>Whitehead appropriates the "Quaker word 'concern', divested of any
>suggestion of knowledge" to express "the fundamental structure of
>experience" (Adventures of Ideas, Chap. XI, "Objects and Subjects,"
>p. 176). According to him, "concernedness is of the essence of
>perception." (p. 180) This is one of grounds in experience on which
>he bases his rejection of scientific materialism, i.e. of the
>ontological idea that reality is "made up of vacuous bits of matter
>with no internal values, and merely hurrying through space." (Modes
>of Thought, p. 158)
>
>The claim that "concernednes is of the essence of perception" is the
>basis of his rejection of the scientific materialist conception of
>nature as "lifeless" and of his own conception of it as "alive."
>
>"Life is the enjoyment of emotion, derived from the past and aimed
>at the future. It is the enjoyment of emotion which was then, which
>is now, and which will be then. This vector character is of the
>essence of such entertainment.
> "The emotion transcends the present in two ways. It issues
>from, and it issues towards. It is received, it is enjoyed, and it
>is passed along, from moment to moment. Each occasion is an
>activity of concern, in the Quaker sense of that term. It is the
>conjunction of transcendence and immanence. The occasion is
>concerned in the way of feeling and aim, with things that in their
>own essence lie beyond it; although these things in their present
>functions are factors in the concern of that occasion. Thus each
>occasion, although engaged in its own immediate self-realization, is
>concerned with the universe." (Modes of Thought, p. 167)
Pretty incoherent stuff, meaningless gibberish in fact. It must require amazing perseverance to read this sort of thing? But of course one can't expect those who reject a materialist conception to make much sense I suppose. An inability to think clearly is an essential prerequisite for such a philosophy.
It reminds me of a Sci-Fi novel I read a long time ago, when I was in high school I think. Forget the name or the author of course, but the premise of the story was the opposite of materialism, that reality arises from what people believe.
The main character in the novel is a feudal God-king, rightful ruler of Gondwanaland, a land populated by untold billions of people (somewhat improbably, given the feudal mode of production, but remember the materialst conception has been suspended in this story). The main character is a flesh and blood God, whose immortality and super-powers are conferred simply by the power of the prayers and beliefs of his billions of worshippers. The more people believe, the more his powers grow.
A very democratic God, I must admit. And of course he is a wise and benevolent God, presumably because this is the desire of his worshippers. Mind you, there are also other immortal Gods, sustained by other worshippers, with who the rightful God-king must do battle. (Or else there would be no story to hang the novel.)
I suppose it must have been this novel that introduced me to the notion of materialism, simply by suggesting an alternative conception. The fictional reality of the novel is the logical extension of any reality where the conception of materialism does not apply.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas