Abstract
In Religion in an Age of Science, Ian Barbour concludes that the contemporary evolutionary worldview with its emphasis on the interplay of law and chance, relationality and autonomy, can be properly accounted for only by something like the process‐relational metaphysics of Alfred North Whitehead. At the same time, he expresses serious reservations about certain features of Whitehead's scheme, notably, his perceived inability to account for the ongoing identity of the human self and for the fact of multilevel organization within organisms and in the world of inanimate compounds. In this article, I suggest that both of these difficulties can be resolved if one adopts a revisionist understanding of the Whiteheadian category of society according to which democratically organized societies possess an ontological unity and exercise a corporate agency proper to their own level of existence and activity. Furthermore, if one applies this revisionist understanding of societies to the Whiteheadian doctrine of God, a Trinitarian understanding of God becomes possible within the overall parameters of process‐relational metaphysics. In this way, traditional belief in the doctrine of the Trinity can be reconciled with a scientifically credible worldview.
Keywords
agency, Trinity, structured field of activity, society of actual occasions, process‐relational metaphysics
How to Cite
Bracken, J., (1998) “Revising Process Metaphysics in Response to Ian Barbour's Critique”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 33(3), 405–414. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/0591-2385.00157
Rights
© 2024 The Author(s).38
Views
59
Downloads