stratalism – conceptual foundations for the theory of levels in whitehead's and...

Stratalism – conceptual foundationsfor the theory of levels

in Whitehead's and Hartmann's ontologies

Jakub Dziadkowiec M. Phil.

John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

The Whitehead Metaphysical Society

e-mail: [email protected]

www.kul.pl/dziadkowiec

Katowice-Panewniki, 6th May 2011

Jakub Dziadkowiec, Stratalism - conceptual foundations for the theory of levels...

2

Contents

1. The philosophical position of stratalism

2. Overlaps between Whitehead and Hartmann

3. Conceptual foundations for stratalism in Whitehead’s ontology

4. Conceptual foundations for stratalism in Hartmann’s ontology

5. The unified concept of stratalism and its applications


3

1. The philosophical position of stratalism

• Stratalism [lat. stratum – a layer] is an ontological statement. It is sometimes called the theory of ontological levels.

• We define stratalism as a philosophical position, according to which the real world manifests a layered structure, contains partially separated ontological levels, relations between them, and concrete things, that include specified layers and their categories.


4

Stratum – meaning net

• Stratum (according to thefreedictionary.com):– Materials: a horizontal layer of material, especially one of several

parallel layers arranged one on top of another,

– Geology: a bed or layer of sedimentary rock having approximately the same composition throughout,

– Physical Geography: any of the regions of the atmosphere, such as the troposphere, that occur as layers,

– Biology: a layer of tissue; the epithelial stratum,

– Social sciences: a level of society composed of people with similar social, cultural, or economic status

– Systems theory: one of a number of layers, levels, or division in an organized system


5

Basic questions of stratalism

• Poli (2001, 262) introduces several questions that express basic problems for the theory of levels of reality:– What is a level of reality? – definition of level– What generates the levels? – demarcation criterion for level– Why are they discrete? [Why are they continuous?] – nature of

hierarchy– What separates them? – demarcation criterion and pluralism– What holds them together? – unification creterion and monism– Are they all of the same kind or are there different types of levels?

– monism vs pluralism of types of being (modes of being)– Are there overlaps between the theory of levels and other

theories?– Who has developed theories of levels?


6

Concrete, layer, level, hierarchy, order

• Some basic concepts of stratalism:– concrete – Hartmann: concretum, Whitehead: actual entity or nexus of

actual entities,

– layer, level – Hartmann: Schicht, Whitehead: society of actual entities,

– hierarchy – Hartmann: Aufbau, Whitehead: the order of nature.

• Each concrete belongs to at least one layer.

• Each concrete that belongs to the higher layerN belongs also to any lower layerN-1, layerN-2, ...

• Each layer is determined by concretes and categories belonging to it.

• Each level contains at least one layer.

• The hierarchy contains all layers and levels in their mutual connections to each other.

• Levels stay in the relation of emergence to each other.


7

Stratalism and emergence

• The relation of emergence (e.g.: Kim 2006) finds its applications within stratalism – it provides an up-to-date mechanism that describes the inter-layer relations, the mutual dependence of levels and their partial autonomy.

• Two types of ontological (strong) emergence:– horizontal – within one layer,

– vertical – between two layers.

• Stratalism uses both types of ontological emergence as it provides a comprehensive view explaining top-down and bottom-up relations between levels, alongside with horizontal dynamics within one level.


8

Stratalism as a main difference between Whitehead and Hartmann

• J.N. Mohanty, N. Hartmann and A.N. Whitehead. A Study in Recent Platonism (1957, 126):

“Hartmann’s ontology of the real world culminates in the recognition of various layer and strata. This stratification takes place in his doctrine of categories. Limits are put against extension of categories of one stratum to another. (…) Whitehead’s cosmology is a unitary picture. For, Whitehead, like Leibniz, makes his actual entities ‘monads’, apprehending other actual entities, reacting to contact, having ‘appetition’, culminating in a sort of aesthetic enjoyment. Thus categories culled form all levels are put together to describe the actual entities. This violates the very fundamentals of the Hartmannian ontology.”


9

2. Overlaps between Whitehead and Hartmann (1)

• Actual entity and Realseiende [real being]:– subjective immediacy and neutrality → fallacy of ‘vacuous

actuality’; vector character of experience,

– Actual entity is full of content, it cannot be pure ‘this’,

– „Indeed, if the fault of Hartmann’s concept is to be found anywhere, it is in its neutrality” (Mohanty 131, 133).

• Essentia – existentia and causa sui:– neutrality concerns the existence of being, not its essence (contra

neokantism and phenomenology),

– causa sui as some sort of subjective immediacy, no consciousness,

– every real being is a causa sui and every actual entity is a causa sui

– ‘what’ is transformed into ‘who’ (Mohanty 132).


10


• Actuality:– W: most real beings are actual entities,– H: actuality is the primary mode of the real world.

