Replies

Thank you for a delightful sketch! I am very happy to “meet” Sifu Fong Ha – intriguing pieces online. What a gift to learn from him!
I am continually amazed that a sifu lives in my tiny rural southern town, teaching in the tradition of  Professor Cheng, Man-Ch’ing, and a friend of Jou, Tsung Hwa and Herman Kauz. Form, I love, so grounding, peaceful, authentic…. Push hands (which I was surprised to learn is part of tai chi!), I’ve needed much encouragement to engage (hard for me to shake the idea of opposition! & not yet skillful enough for “just 4 ounces of pressure”!) — but appreciate all the benefits in balance and sensitivity.

Whitehead has much the same feel – “the brief Galilean vision,” non-coercive, harmonious — Process and tai chi, two traditions that illumine life.

Thank you so much too for the “hopeless quest” reference – I’m in the Cobb group reading P&R, but I see there is much, much more to enjoy!
Deep gratitude

Wow, Rolla, these are wonderful
Thank you so much for posting them!
I love the woodland detail — & their encompassing joys and sorrows….
What a surprise that last line!!!! I came down with a bump : )
Thanks so much again!!!
… I think you’ve mentioned tai chi? It’s a very important part of my life…. fun to make that Whiteheadian ‘connection’ : )

Charles, thank you so much for the offer!!!
Looking ahead here, I don’t think we will be reading Hosinki’s chapters related to the “notorious Part IV” of “Process & Reality,” and I find Hosinki so helpful that I would surely appreciate having a digital form until I locate an affordable paper one!
Kindle compatible would be great; if that doesn’t work, pdf format would likewise be tremendously appreciated!!
elizabetbrownhale@gmail.com [‘elizabet’ has no “h’]
What a great class!! Happy to share it!
Very deep thanks!!
Elizabeth (Betty)

Great comments here, Daryl! I would like to audit your fifth grade math-y classes! Surely hope you can be in person Sunday!!!

Recently I waited a month for a Cobb reply, and received full attention then, so don’t give up!

Meanwhile, googling [Process and Reality,Tripp Fuller] (spaces as printed here — none around the comma) brings up many of the audios for me.

Here’s some of the Homebrewed Christianity PR that I used back in 2020 to sign up — but it looks like signing up now takes you to a list to be notified when it’s available:
https://homebrewedchristianity.lpages.co/processandreality/

When I recently checked out the Facebook group, scrolling back to the original Homebrewed comments took way more time than I should have taken!…. Since that original seminar, the FB group seems to be a more general Cobb one now.

Good luck! Sure is interesting! Thanks for the comments in the Forum!

If anyone is checking out the Homebrewed Christianity/Cobb Institute online class “Probing Process and Reality” mentioned above, our own reading for July 31 is discussed in Dr. Cobb’s third Lecture, with followup Questions from Tripp and then from the class — “The Extensive Continuum,” pp. 61-82. It’s fun to get Dr. Cobb’s perspectives on the ideas and their significance, in addition to help with the ideas themselves.
If anyone has tried the link in my earlier post, I’d love to know whether or not the process (if you’ll pardon the expression) worked for you : )
Looking forward to Sunday evening Eastern!!

Great questions!
I’ve never thought of Whitehead’s idea of “God” as male…. it’s just too different…. Makes me wish that in Part V he had coined a unique pronoun to refer to God, as he coined words like “superject” etc : )
I checked out Dr. Cobb’s Wordbook (“God” 69-71) and don’t see any references to “he” there — but no comment on pronouns either : ) Let us know what you discover!

Thank you again, Pastor Al!

In case anyone reads after the course — I just happened on an online talk that is very helpful for my question — I’m just finishing Thich Nhat Hahn’s life of the Buddha and am struck by the co-dependent arising in Buddhism that sounds so much like process thought — googling “Did Whitehead study Buddhism?” surfaced the text of a wonderful talk by John Cobb that explains about Whitehead:
“There must be an actual entity that mediates between pure possibility, which is fully abstract, and the occasions that are coming into being in the world. He called that entity God.”
That’s the link I’ve been looking for, which makes sense in the context of the whole talk. Of course, internalizing it is a whole different project! but I feel like now I have a good clue.

