Function of reason

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The essay The Function of Reason (FV) is a work first published in 1929 under the original title The Function of Reason by the British philosopher and mathematician Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947). The short text - originally 72 pages - is based on the Louis Clark Vanuxem Foundation lectures that Whitehead had given in March 1929 at Princeton University . It can be attributed to Whitehead's late philosophy, which found its full formulation in the scriptures Process and Reality and Adventure of Ideas . The author builds on considerations that he had placed at the beginning of process and reality , formulates his scientific-theoretical claim and classifies it in the history of ideas so that the work can also be read as an introduction to his philosophy.

The title is ambiguous. On the one hand, it points to the mode of operation of reason within a context, for example in an act of knowledge , within society or in natural events in general, and on the other hand to the internal mode of operation of reason. In this publication, Whitehead addresses both aspects. He explains his basic philosophy of science , according to which progress , i.e. H. The development of new ideas can be traced back to a speculative philosophy applied within reasonable limits , while practical reason serves above all to preserve the existing and to cope with everyday life .

The standard international code for the work is FR .

content

Practical and theoretical reason

In general, Whitehead dealt with the traditional philosophical question of the “ essence of reason”, which must be reconsidered in the light of current conditions. (FV 5) The task of reason is first of all “that it promotes the art of living.” (FV 6) This statement already contains Whitehead's conception of purpose orientation ( teleology ) in nature. Furthermore, he differentiated between practical and theoretical reason and symbolized these with Odysseus , who planned immediate action, and Plato , who was concerned with the completeness of insight. (FV 33-34). A special aspect of theoretical reason is speculative reason. Michael Hampe speaks of a natural philosophical and an epistemological aspect in Whitehead's investigation of reason.

Originally, reason is oriented pragmatically, helping to cope with the demands of practical life and improving the state of life. This is its purpose. That is why an interpretation of evolution that biologically , causally focuses on the survival of the fittest is insufficient . Strength alone is not the reason for survival. “In fact, everything that lives is not particularly capable of survival for that reason alone. The art of surviving is an attribute of the dead. Only inorganic objects last really long periods of time. ”(FV 6).

Therefore, another explanation of the mechanisms of action of evolution must be asked for. “Why did evolution in its overall tendency lead to the development of ever higher forms of life? Neither the fact that living organisms arose from some distribution of inanimate matter, nor the fact that ever higher forms of organisms have developed over time can be explained in any way by the concepts of adaptation to the environment or the struggle for existence. In fact, in the course of the upward development, an opposite relationship to the environment has emerged, expressed mathematically: the inverse relationship to adaptation . ”(FV 8). Birds build nests, beavers build dams. The struggle for survival is a factor that plays an important role in the organic world, but is not sufficient to explain evolution. In the course of evolution, individuals make use of their respective environment primarily because of their practical reason. This is increasingly true with the growing formation of consciousness. The limitation of the theory of evolution to mechanical explanations does not provide any justification for the development of ever higher levels of life. From this Whitehead develops his position:

“My thesis is that this active attack on the environment can be explained by a threefold endeavor: first, to live at all, second, to live well, and third, to live even better. The art of living consists in firstly living at all, secondly living in a satisfactory way and thirdly being able to achieve an even higher degree of satisfaction. "(FV 9)

There is no coherent (coherent, conclusive) justification for a materialistic worldview. The usual arguments are based on superficial appearances. Man acts according to his interests in all areas of his life. “We all start out as good empiricists . But our openness to experience remains within the limits of our immediate interests; ”(FV 12) Without any direct reference to the debate, Whitehead opposed Max Weber's position in the value judgment dispute with this view . “Reactions have never been observed between the material components of an organism that somehow violate the physical or chemical laws of inorganic nature. But this is a statement that is very different from the further assertion that there are no other principles that play a role in these processes. ”(FV 12-13) All human life is determined by purposes and intentions (ultimate causes) . There is overwhelming "evidence" for this. How could a large ship be built at all based on causal relationships, he argued, and then head for planned overseas destinations in a pre-calculated time.