• Decision:– W: a very meaning of actuality, „cutting off”,– H: similar concept in modal structure of becoming, another term.

• Ontological principle and Realgesetz der Wirklichkeit,– W: there is no element of hypothesis in an actual entity, indetermination

evaporates from satisfaction, actual entity as a stubborn fact,– H: there are in the real world no mere possibilities; all that are there are

actualities (Mohanty 135).

• Reality of the past:– W: objective immortality and the lost of subjective immediacy,– H: what is once real can never cease to be real, to be past does not mean

ceasing to be real, ‘Härte des Realen’.


11


• Two types of potentiality/possibility:– ‘General’ possibility:

• W: ‘general’ potentiality = H: ‘ideal’ possibility,• most abstract nature of eternal objects.

– ‘Real’ possibility:• H: „the totality of conditions present at a given

time within the real context” (New Ways 27),• W: a conditioned indetermination of a real

concrescence within a correlated world,physical field of actual entity (PR 23 and 80).

“This is to say, while for Hartmann the actual entity A is itself ‘real’-possible, for Whitehead A determines a range of ‘real’ possibility relative to itself!” (Mohanty 144)


12

Real potentiality (W) and Realmöglichkeit (H)

• W: ‘real’ potentiality is relative to a given actual entity,

• W: ‘real’ potentiality is still partial indetermination,

• W: ‘real’ potentiality cannot be understood without ‘general’ potentiality, and it is not a modal category.

• H: ‘real’ possibility is always of the actual being,

• H: ‘real’ possibility is devoid of all indetermination,

• H: complete separation between the two.

“Second, by making ‘real’ possibility different form ‘ideal’ possibility, the old rationalistic idea of the real as a selection form many possible ideal worlds is set aside.” (Mohanty 151)


13

3. Stratalism in Whitehead's ontology

• If Whitehead’s ontology is similar to a living organism, then the question is, how to establish a stratification of living organism?

Cons (5):– The world is a flowing stream of actual entities – each being is equal to

the others, there is no graduation among them,

– No categorial novum – all categories describe each actual entity,

– Actual entity is dipolar – inseparable structure of physical and mental pole, weak panpsychism,

– Constant rhythm one-many – all ontological levels may be reduced to the creative process of constituting one from many and many from one,

– Ontological continuity – there are no sudden changes at macroscopic level that could create gaps, thus producing distinct and separate layers.


14

Whitehead’s cosmologyas a hierarchical picture

• On the other hand, the Whitehead’s cosmology is a hierarchical picture that contains:– hierarchy of eternal objects, arranged according to the degree of their

complexity (Mohanty 67),– hierarchy of societies (PR 96, 192): from pure extension to animal body,

and four types of societies (PR 99-103): structured, stabilized, specialized and protected,

– four grades (species) of actual entities which are moments in:a) empty space,b) non-living objects,c) living objects,d) objects with conscious knowledge (PR 177-178).

– The four grades are distinguished by a criterion of perception; the better perception the higher grade; perception includes: causation & decision.

• Hierarchy – an ordered system with increasing degree of complexity.


15

Mechanisms of stratification

• the Creativity One Many – provides novelty,• the very process of concrescence (horizontal emergence

that guarantees an explanation of lowest-level inner dynamics),

• the ingresion of eternal objects through the real potentiality into the actual world (PR 23); the creation of the world is „the incoming of a certain type of social order” (PR 96),

• contrast, nexus & society – vertical arrangement,• the order of nature: from an extensive continuum to an

animal body.


16

Not just horizontal, but also vertical– society

• Society – „a nexus of actual entities which are ‘ordered’ among themselves”, „more than a set of entities to which the same class-name applies” (PR 89)

• Society endures through time and can change location (Cobb 28), Whitehead’s enduring object,

• Society arranges actual entities hierarchically, according to a certain pattern that comes from the eternal object, which is a common form for the society (PR 34),

• The higher complexity of eternal object brings the higher level of ordered society.


17

4. Stratalism in Hartmann's ontology

• Four ontological layers [New Ways 57]:– inorganic being [anorganisches Sein]

– organic being [organisches Sein]

– psychical being [seeliges Sein]

– spiritual being [geistiges Sein]

• Two inter-level relations:– super-formation [Überformung]

– super-position [Überbauung]

• Four groups of categorial laws (Der Aufbau 382-472, Cicovacki 2001, 163):

1) categorial validity, 3) stratification, 2) categorial coherence, 4) categorial

dependence.


18

4. Stratalism in Hartmann's ontology

• Albertazzi (2001, 299) calls Hartmann’s system an architectural ontology.

• If Hartmann’s ontology is similar to a gothic cathedral, then the question is, how to establish a horizontal perspective and dynamics of static and vertical gothic cathedral?


