Talk:Charles Hartshorne
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
[edit] Hartshorne's influences
The additions of Arnold and Emerson come from the Hartshorne essay, "How I Got That Way" in Existence and Actuality. He said reading Arnold's criticism of Christianity was a "decisive event". He said Emerson's essays "changed my life substantially", and on page 12 of the book called Emerson his first philosophical hero, while Royce was his second. Rufus Jones was his teacher at Haverford, and continuing mentor. He did not mention Bergson in his essay, so I moved him to the second rank. Hartshorne also noted here that his idealism, and rejection of materialism and dualism came not from studies but from his experiences, particularly his time in the army medical corps. He stated that his philosophical stance was already formed by the time he came into contact with Pierce and Whitehead, and that they mainly contributed to the "technical matters of method and definition." --Blainster 17:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Misplaced Sentence
This sentence, "While Hartshorne acknowledges the importance of Whitehead's philosophy on his own ideas, he did not entirely agree with Whitehead." Seems out of place given the paragraph it is placed it. The statement is true enough, but it begins a paragraph that has nothing to do with Hartshorne's disagreements with Whitehead. I don't know how I would change it, but someone should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Craigatkinson (talk • contribs) 11:07, July 17, 2006 (UTC)
[edit] He was a Unitarian and that mattered
Much of what is written under "Criticisms," especially in the last 2 paragraphs, flows from a simple cause: Hartshorne was a passionate Unitarian. Hence honest orthodox Christians will reject his notions of God and moral theology.
It is very curious that Hartshorne, who is very much linked to Whitehead, finished his studies before Whitehead landed in Cambridge. From 1928 to 1934, Hartshorne was deeply immersed in editing Charles Peirce's Collected Papers. How did this influence his subsequent thought?
I very much look forward to reading the eventual Hartshorne biography. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.181.160.42 (talk • contribs) 16:38, August 20, 2006 (UTC)
