Editing Process philosophy (section)

{{short description|Philosophical approach}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2021}}

'''Process philosophy''' (also '''ontology of becoming''' or '''processism''')<ref>[[Nicholas Rescher]], ''Process Metaphysics: An Introduction to Process Philosophy'', SUNY Press, 1996, p. 42.</ref> is an approach in [[philosophy]] that identifies processes, changes, or shifting relationships as the only real [[experience]] of everyday living.<ref>{{cite book | chapter-url=https://plato.stanford.edu/search/r?entry=/entries/process-philosophy/&page=1&total_hits=2206&pagesize=10&archive=None&rank=0&query=process%20philosophy | title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapter=Process Philosophy | year=2022 | publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University }}</ref> In opposition to the classical view of change as illusory (as argued by [[Parmenides]]) or [[Accident (philosophy)|accidental]] (as argued by Aristotle), process philosophy posits transient occasions of [[Change (philosophy)|change]] or ''becoming'' as the only fundamental things of the ordinary everyday real world.

Since the time of [[Plato]] and [[Aristotle]], classical [[ontology]] has posited ordinary world reality as constituted of enduring [[Substance theory|substance]]s, to which transient processes are ontologically subordinate, if they are not denied. If [[Socrates]] changes, becomes sick, Socrates is still the same (the substance of Socrates being the same), and change (his sickness) only glides over his substance: change is accidental, and devoid of primary reality, whereas the substance is [[Essentialism|essential]].

In physics, [[Ilya Prigogine]]<ref>Ilya Prigogine, ''From being to becoming'', [[David Bohm]], "Wholeness and the Implicate Order", W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1980.</ref> distinguishes between the "physics of being" and the "physics of becoming". Process philosophy covers not just scientific intuitions and experiences, but can be used as a conceptual bridge to facilitate discussions among religion, philosophy, and science.<ref name="Hustwit">{{cite encyclopedia|author=Jeremy R. Hustwit|title=Process Philosophy: 2.a. In Pursuit of a Holistic Worldview |url=https://www.iep.utm.edu/processp/#SH2a|encyclopedia=[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]|year=2007}}</ref><ref>Cf. [[Michel Weber]] (ed.), ''[https://www.academia.edu/6359324/Michel_Weber_ed._After_Whitehead_Rescher_on_Process_Metaphysics_2004 After Whitehead: Rescher on Process Metaphysics]'', Frankfurt / Paris / Lancaster, Ontos Verlag, 2004.</ref>

Process philosophy is sometimes classified as closer to [[continental philosophy]] than [[analytic philosophy]], because it is usually only taught in continental philosophy departments.<ref>William Blattner, [https://faculty.georgetown.edu/blattnew/contanalytic.html "Some Thoughts About "Continental" and "Analytic" Philosophy"]</ref> However, other sources state that process philosophy should be placed somewhere in the middle between the poles of analytic versus continental methods in contemporary philosophy.<ref>{{cite SEP |url-id=process-philosophy |title=Process Philosophy |last=Seibt |first=Johanna}}</ref><ref>Nicholas Gaskill, A. J. Nocek, ''The Lure of Whitehead'', University of Minnesota Press, 2014, p. 4: "it is no wonder that Whitehead fell by the wayside. He was too scientific for the "continentals," not scientific enough for the "analytics," and too metaphysical—which is to say [[Critical philosophy|uncritical]]—for them both" and p. 231: "the analytics and Continentals are both inclined toward [[Kantianism|Kantian]] presuppositions in a manner that Latour and Whitehead brazenly renounce."</ref>