года назад +10

      Jordan Peterson is to cosmology what farting in a bathtub is to champagne.

    • @CharlieTourniquet
      @CharlieTourniquet 4 года назад +3

      @@blakestewart7200 I laughed out loud!

  • @Gringohuevon
    @Gringohuevon Год назад

    hilarious