The Postmodern Dimension of Whitehead Philosophy and its Relevance

Zhihe Wang

(Claremont Graduate University)

       The purpose of this paper is to reveal the postmodern dimension of Whitehead philosophy which can be helpful for both the West and China to overcome the dominant closed mentality such as “ imperialistic attitude” and Yelangism.[1]

       The first part of the paper defines "postmodern" in terms of openness to otherness. From this perspective, Whitehead can be called in a very real sense a  postmodern thinker. The second part of the paper looks more closely at the major postmodern features of Whitehead's philosophy. The third part suggests the relevance of postmodern Whitehead philosophy for both

contemporary China and West.

       As that there are 1000 Hamlets if there are 1000 readers, different process scholars have different understandings of Whitehead. The richness and  diversity of  Whitehead’s thought make this more evident.

       However, Whitehead has been treated by most  scholars except Cobb and Griffin as a modern thinker. “ Most postmodern thinkers ignore Whitehead as a potential source for postmodern thought”.[2] That means the tendencies to “modernize Whitehead” is still dominant in the field of Whitehead studies. Due to the fact that “the ‘presence’ of postmodern views in Whitehead’s writings still remains  largely ignored in most of the  works that trace the development of postmodernism and deconstruction”, it is necessary to reveal the postmodern dimension of Whitehead.

       To call Whitehead postmodern thinker is by no mean an easy or a perfectly safe undertaking. It is a risky enterprise which will face a danger to limit Whitehead’s thought as labeling him as a “modern” thinker. But labeling him as a postmodern thinker does help us understand and highlight some very important aspects of his thought which have strong relevance to the current situation. What we need to do is not to be too concerned with the label. In a Chinese term, “Deyuwangquan”, means forgetting the fishnet after having gotten the fish.

       How to define Postmodernism

       In order to examine Whitehead’s postmodern dimension, we need to give our understanding of postmodernism. Without a doubt, there are a variety of  ways to characterize postmodernism. Although “it is a mistake,” as Lawrence Cahoone, the editor of From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology, points out, “to seek a single, essential meaning applicable to all the term’s instances.”[3]  there are still some important clues and some need that  identify postmodernism.

        In The Reenchantment of Science(1988), David Ray Griffin uses the  term “postmodernism” to refers to “a diffuse sentiment rather than to any common set of doctrines—the sentiment that humanity can and must go beyond the modern.” [4] He also characterizes four features of postmodern spirituality. One is its emphasis on internal relations; one is its organism; one  is its new relation to time; one is its postpatriarchal vision.[5] In 1991,David Hall stated “ the postmodern enterprise aims at the development of a philosophy of difference. Our purported inability to think difference and otherness in their most general senses threatens the entire metaphysical project of western thought.”[6]. In 1993,Cobb spells out Whitehead's postmodern dimension by pointing out the turn Whitehead made" from substance with attributes to events in relation", "from subject and objects to subject-object", " from conceptual relativism to correspondence", "from the segregation of Religion to its Pervasiveness."[7] In my book, The Postmodern Philosophical Movement(1993, 1996, 1998), I used to ascribe eleven strains such as  irrationalism, posthumanism, perspectivism, antifoundationalism and decentering, deconstruction, pluralism, etc, to the postmodern family. In  From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology (1996, 1997, 1998), Lawrence Cahoone summaries “five prominent postmodern themes”, they include: the rejection of presence  origin, unity and Transcendence of norms and the use of the idea of “ constitutive  otherness” in analyzing any cultural entity.[8]

       All of these characterizations and categorizations above are very helpful for us in understanding postmodernism. They help us understand not only the complexity of postmodernism, but also its richness.

       Nevertheless, all of them naturally discuss or define postmodernism vs. modernity from a purely Western perspective. There is nothing wrong in doing so because both modernity and postmodernity originally are the products of the Western culture. However, due to the fact that it is easier to see the role of ideas in a foreign culture rather than in one's own, [9] it becomes meaningful  to examine postmodernism from alternative vantage points. In this paper, I intend to view modernity and postmodernity from Chinese perspectives.