Whitehead, like Ludwik Fleck or Thomas S. Kuhn later, criticized the defensive, positivistic self-sufficiency in the individual sciences, in which practical reason clings to experience.

“Many a scientist, with great patience and ingenuity, has constructed experiments whose purpose was to confirm his conviction that animal behavior is not guided by purposes. And possibly he also wrote essays in his spare time in which it is proven that humans are in no way different from other animals, which is why 'purpose' is a completely irrelevant term for the explanation of their physical activities (including his own) got to. I think that scientists whose purpose in life is to prove that they are useless beings are a very interesting subject of investigation. "(FV 16)

The behaviorism rejected Whitehead clear here from, again without mentioning explicitly the appropriate debate. At a later point in time (1934) there was an encounter with BF Skinner , who saw this controversial conversation as a stimulus for his work Verbal Behavior . Whitehead, on the other hand, noted a higher development of practical reason and justified its great importance with the associated positive emotions:

“The primordial, deep-seated feeling of satisfaction with its roots in an unmistakable past that the exercise of reason brings with it is caused by the impressive clarification of a method that helps one with immediate practical tasks. The method works and reason is satisfied. There is no interest beyond the immediate scope of the method - which, in the same way, is too moderate a statement. There is an active interest in keeping the inquiring curiosity within the scope of the method; and every failure of this interest triggers an emotional reluctance that makes the openness to experience disappear. "(FV 17-18)

According to Whitehead, theories always have a “life story”. At the beginning of the discovery of something new, there is a contrast to the traditional approach, which creates a conflict. When the new theory has established itself, it becomes a habit, “normal science” (Kuhn). The once new method becomes the dominant approach, which is also defended by obscurants . (FV 38) The epistemological contrast disappears. “The clearest sign of wear and tear is when the progress made with the help of the method is no longer a matter of contentious issues. Then it has reached the last application phase, which is about endless arguments about incidental matters. "(FV 18)

Whitehead's remarks are reminiscent of Peirce's theory of abduction when he writes: “The birth of a method consists essentially in the discovery of a certain maneuver, a trick how one can live.” (FV 18) On the other hand, he presented the life story of a method in the context of becoming and passing away. Methods that have proven themselves are no longer able to create something fundamentally new, to promote progress. There is mere survival and perishing when new, alternative methods are found. (FV 19) "A method reaches the peak of its effectiveness when it encourages the taking of new possibilities without having to transcend oneself." (FV 22).

As a mathematician, physicist and theorist of relativity, he was aware that his talk about the final cause and the upward development on the side of the observable world has no direct basis. Yet he drew the analogy between organisms and the inorganic world. The structures observable in the universe show a development towards a weakening of the contrasts, towards a more even distribution of energy (see entropy ). The emergence of life and the development of intelligence oppose this basic physical condition. Life and consciousness mean an increase in contrast and an increase in order. There must then be a “counter-agent”, a counterforce to causality, with which life and consciousness can be explained.

“There has been a mysterious impulse in the material universe (and perhaps it still exists) that has led to the aspiration of higher energy levels. The general confirmation of this impulse is beyond our observation. "(FV 23)

Whitehead answered the question, which remains open here, about the origin of this first impulse in process and reality with the theory of the “primordial nature of God”. As a function of reason , it was only important for him to work out that the exclusively physical , materialistic approach leads to unsatisfactory explanations. If, on the other hand , one assumes a finality in the universe in addition to causality , one can develop a cosmology that is coherent in itself.

"If we decide to allow the category of the ultimate cause, we can use it to define the original function of reason without contradiction: This function consists in constituting, articulating and criticizing the ultimate cause and the strength of the striving towards it." FV 25) or, to put it negatively: “One would do well to make it very clear to oneself that reason is an inexplicable phenomenon if there are no effective purposes.” (FV 25) Whitehead postulated: “Anyone who thinks pragmatically must have this definition accept. "(FV 25)

In a brief secondary thought, Whitehead criticized the dualism of body and mind in René Descartes : "The double aspect of ascent and decay cannot be broken down into its components." (FV 28) He demands:

