Here be revisionary metaphysics!’ A critique of a concern about process philosophy

Bibliographic Data

ID9686756
AuthorsPaul Giladi (0000-0002-8934-3602, Manchester Metropolitan University, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume60
Issue2
Pages257-275
Publication date2021-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueDialogue (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0012-2173 • E-ISSN: 1759-0949
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0012217321000068
OpenAlexW3136114963
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited34

In this paper, I argue that John Dupré and Daniel Nicholson's ‘process manifesto’ is ironically more sympathetic to descriptive metaphysics than to revisionary metaphysics. Focusing on their argument that any process philosophy automatically slides into Whiteheadian obscurantism if it does not just rest content with revealing the problematic features of ordinary language, I argue that their position occludes a logical space, one in which revisionary metaphysics is articulated without any Whiteheadian obscurantism and involves no dereliction of critical/revisionary orientation. I argue that key features of the respective critical social ontologies of Judith Butler and Talia Mae Bettcher occupy such a logical space

Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Key (lock) · Manifesto · Metaphysics · Ontology · Political science · Process (computing) · Chemistry · Computer Science · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Hannah Arendt's Political Philosophy · Law · Philosophy · Posthumanist Ethics and Activism

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access