       From my point of view,  the most significant feature of  postmodernism is an open attitude to otherness. I call it an “oceanic mentality” which indicates an attitude that welcomes difference and is open to the other. Accordingly the most valuable thought resource postmodernism can offer us is its open mentality, and thus its rejection of the closed mentality  of modernity such as the  “imperial attitude” in West and  Yelangism in China and its open mentality. On the contrary, a common feature of modernity is an closed attitude toward to the others. Both the “imperialistic attitude” and Yelangism are common manifestations of modernity. The  “imperialistic attitude” designates a arrogant mentality toward otherness. Yelangism refers to a self-aggrandizing, self-closed way of thinking. [10] On my understanding, the turn from modernity to postmodernity is a shift of attitude, a shift of mentality. That is, from a closed mentality to open mentality.

       It must be pointed out that “the other” not only indicates the other cultures and nations,

It also refers to nature and women. That is why ecological movement and feminism to some extend find their theoretical support in Whiteheadian process philosophy. But the length of the paper limits my focus on the relationship between East and West.

       The typically dominant attitude of Western modernity toward the others, including other nations, other people, other cultures and other species is an “imperialistic attitude”,[11] which is deeply rooted in Europeancentrism. On the contrary, the postmodern attitude toward the others is openness. I call it “oceanic  mentality.” .

       The oceanic mentality is a primary characteristic attitude of postmodern philosophy.  For Charles Lermert, " Postmodernism is a culture that believes there is a better world than the modern one. In particular it  disapproves of modernism's uncritical assumption that European culture(including its diaspora versions in such places as South Africa, the United States, Australia, and Argentina) is  an authentic, self-evident, and true universal culture in which all the world's people ought to believe."[12]Almost all postmodern thinkers put an emphasis on  openness to otherness. In Cobb’s word, “Postmodernists allow difference to stand.” [13]

       Derrida’s stress on difference, absence, trace, in fact is openness to the other. In his own word, “The critique of logocentrism is above all else the search for the ‘other’…”[14] More important, the "respect for the other" is viewed by Derrida as " the only  possible ethical imperative” [15] Derrida's personal background significantly affects his thought a lot. Derrida once acknowledged that his childhood experience of extreme isolation as the  child of a Jewish family during a period of persecution and racial violence strengthened his sense of belonging to a marginal and dispossessed culture. "I felt an impatient distance with regard to various Jewish communities, when I have the impression that they close in upon themselves, when they pose themselves as such. From all of which comes a feeling of non-belonging that I have doubtless transposed…."[16] Derrida admits, " It's an experience which leaves nothing intact; something you can never again cease to feel. The Jewish children were expelled from school."[17]

       Although Derrida emphasizes that the early experience has no causal relationship to his philosophy, the experience undoubtedly produced profound influence on the formulation of his thought. In the first place, the special experience made him have strong feeling and sympathy for the marginal and dispossessed cultures; In the second place, the early experience made Derrida feel the importance of interrelatedness. This also explains why Derrida puts emphasis on intertext in his philosophy.

        Rorty once placed great emphasis on the importance of increasing our sensitivity to unfamiliar sorts of people to prevent marginalizing them. The conception of otherness also plays a very crucial role in , another important postmodern thinker Levinas’s philosophy. Levinas asks which will be stronger: the self or the other, self-interest and self-centeredness or openness toward the other? Levinas describes the Western ontological vision of freedom, which is opposed to his  conception of “ metaphysics of the other’s face”: “ It is hence not a relation with the other as such but the reduction of the other to the same. Such is the definition of freedom: to maintain oneself against the other…”[18]  In addition, Process scholar Buchler's concept of "alescence" which refers to the admission of new or novel traits into a complex also contributes to this train of thoughts, namely openness to otherness. In such an understanding, postmodernism may be characterized in terms of openness to otherness.

       By openness, according to Heidegger, means "something that does not block-off. It  does not block-off because it does not set bounds…The Open is the great whole of all that is unbounded. It lets beings…draw on one another and draw together without encountering any

bounds."[19]  This is to say, that the core of openness is no blocking off. Postmodernism helps break the closed mentality and call for a new kind of attitude—ocean attitude. What Northrop wrote in late1940s expressed the attitude:" We must open our intuitions and imaginations, even our souls, to the possibility of insights, beliefs and values other than our own, and we must bring scholarship to bear upon the world' problems as a whole, seeing local provincial factors in theirs relations to another and this whole."[20]

       Suchocki  contributes significantly to the conception of “openness”. She defines openness as  “the orientation of existence to ever-new forms of value.”[21] Here I would like to add that openness not only indicates being open to new values, but also to different values, cultures and people, in short, to otherness.