19

H-stratalism

• In the article Hartmann’s Stratified Reality Peruzzi (2001) develops Hartmann’s stratalism in several directions, he emphasizes:– order, dependence, and independence within the hierarchy of strata,

– a relation to GST [general system theory] of Bertalanffy and Bunge,

– a relation to the concept of emergence,

– the usage of terms „society”, „pattern”, „emergence”,

– anti-dualistic, evolutionary, many-layered and dialectical picture of the world,

– that „whatever is possible is possible within the bounds of the actual world”, real possibility,

– that „emergence would result from self-selection of Potentialities”,

– horizontal and vertical aspects of Hartmann’s ontology.


20

Not just vertical, but also horizontal– categorial coherence

• As the vertical and hierarchical character of Hartmann’s ontology is quite obvious, there is still a need for the explanation of horizontal relations within consecutive levels. It would eventually bring some sort of unity connecting all vertical strata.

• As Cicovacki (2001, 164) writes: „The world is governed and co-determined by all of its layers; it is a unity in plurality.”

• To solve the problem Cicovacki introduces the relation of interaction, while Hartmann presents the relation of categorial coherence.

• Categorial coherence establishes a horizontal relation among categories within a layer – the multi-connected categories and entities create a dynamic basis for the emergence of any higher type of being.

• The horizontal tension at the same time expresses the diversity within consecutive levels in hierarchy and unites them by showing common mechanisms of that diversity.


21

Mechanism of horizontal dynamics– process

• The categories of process and becoming – Hartmann considers them among the fundamental categories of the real world (Mordka 2008, 59).

• That emphasizes his dynamical approach in ontology where stabilized structures and entities are secondary to processes and categorial relations occurring at the bottom level (anti-substantialism).

• It puts Hartmann’s stratalism in a different light that exhibits the inner dynamics of his quasi-cathedral ontology.

• The relation of categorial coherence and the category of process introduces both: dynamics and horizontal axis in his ontology.


22

5. The unified concept of stratalism (1)

• Whitehead’s living organism • Hartmann’s gothic cathedral

&


23


– continuous

– monistic

– dynamic

– horizontal

– discreet

– pluralistic

– static

– vertical

– Ontological continuity that leaves place for discreet ontological layers based on a certain demarcation criterion.

– Monism in the type of being (real), pluralism in the grade of being (existentia et essentia).

– Dynamics at the horizontal axis that leads to static outcome at the vertical axis.

– There is no proper explanation of a vertical emergence of higher level without a horizontal explanation of inter-relations at the lower level.



24


– How to justify the verticality of Whitehead’s ontology?

– grades of societies of actual entities organized within the order of nature,

– statics guaranteed by the vertical axis and the societies of actual entities introducing new patterns,

– the emergence of vertical novelty.

– How to justify the horizontality of Hartmann’s ontology?

– tension of pairs of general categories and the category of process,

– dynamics guaranteed by the horizontal axis and the relation of categorial coherence and the category of process,

– the emergence of horizontal novelty.

Real possibility co-creates the actuality



25

Scientific applications

• Stratalism may be considered as the ontological background for many scientific disciplines, e.g.:– chaos theory and non-linear dynamics, bifurcation as an

ontological discontinuity,

– complexity theory (Ellis),

– general system theory (Bunge),

– emergent effective theories, e.g.: thermodynamics and statistical mechanics,

– quantum mechanics, quantum Darwinism (Zurek, Campbell),

– minimal living system theory,

– cognitivism.

Thank Youfor Your attention!


27

References• Albertazzi, Liliana (2001), “The Roots of Ontics”, in: Axiomathes 12, 299-315.

• Cicovacki, Predrag (2001), “New Ways of Ontology – The Ways of Interaction”, in: Axiomathes 12, 159-170.

• Cobb, John (2008), Whitehead Word Book. A Glossary with Alphabetic Index to Technical Terms in Process and Reality, Claremont, P&F Press.

• Hartmann, Nicolai (1964), Der Aufbau der Realen Welt, Berlin, Walter de Gruyter.

• Hartmann, Nicolai (1975) New ways of Ontology, translated by Reinhard C. Kuhn, Connecticut, Greenwood Press.

• Kim, Jaegwon (2006), “Emergence: Core ideas and issues”, in: Synthese 151, 547-559.

• Mohanty, Jitendra N. (1957), Nicolai Hartmann and Alfred North Whitehead. A Study in Recent Platonism, Calcutta, Progressive Publishers.

• Mordka, Artur (2008), Ontologiczne podstawy estetyki. Zarys koncepcji Nicolaia Hartmanna, Rzeszów, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego.

• Peruzzi, Alberto (2001), “Hartmann’s Stratified Reality”, in: Axiomathes 12, 227-260.

• Poli, Roberto (2001), “The Basic Problems of the Theory of Levels of Reality”, in: Axiomathes 12, 261-283.

• Whitehead, Alfred North (1926; corrected edition 1974), Process and Reality. An Essay in Cosmology, New York, The Free Press.

stratalism – conceptual foundations for the theory of levels in whitehead's and...

Documents