Whitehead and Buddhism

Next question will need to be — does that “actual entity” “lure” toward things that we think of as evil? I doubt there is thought of two such entities, one urging compassion & the other enmity!

Thank you, Pastor Al — I remain on the lookout for the Matt Segall talk, which no doubt will help too! And deep thanks to John Cobb, who writes, thinks, and speaks so clearly and patiently — and to all here “rebirthing God.”
: )

Elizabeth

Another wonderful tip! Thank you!!!!

“Process Theology: A Basic Introduction” arrived today and the last two chapters do directly address my question!! Thank you so much!!! I will be chewing on this for quite some time. I would love to know what Dr. Mesle would have answered to Dr. Cobb’s final chapter — I’ll be looking for clues, and if anyone has an answer, I would love to receive it!

When I asked Richard about the Matt Segall Friends discussion, he replied that it should be posted maybe by the end of this week. If I understand correctly, Friends videos through 2020 can be accessed without charge, and beginning with 2021 there is a small fee for the whole year’s access. https://cobb.institute/meeting-recordings
“Whither Science?” might also be placed on the Cobb Institute YouTube channel, which the public can access. In the meantime, I see Segall with Richard Tarmas in a fascinating conversation, “Journeying Within a Cosmic Journey” — and quite a feast of other conversations! Thank you so much! [I recently heard Tripp Fuller’s Homebrewed Christianity podcast with Matt — but they veered into sociology so weren’t so focused on metaphysics : ) ]

I deeply appreciate these tips for my searches and questions!!!! They are right on point! And very deep thanks too for these Newell sessions…. so meaningful.
I wish they would go on and on…. but I know you have a life : )
Just, a very heartfelt Thank you!!!

What a great resource! The final section, “Naturalism and Theism” [as seen on AmazonSmile], sounds like a direct answer to my question!! Thank you so much, Pastor Al !! I am eager for my copy to arrive! — wish it were on Kindle!

I have Dr. Mesle’s “Process-Relational Philosophy: An Introduction to
Alfred North Whitehead.” There, the closest I come to my question is in the footnotes:
“A principle [sic] point of discussion about whether Whitehead’s vision of reality can work without God depends on whether the world itself can contain possibilities that have not yet been actualized. If it can, then Whitehead’s argument for the role of God is undermined. Personally, being more of a nominalist, I think Whitehead’s argument an excessively platonic view of possibilities.” [116]

Maybe it’s a question of how one views & names “possibilities that have not yet been actualized” or the “striving for love” — as well as the resonances the word “God” has for many. Maybe many are looking at the same process/es, data, and naming it differently. Or maybe — likely! — I just don’t get the vision of reality that Whitehead sees. Whatever, it’s all endlessly interesting, and I thank you so much for the lucid summary, the tip, and the wonderful opportunity, presentation, and content of this class!!!!
Sincerely! Elizabeth

Interesting question!

“Henri Bergson’s elan vital and… evolution” makes me think of George Bernard Shaw, who also was influenced by Bergson and his theory of “creative evolution.” You apparently are on the right track! — britannica.com describes Bergson as “French philosopher, the first to elaborate what came to be called a process philosophy, which rejected static values in favour of values of motion, change, and evolution.”

Shaw was a pivotal factor in my theological/philosophical journey…. I was inspired by his play “Saint Joan” to choose him for my college senior study in the 1950s because after seeing the movie I thought he could help me with my growing theological doubts. In a smile of fate, it turned out that Shaw’s voluminous play prefaces skewered much of traditional Western theology and I had to admit that I agreed with him. (It’s been quite a winding path since then!)

It’s interesting to see how Bergson (1859-1941), Shaw (56-50), and Whitehead (61-47) were born within 5 years of one another, and Kazantzakis was next generation, 1883-1957. Process philosophy seems in the air then!

It would be neat to read your sermon [hinthint : ) ] Thanks for the question!!

I’m remembering that my friend said also, “Maybe he [my beloved] was there to see me through the hardest years, til things finally were getting better.”
[I’m not able to edit, so am replying to myself : ) ]