       What John Cobb stated in 1982 further made the postmodern open attitude to otherness evident.  " Today we are much more ready to learn from other cultures since the assumption of the superiority of European culture over others no longer grips us."[22] According to Cobb, “ one principle of postmodern thought in general, and of the greens in particular, is to be inclusive and to give voice to diverse groups and interests.”[23]

       In fact, the effort of "putting ourselves in the shoes of the other" and "seeing the world through the others' eyes"  has been appreciated by all postmodern thinkers. In this sense, postmodernism is allied with pluralism. Put it in Cobb’s word,  to be postmodern, is to be pluralistic.

       It is clear that it is postmodernism that makes it possible for Westerners to cross over to a strange world of thought and life and enables Westerners to view the two worlds as complementary rather than mutually exclusive. The both parties will learn something from others. When Cobb emphasizes in his response to 9-11 that “We must recognize that the perspectives of other nations  are just as valid as our own”, without a doubt, he is typically postmodern thinker. That is why he emphasizes that a postmodernist must be a pluralist. 

Is Whitehead and his process philosophy postmodern from such a criterion? My answer is positive.

       Although Whitehead never  used the term “ postmodern’,  as Cobb puts out, “the way

He spoke of the modern has a definite postmodern tone.”[24] In my opinion, the postmodern dimension of Whitehead philosophy not only lies in the fact that never regards his own philosophy as a fixed and single truth,  in his emphasis on complexity, and in reminding us to avoid the “ narrowness inherent in all finite systems”, [25]but also, even more importantly, in his  rejection of the conception of substance and the  rejection of “simple location”, and  his emphasis on interrelatedness. All of these rejections and emphasis lay foundation for openness to  otherness

       Rejection of the notion of Substance

       Substance has been a underlying assumption in modern Western philosophy. According to which, there is an independent, unchanging ultimate reality. The ultimate reality is a static and vacuous substratum and an enduring substance. Substance can exist by itself. Substance thinking has been dominating over western thinking since the time of  ancient Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers can be conceived as the founders of substance thinking. When Democritus stated that the universe is composed of tiny, indestructible, unchanging, and indivisible elements he called "atoms", he actually initiated the substance thinking.

       Although there are a number of philosophical schools among traditional metaphysics, some of them suggested that there are two substances such as mind and matter(like Descartes's dualism),  some emphasized there is only one substance such as matter(like materialism), they converge in conceiving of substance as something independent, unchanging and devoid of experience. The influence of substance thinking on modern western thinking is enormous, due to which one tends to think of something as self-contained and self-sufficient. To some extend, the modern closed “imperialistic attitude” can be regarded as  the product of substance thinking.

       To Whitehead, one of the major difficulties of substance thinking consists in failing to explain the interconnectedness among things. Substance thinking views relations as external to substance. The substance is what it is independently of relations and then enters into relations. These relations do not affect its fundamental  nature or existence. One major task of Whitehead’ philosophy is to attack the “notion of an actual entity as the unchanging subject of change.”[26]

Whitehead holds a non-substance thinking which pays much attention to relations and treat relations as internal constitutes of actual entity. According to which, nothing exists in itself. The existence of is a function of the existence of others. That means that there is no separated and isolated substance, and there is no self-contained and self-closed substance. It is evident that the “imperialistic attitude” dominant in modernity is strongly influenced by the underlying assumption of independent substance. It is the notion of substance that leads directly to the attitude because treating one’s culture or nation or people as substance necessarily leads to

Conceive a culture or nation as self-contained and independent. Through introducing the conception of interrelatedness, Whitehead deconstructs the modern worship of substance.

       Whitehead's rejection of “simple location”

       Associated with the rejection of substance, is the rejection of the “fallacy of simple location”. Whitehead  definitely emphasizes: his theory involves “ the entire abandonment of the notion that simple location is the primary way in which things are involved in space-time."[27] By simple location, Whitehead defines it in Science and Modern World as follows: “To say that a bit of matter has simple location means that it is.. in definite region of space, and  throughout a definite finite duration of time, apart from any essential reference… of that bit of matter to other regions of space and to other durations of time."[28] Whitehead also realizes the conception of simple location is deeply rooted in the West mind. He points out," The difficulty really arises from the unquestioned  acceptance of the notion of simple location as fundamental for space and time and from the acceptance of the notion of independent individual substance as fundamental for a real entity."[29] Against this train of thoughts, Whitehead's philosophy places emphasis on that every location involves an aspect of itself in every other location…"[30] The philosophical foundation to support Whitehead's rejection of simple location is his ontological principle: " In a certain sense, everything is everywhere at all time."[31] The postmodern implication of Whitehead’s rejection of simple location lies in the call for openness to other spaces and other times.

