-........., .... / IN PRAISE OF HEDGEHOGS \ IN PRAISE OF HEDGEHOGS: Alfred North Whitehead's Critique of Hume ( By JOHN LARKIN LINCOLN, V A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts McMaster University September 1977 / B e JOHN LARKIN .L INCOLN . '1977 MASTER OF ARTS (-1977) MCMASTER UNIVERSITY (PH I LOSOPHY) Hamilton, Ontario CANADA . TITLE: IN PRAISE OF HEDGEHOGS: Alfred North Whitehead's Critique of Hume rs AUTHOR: JOHN LARKIN LINCOLN, V UPERV·ISOR: PROFESSOR S. M. ,N .A JM \ Number of Pages: ix, 1)2 .'\ -- 11 ) , ABSTRACT ) t': . j ~ This e~:say presents a particular perspective. into Al- fred North Nhitehead's critique of David Burne's philosophy f> of experience. The first section sets forth the problem. which Whitehead saw in Burne's philosophy: the problem that were one to consistently hold Hume's position one would be red.uged. to what George Santayana calls t~ 'solipsism of the I pr.esen t moment. The section section concerns Whi tel1ead 's I understanding of the cause of Burne's problem, abstraction. . , Section three considers Hume's partic.u l.a r brand of abstraction, sensationalism, and its relation to visual experience. Sec- ,. . tion four deals with the rudiments of the Whiteheadian solu-· tion of Hume's.problem. ~ brief conclusion attemp~s to put. Whitehead's critique into perspective and suggest further inquiries . .. " • iii LN PRAISE OF HEDGEHOGS: Alfred North ~vhitehead's Critique of Hume "I' f'V r-tyt(.. K))) lrLYVS ~ PXfJoXOJ II The Fox knows many things, ~ut the lIedgehoq kn.ol,ols One "big thing.' " (Translation mine.) o .. . iv , , I I ACKNOWLEDGE~~NTS I would like to take this opportunity to thank the following persons affiliated with McMaster University who ,. have been instrumental in my completing this essay: Prof- essor Sami Najm, my advisor whos:e. patience good humor. ~nd have been beyond Professor James Noxon, whose expectat~on; friendship, wi~ and advice are deeply apprecia.. ted; Professor Albert Shalom, whose friendship" advice and ~ncQuragement me through some dark hours; and Professor Constantine h~lped Georgiadis, whose friendship, humor, good.conversat~on·ana enthusiasm shall serve as an e'xample for my futu're endeavo~s. My'thanks to my friend, typist, pr6ofreader, and ephem-' • 0 eral gadfly I t-1S .Su,zanne Ross; and ~o Mr. Franci's P. DeMaio ror the use of a mean machine. To John Borders Tom Kronsberg, my deepest apprec ~nd iation. Both ,listened to drafts and argu- patien~ly cou~tless , ' ments, endured my releDtless and still,offered b~nter, i~val- uable constructive criticism. lowe special thanks to David E. Starr, Tutor, St. John's College, Annapolis, Maryland who has been friend and men bot~ tor througho1;lt my acquaintance with Whi.tehead. It is with oc- . . , ambivalence that I remember Mr. Starr's cajoling casio~al tha~ "'"' . I study Whitehead and for~ake a promising c~reer as·a mason. v , , PREFACE , In order to avoid an unreasonable number of footnot~s', I have chosen to refereDcesby means of the indicate~~extual following code: complete ~ibliographical data may be located ... in the Bibliography section at the end of this essay. \ Berkeley, PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE, PoHK. Hume" AN ABSTRACT OF A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE, A. ENQUIRIES, E . . ---- A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE, ,T. James, ESSAYS IN RADICAL EMPIRICISM, EiRE. Jonas, THE PHENOMENON OF LIFE, PoL. • 0 Macmurray, THE SELF AS AGENT, SAA. Santayana, SCEPTICISM 'AND ANIMAL FAITH, SAAF.· Whitehead; ADVENTURES OF IDEAS, AoI. -~------- THE CONCEPT OF NATURE, eN. --------- THE FUNCTION OF REASON, FOR. INTERPRETATION OF SCIENCE, loS. ----~~---, MODES OF TROUGHT, MOT. --------- NATURE AND LIFE, N&L., ~--------, ~ROCESS AND REALITY, PRo . -~------~, SCIENCE AND-THE M9DERN WORLD, S~~. . ~~~, SYMBOLISM: ITS MEANING AND EFFECT, S. I vi -/ I j ., t' How happy is the little Stone That rambles in the Road alone, And doesn I,t care about Careers , And exegencies never fears - Whose Coat of· elemental Brown A passing Universe put on, And independent as the Sun or Assoc·iat.~s glows alone, Fulfilling absolute Decree In casual simplicity. Emily Dickinson, c. 1881 ~ J ( \ ,. ... • , . " .1 ." vii, .' INTRODUCTEON The philosophical work of Alfred North Whitehead pre sent~ a prolonged cr~tique of modern ~hilosophic positions. It was ~Vhitehead r s contention that virtually a 11 of the mod- ern philosophic alternatives were fundamentally similar in their basic presuppositions c?ncerning the character, con~ tent and, tex,ture of h\llna. . n experience. Whitehead claimed that . ':" .~ -'.: ... ~ many of , the inadequacies 'of.,modern philosophy could be att:.rib- , --- . uted to limitations imposed by these basic presuppositions. " Whitehead's entire philosophical endeavor mig.l?t be charact!=r- , ized as all atte~pt to .understand the li'mi ts of .explanation .w~ich these presuPPos,i tion's impose and to· offer a plausible . ·~'.tt.ernati ve . This 'ess'ay 'wiil' present a part~culai aspect of Whi te head·1 s endeavor to und:er.6·1,::·an4 the presupposi tion~ of ~odern (. philosophy. i will piscuss Whi~ehead's arguments cori~erning 'David Hume .acco\lnt of. eXp'erience . In· order to ·accomplish IS ',". this I shall divide this essay into four section~. ~he first . ", will deal with the .problem Whitehead saw in Hume I s ~ccount . , . ' of expel:~ence. '1'he second section will discu~s \fui tehead ~ s view Goncernfilg what was the cause· .o~ Hume t s probl~m. Whi te- . ,", head's claim i's·that Hume's fundamental el~lI\ents of. experience, • > I.,. , .. ,,' ideas, ar.~ the. resul t,s of a sophisticated .process .of· abst;rac..,. 1 tion. The third s'ection is di vid'ed into two parts. The :first .\ \. . viii t , • • shall attempt to show what Whltehead means by the 'sensation alist doctrine' of experience and' tha~Hume's philosophy is the most lucid instance of this doctrine. The second part will present an analysis of visual experience which, when "'- demonstrate that the 'sensationalist elements', completed!wil~ ideas, are creatures of a nearly complete dependence on / a visual model of experience. Section four will adumbrate Whitehead's solution of Hume's problem, showing how Whitehead's ~ different characterization of experience avoids some of the pernicious cuI de with which modern philosophy has over- ~ whelmed philosophers. ix