The God of Metaphysics PDF
Preview The God of Metaphysics
The God of Metaphysics This page intentionally left blank The God of Metaphysics Being a Study of the Metaphysics and Religious Doctrines of Spinoza, Hegel, Kierkegaard, T. H. Green, Bernard Bosanquet, Josiah Royce, A. N. Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne, and Concluding with a Defence of Pantheistic Idealism T. L. S. Sprigge CLARENDON PRESS (cid:1)OXFORD 3 GreatClarendonStreet,OxfordOX26DP OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwidein Oxford NewYork Auckland CapeTown DaresSalaam HongKong Karachi KualaLumpur Madrid Melbourne MexicoCity Nairobi NewDelhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto Withofficesin Argentina Austria Brazil Chile CzechRepublic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore SouthKorea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress intheUKandincertainothercountries PublishedintheUnitedStates byOxfordUniversityPressInc.,NewYork (cid:1)T.L.S.Sprigge2006 Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker) Firstpublished2006 Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced, storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans, withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress, orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriate reprographicsrightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction outsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment, OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbindingorcover andyoumustimposethesameconditiononanyacquirer BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData Dataavailable TypesetbySPIPublisherServices,Pondicherry,India PrintedinGreatBritain onacid-freepaperby BiddlesLtd, King’sLynn,Norfolk ISBN0–19–928304–4 978–0–19–928304–0 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2 Thisbookisdedicatedto StMark’sUnitarianChurch,Edinburgh This page intentionally left blank Preface In this book a number of metaphysical systems are examined in such detail as is practicable. There are probably only a few of my hoped for readers who are at home with each and all of them, and so most readers shouldlearnsomethingaboutasignificantphilosophicalsystemnotvery familiartothem.However,thebookisintendedalsoasacontributionto thecontinuingdebateaboutthesethinkersamongthecognoscenti. What links these systems together is that each provides a case for a religious view of the world based on rational or would-be rational argu- ment. That a seriously religious perspective on things can derive, or win important support, from metaphysics is denied by many thinkers—for example,byBlaisePascal(criticizingespeciallyRene´ Descartes),bySøren Kierkegaard (criticizing especially Hegel and Hegelians), and by William James, John Macmurray, and others. According to such thinkers, a God whoseexistenceissupposedtobedemonstratedinaphilosophicaltreatise is not the God of ‘Abraham, Isaac and the Christians’ or (so those not thinking exclusively from the point of view of Judaeo-Christianity may add) of any actual or possible living religious faith at all. In the light of this,thepresentbookexaminessomeofthemetaphysicalsystemswhich theirauthorsdidthinkofasofferingsomekindofdemonstrationof(orat leastaphilosophicallocusfor)religioustruth,whetherChristianorother- wise. Thus it sets out to test the objections to what might be called ‘metaphysical religion’ by investigating the works, and even to a limited extentthelives,ofsomeofthosewhomaybethoughttohaveadvanced somethingofthatsort(aswellasprobablythebestcritiqueofsuchefforts by Kierkegaard in his attack on ‘Hegelian Christianity’). However, the investigationofthemetaphysicalsystemsisalsoforitsownphilosophical sake. I do not engage in the kind of lofty evaluation, as from a higher authority,ofthesemetaphysicalsystemsandtheargumentsinsupportof them,that,asIfear,somecommentatorsdotoday.Mymoredifficultaim has been to promote understanding of, and interest in, the systems and their relation to religious issues, and to criticize only for the sake of Preface advancingthisaim.Myownviewsonmetaphysicsandreligionaregiven inChapter9. ThereadershouldrealizethatIamawarethatitmaybethoughtcheek to investigate, and even propound, general views of reality and say little abouthowtheyrelatetothescientificconceptionsoftoday,whichmaybe thoughttobethemostimportantclueswehaveastothenatureofthings. Thisisareasonablecharge.Fromthispointofview,Ithinkthattheideal thinker on such general matters is someone scientifically well equipped but also aware of the way in which metaphysicians have grappled with these issues. Of all the thinkers studied here, Whitehead was the best equippedtodothis,thoughSpinozawaswellequippedinrelationtothe science of his day. Einstein’s general theory of relativity would have appealed, I think, to Spinoza, while Whitehead’s philosophy fits well, I believe,withquantumphysics.Moregenerally,onecanonlyworkatwhat oneiscapableof,andthisiswhatIhavedone,believingthattheproductis notentirelyworthless. Mymainhelpersinwritingthisbookhavebeenthephilosophersthem- selvesandsomecommentators.Ihavehadsomehelp,forwhichIammost grateful, with several chapters from John Llewelyn especially on Hegel; fromAlastairHannayonKierkegaard;fromWilliamSweetonBosanquet; from John Clendenning on Royce; from John Cobb, Pierfrancesco Basile and Michel Weber on process thought and over the years from Leemon McHenryonprocessthoughtandmuchelse.Mostofthesehavenotseen mytextandarenottoblameforit,buttheyhavehelpedmemuch,either indiscussionorinanswerstomye-mailquestions.Ishouldalsosayhow valuable it has been to be able to meet and talk with fellow idealists, or idealistscholars,fromaroundtheworldinaseriesofconferencesatHarris Manchester College, mostly organized by Bill Mander (himself a notable contributor to idealist philosophy), on current and historical idealist trendsinphilosophy.IamafraidthatIamnotagreatreaderofphilosoph- ical articles (as opposed to books) just as I avoid reading short stories. Neitheroftheseformsallowsonetoimmerseoneselfinanother’sworld, butactsonlysoastojerkoneoutofone’sown.SoIapologizetoallthose who have written on the philosophers studied here in that medium for any apparent failure to take account of their work. I may well have read theirarticles,buttheytendtofloatawayfrommyconsciousmind,though probably exerting some influence on my conscious thought. This is not thecase(Ithink)withbooks.IamalsogratefultoallthosewithwhomI have discussed philosophical and religious issues over the years, but it wouldbeinvidioustopickoutanyofthemespecially,withtheexception viii Preface of my late brother Robert, from whom I have learnt so much on philo- sophical and religious matters. I am also deeply appreciative for all the helpofveryvariouskindswhichIhavehadfrommywife,Giglia. There is a separate bibliography for each chapter which gives abbrevi- ations in square brackets for books used in the text. These abbreviations areinsmallcapitals.Sometimeswhenanauthor’snamedoesnotappearin thetext,itisusedforthereference.Somerepetitionacrosschaptersshould makethemindependentlyintelligible. T.L.S.SPRIGGE ix
Description:The list of books you might like