       Emphasis on Relatedness

       Behind the rejection of substance thinking and “simple location” is Whitehead’s emphasis on relatedness. Whitehead process philosophy is essentially a relational and organic philosophy, according to which all things are interrelated to each other, influence each other, and act upon each other. As individuals we are interrelated with other individuals. No one can exist apart from others, and no one can exist apart from relationship. That is to say, we are constituted by relationships.  We can find that the pervasive interrelationship of all beings is prevalent in Whiteheadian philosophy. In Whitehead, "relatedness is dominant over quality". [32]

       For Whitehead, relations are  internal. It is relations which are constitutive of the event itself. He emphasizes, “The internal relatedness is the reason why an event can be found only just where  it is  and how  it is, that is to say, in just  one definite set of relationships. For each

relationship enters into the essence of the event; so that, apart from that relationship, the event would not be itself. This is what is meant by the very notion of internal relations.”[33] Whitehead once emphasized that “The philosophy of organism is mainly devoted to the task of making clear the notion of ‘being present in another entity’.”[34]

      The notion of “mutual independence” promoted by Whiteheadian Suchocki in the light of process philosophy is helpful in understanding Whitehead’s notion of relation, especially the relationship with the other. Suchocki claims, “interdependence is universal.”[35]She emphasizes that “the well-being of one depends in some sense on the well-being of all” in an interdependent world is a “raw fact.”[36] Our interdependence is our mutual reliance upon one another. In Suchocki’s words, “We are not fortuitously interdependent, but necessarily so.” In this sense we can say, “interdependence is the very stuff of life.”[37]

The postmodern implication of  emphasis on relations and interrelatedness lies in that it deconstructs various modern dualisms such as subject and object, I and thou, the East and West.

Moreover, it lays the foundation for openness to the other. Being an organic whole, human mankind has no reason to be exclusive from each other, to be hostile each other.

       Pluralism

       Pluralism is an important trait of the postmodern dimension of Whitehead philosophy.

For Whitehead, “ the universe as a totality is essentially plural.”[38]This explains the reason why Whitehead discourages the desire to build a single metaphysic which will synthesize the discernment of all and "correct all their exaggerations and distortions."[39] According to Cobb, “the vision of myriads of complexity interrelate events in the  foundational feature of process metaphysics.”[40] On my understanding, the following famous saying by Whitehead can be conceived as an important principle of pluralism in Whitehead philosophy. It reads: “the many become one and are increased by one.”[41]The new one is itself one of many new events that participate in the disjunctive that become conjunctively the next new events. In Whitehead, there is no only one actual entity. He emphasizes the plurality of different actual entities. As Alston summarizes, "It is evident that Whitehead holds to pluralism in that he is emphatic in denying that there is any all-inclusive act of experience, or any other all-inclusive actuality of a comparable grade of unity, which embraces all finite experiences as component parts.”[42] Whitehead considers that the conditions of aesthetic experience make it impossible that there should be an all-inclusive experience. There are always “others,” which might have been and are not. For Whitehead, “this finiteness is not the result of evil, or of imperfection. It results from the fact that there are possibilities of harmony which either produce evil in joint realization, or are incapable of such conjunction. This doctrine is a commonplace in the  fine arts.”

       Whitehead held that the true philosopher should seek to examine as much human experience as possible. “The chief danger to philosophy is narrowness in the selection of evidence.”[43] The pluralist character of Whitehead has been noted by a few process thinkers. Some of them like Alston also notice that pluralism is “ central to Whitehead’s system.”[44]

       Promoting openness to the other

       Regarding the relationship with the other,  Whitehead emphasizes that different traditions can learn from each, borrow from each other, …..”[45] Behind what he said above is his emphasis on difference. Difference plays a very essential role in Whitehead's philosophy. For him, the differences provide the condition for higher development. More importantly, Whitehead emphasizes, "A diversification among human communities is essential  for the  provision of the  incentive and material for the Odyssey of the human spirit. Other nations of different habits are not enemies: they are godsends. Men require of their neighbors something sufficiently akin to be  understood, something sufficiently different to provoke attention, and something great enough to command admiration. We must not expect, however, all the virtues. We should even be satisfied if there is something odd enough to be interesting."[46]

       The Relevance of Whitehead postmodern philosophy

      The emphasis of Whitehead's postmodern philosophy on oceanic mentality paves the way for openness to other cultures. It provide a new forum from which Chinese philosophy can creatively engage in solving the core issue we face today with its own thought resource. In this process, we must be cautious of  cutting the feet to fit the shoes. The misreading of Zhuangzi can be conceived

An example.