“If we want to arrive at a metaphysics worked out in detail that gives us explanatory insights, we must first give up the concept of value-free, empty existence. This kind of emptiness is a property of abstractions and it is completely wrong to try to introduce it into the concept of the fundamentally real thing, of the real process. "(FV 28)

Against the separation of body and mind as substances, Whitehead set the process of experience, in which the physical aspect is included as well as the psychological aspect. He spoke of the two “poles” of experience. Experience is the basis of all knowledge and is always "bipolar". The higher a structure is developed, the stronger the influence of the spiritual pole. Only from a certain degree of complexity does reason appear as a purposeful striving through which the psychological-spiritual striving is brought into order. Order, determinateness and clarity are only constituted by reason and this or "consciousness is not a necessary component of psycho-spiritual experience." (FV 30)

Reason and history of ideas

Whitehead describes speculative reason as an essential driving force of human life. However, it is different in different people. Above all, it was great thinkers who drove human progress with their ideas. On this rests a moral obligation to give speculative reason the freedom it needs. “There is a certain moral intuition to their cause that speculative insight for its own sake is one of the basic ingredients of the good life. The passionate demand for unrestricted freedom of thought is based on it. "(FV 34)

Practical and speculative reason have an intrinsic connection. “Speculative reason accumulates those theoretical insights that enable the transition to new methods at certain critical moments.” In doing so, it is subject to historical, social processes. “And the discoveries of practical reason create the raw material without which speculative reason cannot advance.” (FV 34) According to Whitehead, the history of practical reason goes back to the pre-forms of animal life; that of theoretical reason he estimated to be only about 6,000 years in which human thought evolved from myth to religion to science. (FV 35)

“The decisive discovery to which speculative reason owes its paramount importance was made by the Greeks . They discovered logic and mathematics and in this way brought method into speculation. From that point on, sanity had an objective method of verification and a method that could lead to progress. As a result, she was freed from her exclusive dependence on mystical visions and imaginative conjectures and was able to develop according to a method that originated from herself. From now on she no longer produced isolated judgments, but systems - systems instead of inspiration. ”(FV 35-36) Mathematics and logic as new ways of thinking have an impact in all practical areas of life, be it commercial calculations, scientific calculations or the arguments of rhetoricians . This led through the Renaissance to the “speculative philosophy” of Galileo or Newton .

An explosive development of human knowledge, which began for Whitehead about 150 years before his time, is mainly due to the connection between practical and theoretical reason. A period of around 300 years passed from the overcoming of static thinking in the Middle Ages, the scholastic "obscurantism" by Galileo and his contemporaries to the invention of the steam engine in 1769. After that, a development with a special dynamic set in, in which at the same time a fundamental opposition arose between natural science and metaphysics, based on Newtonian physics, which consequently led to a materialistic point of view. (FV 43). Whitehead sees a drastic example of this in the distinction between “moral science” and “natural science” that arose at Cambridge University . “Philosophy has given up its right to unlimited generality; and natural science has withdrawn into the narrowly limited circle of its methodology. ”(FV 52) Whitehead wanted to overcome this discrepancy with his late philosophy .

Speculative common sense

“Speculative reason is essentially free from methodological restrictions. Their function is to go beyond the limited reasons to the general reasons and to understand the totality of all methods as coordinated by the nature of things - a nature of things that can only be understood by crossing all methodological barriers. The limited intelligence of man is never enough to ever really achieve this infinite ideal. ”(FV 53) Because of man’s limitations, a methodical and coherent approach can help him to further develop his knowledge. In this way speculative thinking loses its anarchic character. Whitehead saw this as the special achievement of ancient Greece.

"Fortunately, the Greeks invented logic in the broadest sense of the word - the logic of discovery." (FV 55) Based on this logic, there are a number of criteria with which one can judge opinions and convictions as to whether they meet the requirements of a general explanation can suffice.

