Hartshorne and Nishida Re-envisioning the Absolute :: Philosophy Philosophical Papers

Hartshorne and Nishida Re-en resourcefulnessing the unattackableABSTRACT This paper is a comparative study of Hartshornes classic reconsideration of the notion of the Absolute based on his Whiteheadian vision of the divine relativity, and Nishidas attempt at redefining the same notion against the background of what he calls the philosophy of key (Jpn., basho) of unquestioning Nothingness or Buddhist Emptiness. By reconsidering the notion of the Absolute, Hartshorne has come up with the standpoint of Surrelativism, and Nishidas attempt has resulted in the standpoint of absolute dialectic as guided by the principle of the self-identity of absolute contradictions. What I intend to do in this paper is study comparatively Charles Hartshornes neo-classical re-consideration of the notion of the Absolute based upon his Whiteheadian vision of the divine relativity and Nishida Kitaros attempt at re-defining the same notion against the background of what he calls the philosophy of the place (Jpn., basho) of absolute Nothingness or Buddhist Emptiness. By reconsidering the notion of the Absolute Hartshorne has come up with the standpoint of Surrelativism in his Divine Relativity (1948). And Nishidas attempt at redefining the same notion has resulted in the standpoint of absolute dialectic as guided by the principle of the self-identity of absolute contradictories in his The Logic of Place and the Religious Worldview (written in 1945 published posthumously in 1946).Hartshorne belongs, as leader, to the second generation of Whiteheadian process-relational thought in North America. By contrast, Nishida is the founder of what is usually called the Kyoto School of philosophy in Japan deeply inspired by Zen, Nishida vigorously engaged in a wholehearted, laborious encounter with the West philosophically throughout his career. But what I can commonly perceive in the two philosophers is a noticeable philosophical phenomenon namely, the notion of the Absolute has undergone a prof oundly significant process of self-transcendence/self-transformation in either of the two philosophical systems in such a way that one now begins to identify ones own position as panentheism.Hartshorne and Nishida both negate and transcend the traditional notion of the Absolute as transcendence in this sense, they both tend to be radically affirmative of the immanence of the Absolute. And yet at this very juncture they both by all odds deny the linkage of their respective standpoints with that of Spinozas pantheism. Hence, panentheism. But how so?In what follows let me try to answer and elucidate this question as much as I can. For I perceive