Zhuangzi is conceived by some Western scholars as the ancient Chinese equivalent of Jacques Derrida because of “his skepticism, relativism, and distrust of language.”[47] Some propose that when Zhuangzi asks us to consider the fact that very big things from one perspective might be very small from another, then “we have perceived the laws of difference.”[48]

It is obvious that these scholars oversimplize Zhuangzi’s philosophy. Put it concretely, they clothed Zhuangzi with deconstructive postmodernism.

Yes, there is little doubt that there is relativistic element in Zhuangzi philosophy,

But two points must be pointed out: one is that Zhuangzi's relativism is different from the western relativism. There is a radical difference between them. Because there is no room for something absolute in the western relativism which  holds the view that every set of beliefs is as good as every other set. By contrary, in Zhuangzi, "relativism" is the  mean to reach a ideal personality.That means there is still something absolute in Zhuangzi's philosophy.

The second, the positive implication of Zhuangzi's philosophy is ignored. That is, Zhuangzi's rejection of Yelangism. In “Autumn flood", through the self-mockery and self-reflection of Lord of River who thinks "he is better than anyone else", Chuangzi criticizes Yelangism.

"I sit here between heaven and earth as a little stone or a little tree sits on a huge mountain. Since I can see my own smallness, what reason would I have to pride myself.

Compare the area within the four seas with al that is between heaven and earth-- is it not like one little anthill in a vast marsh? Compare the Middle Kingdom with the area within the four seas—is it not like one tiny grain in a great storehouse?"[49]

In my opinion, these aspects of Zhuangzi philosophy such as its emphasis on openness and its rejection of closed Yelangism more importantly embody the postmodern dimension of his philosophy.

       This also explains the reason why postmodernism  and premodernism may share some similarities. Because  "they share the same enemy.”[50] That is the “imperialistic attitude” and Yelangism.According to David Hall, postmodern reflection on modernity can benefit China because “the values underlying the postmodern critique of modernity resonate more profoundly with the dominant cultural interests of the Chinese than ever did interests and values of the modern West.”[51]

Today China is marching toward modernization. One of major obstacles on its way to modernization is Yelangism.In the past century, China has not only witnessed the drawbacks of the “ imperialistic attitude” , but also been a victim of the attitude.

Although the closed mentality such as  imperialistic attitude and yelangism are still powerful both in China and West today,  the quest for openness has increasingly become a irresistible tide at the whole level under the influence of postmodenism.As Hoogstraten rightly states, “If we are to continue to make history, we must change our attitude toward the other.”[52] This remind us of what Franklin D. Roosevelt said" “ We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well being is dependent on the well-being of other notions, far away.”

       One crucial lesson   9-11 event tells us that the postmodern oceanic attitude to otherness is extremely necessary. The rejection of the closed mentality of modernity still has a long way to go.In this sense, we can say that Whitehead's postmodern philosophy still has significance. When Cobb challenge people after 9-11 to “try to see the world  through bin Laden" and be cautious of  self-righteousness,[53] we see the necessity the presence of  postmodernism.

Just in this sense, I agree with Hall David’s paradoxical claim that “classical China is in a very real sense postmodern.”[54] although I don't totally agree with his definition of postmodernism.

The emphasis of Chinese classical philosophy on oceanic mentality based on the notions of  organic system, interrelatedness, mutual interdependence is indeed very postmodern which is very necessary today.

      Facing the powerful modern worldview and way of thinking, postmodernists not only need to form coalitions with others, but also need to take advantage of traditional thought resource from different traditions and cultures. A postmodern open “ocean mentality”

Can make us open to other cultures and welcome the different voice, on which an mutual enrichment and a creative transformation become possible.

Go to homepage       

 2004 © The Institute for Post-modern Development of China, Inc.