1. Agreement with the visual experience;
2. clarity of thought content;
3. internal logical consistency;
4. external logical consistency;
5. Classification in a logical scheme that
(a) largely coincides with experience,
(b) does not conflict with it anywhere,
(c) is based on coherent basic concepts or categories, and
(d) has certain methodological consequences. (FV 55)

Whitehead found it difficult to achieve this overview, which at first glance seemed simple. The problems start with the premises , which are often not questioned enough, although on closer inspection they contradict the experience. The assumption that the clarity of statements can be easily checked is also deceptive. Whitehead assumed "a complete metaphysical understanding of the universe as a whole" (FV 56) in order to be able to judge the clarity of a statement. Experiences are always based on interpretations, so that a comparison of a statement with an experience always leaves some doubt. Because the analysis of facts must always be incomplete and fuzzy, the internal consistency is also fraught with ambiguities. This applies in the same way to the comparison of the theory in question with corresponding theories in other areas.

The fifth criterion in the sub-items reflects the first four requirements for a speculative theory. Whitehead demanded that all the individual elements and theories be brought into a coherent context by setting up an overarching scheme. Only with a uniform system of categories and concepts can one work out the missing inner logic between individual theories and methods from the overriding perspective. Irregular statements, incompatible facts or the discovery of something new force a review of experience, individual theories or the entire general scheme. "The fundamental moral claim that civilization imposes on its bearers requires that they pass on and increase this reservoir of potential further developments from which they themselves have benefited." (FV 59)

Speculative reason has to submit to certain rules, not only formally, methodically. It must also withstand the confrontation with the observed facts in its statements. "The priority of the factual over thinking means that there should still be a certain measure of truth even in the boldest upsurges of speculative thinking." (FV 66) Furthermore, speculative reason is not restricted in its creativity. “It is part of the nature of speculation that it goes beyond the facts immediately given. Your task is to let your thinking work creatively into the future; and it fulfills this task by looking at ideas which include the observable. "(FV 68)

Whitehead's initially speculative "realization that there is a counter-tendency at work in the universe that transforms the decay of an existing order into the emergence of a new order" (FV 74), became half a century later through research into non-equilibrium thermodynamics , self-organization and chaotic Dynamics plausible and empirically supported. His critical assessment of the theory of evolution and the interpretation of the evolution of life as an active and creative process also find significant support from recent research results.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Entry in the Princeton University Library Catalog
  2. ↑ Eberhard Bubser, the translator of the work in the afterword (FV 75)
  3. ↑ Christoph Kann: Footnotes to Plato. History of philosophy at AN Whitehead , Hamburg: Meiner 2001, 71
  4. ↑ Christoph Kann: Footnotes to Plato. History of philosophy at AN Whitehead , Hamburg: Meiner 2001, 72
  5. ^ Michael Hampe: Alfred North Whitehead , Munich: CH Beck 1998, 91
  6. ↑ Ludwik Fleck: Origin and Development of a Scientific Fact . [1935] Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 1980
  7. ^ The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
  8. ^ Burrhus Frederic Skinner: A psychological analysis of verbal behavior. Class notes made by R. Hefferline , Summer, 1947, in a course at Columbia University, given by BF Skinner . Internet resource , VB 76
  9. ↑ with this date Whitehead refers to the year in which the machine was patented by James Watt
  10. ↑ Different approaches are discussed in: Timothy E. Eastman, Hank Keeton (Eds.): Physics and Whitehead: Quantum, Process, and Experience . SUNY Press, Albany 2004; Joachim Klose: The Structure of Time in the Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead . Alber, Munich / Freiburg 2002; Spyridon Koutroufinis (ed.): Processes of the living. To the topicality of the natural philosophy AN Whiteheads . Alber, Freiburg 2007; Tobias Müller and Bernhard Dörr (eds.): Reality in the process. AN Whitehead's philosophy in dialogue with the sciences. Schöningh, Paderborn 2011; Franz Riffert and Michel Weber (eds.): Searching for New Contrasts, Ontos 2003; Hans Günter Scheuer: The process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and the physics of the 20th century , Shaker, Aachen 2005

expenditure

  • The function of reason . Princeton University Press 1929. (online) (Reprint: Beacon Press, 1971)
  • The function of reason. Translated and with an afterword by Eberhard Bubser, Reclam, Stuttgart 1974, ISBN 3-15-009758-4 .

literature