PANENTEIZM. W ZWIĄZKU Z POGLĄDAMI JÓZEFA ŻYCIŃSKIEGO, CHARLESA HARTSHORNE’A I INNYCH PRZEDSTAWICIELI „ZWROTU PANENTEISTYCZNEGO”

• Authors: Jacek Wojtysiak

Title variants

EN

PANENTHEISM. IN REFERENCE TO THE VIEWS OF JÓZEF ŻYCIŃSKI, CHARLES HARTSHORNE, AND OTHER REPRESENTATIVES OF “THE PANENTHEISTIC TURN”

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

In this paper I try to present some main origins, varieties, motives and ideas of the philosophical and theological movement called “the panentheistic turn”. Particular attention is paid to the Ch. Hartshorne’s combinatorial analyses (based on “the law of polarity”) and to the J. Życiński’s conception of “the field of rationality”. I distinguish five forms or domains of the contemporary panentheism. The first of them — the linguistic one — uses the preposition in or spatial metaphors to express the relation between God and the world. The second — the (inter)cultural panen- theism — is the result of searching for a common theology to many different religions. The third type — the Christian panentheism – interprets some main dogmas of Christian faith in the spirit of kenotic theology. At an end the ontological panentheism can be defined as the metaphysics (of God and world) emerged from the German idealism and the process philosophy. Its newest kind is the scientific panentheism based on the idea of emergence. After these distinctions I compare the ontological panentheism with the classical theism. In my opinion there are some irremovable differences between both options. I also defend the thesis that the main arguments given by the panentheists against the classical theism do not constitute the sufficient reasons to prefer their position.

EN

In this paper I try to present some main origins, varieties, motives and ideas of the philosophical and theological movement called “the panentheistic turn”. Particular attention is paid to the Ch. Hartshorne’s combinatorial analyses (based on “the law of polarity”) and to the J. Życiński’s conception of “the field of rationality”. I distinguish five forms or domains of the contemporary panentheism. The first of them — the linguistic one — uses the preposition in or spatial metaphors to express the relation between God and the world. The second — the (inter)cultural panen- theism — is the result of searching for a common theology to many different religions. The third type — the Christian panentheism – interprets some main dogmas of Christian faith in the spirit of kenotic theology. At an end the ontological panentheism can be defined as the metaphysics (of God and world) emerged from the German idealism and the process philosophy. Its newest kind is the scientific panentheism based on the idea of emergence. After these distinctions I compare the ontological panentheism with the classical theism. In my opinion there are some irremovable differences between both options. I also defend the thesis that the main arguments given by the panentheists against the classical theism do not constitute the sufficient reasons to prefer their position.

Keywords

PL

panenteizm; klasyczny teizm; panteizm; Hartshorne; Życiński; teologia naturalna (filozoficzna)

EN

panentheism; classical theism; pantheism; Hartshorne; Życiński; natural (philosophical) theology

• Publisher: Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
• Journal: Roczniki Filozoficzne
• Year: 2012
• Volume: 60
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 313-337

Contributors

author

Jacek Wojtysiak

• Wydział Filozofii Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego Jana Pawła II

References

• Dembowski B., ks. (1989): O filozofii chrześcijańskiej w Ameryce Północnej, Warszawa: Akademia Teologii Katolickiej.
• Dombrowski D. (2009): Charles Hartshorne, [w:] E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclope- dia of Philosophy (Spring 2009 Edition), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/ hartshorne/.
• Ford L.S. (2004): Contrasting Conceptions of Panentheism, „The Modern Schoolman” 81, nr 3, s. 226-231.
• Gawecki B.J. (1967): Filozofia rozwoju. Zarys stanowiska filozoficznego, Warszawa: IW Pax.
• Gut P. (2011): Spinoza o naturze ludzkiej, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
• Gutowski P. (1995): Filozofia procesu i jej metafilozofia. Studium metafizyki Ch. Hartshorne’a, Lublin: RW KUL.
• Hartshorne Ch., Reese W.L. (1953): Philosophers Speak of God, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Hartshorne Ch.E. (1976): Aquinas to Whitehead. Seven Centuries of Metaphysics of Religion. The Aquinas Lecture, Milwaukee: Marquette University Publications.
• Hartshorne Ch. (1984): Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes, New York: State University of New York Press.
• Hartshorne Ch. (2005): Pantheism and Panentheism, [w:] L. Jones (ed.), Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 10, Detroit: Macmillan Reference, s. 6960-6965.
• Hasker W. (1983): Metaphysics. Constructing a World View, Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press.
• Herbut J. (2008): Filozofia procesualna Alfreda N. Whiteheada, [w:] J. Herbut, Artykuły i szkice. Z metodologii i teorii metafizyki, filozoficznej analizy języka religii oraz etyki i metaetyki, Opole: Redakcja Wydawnictw Wydziału Teologicznego Uniwersytetu Opolskiego, s. 149-159.
• In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being. Panentheistic Reflections on God’s Presence in a Scientific World, Ph. Clayton, A. Peacocke (eds.), Grand Rapids, MI – Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company 2004
• Levine M. (2010): Non-Theistic Conceptions of God, [w:] Ch. Meister, P. Copan (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion, London–New York: Routledge, s. 237-248.
• Moltmann J. (1995): Bóg w stworzeniu, przeł. Z. Danielewicz, Kraków: Znak 1995. (Pierwotne wydanie oryginału – 1985).
• Morris T.V. (1991): Metaphysical Dependence, Independence, and Perfection, [w:] S. McDonald (ed.), Being and Goodness. The Concept of the Good in the Metaphysics and Philosophical Theology, Ithaca–London: Cornell University Press 1991, s. 278-297.
• Niziński R.S., OCD (2002): Między teizmem a panteizmem: Charlesa Hartshorne’a procesualna filozofia Boga, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
• Peacocke A. (1991): Teologia i nauki przyrodnicze, przeł. L.M. Sokołowski, Kraków: Znak 1991. (Pierwotne wydanie oryginału – 1971).
• Peters E.H. (1970): Hartshorne and Neoclassical Metaphysics. An Interpretation, Lincoln: University of Nebrasca Press.
• Piwowarczyk M. (2008): Bóg i stawanie się. Problem relacji świat-Bóg w filozofii Alfreda Northa Whiteheada, Lublin: TN KUL.
• Sia S. (1985): God in Process Thought. A Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Sokolowski R. (1982): The God of Faith and Reason. Fundations of Christian Theology, Notre Dame–London: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Wainwright W.J. (1987): God’s Body, [w:] T.V. Morris (ed.), The Concept of God, Oxford: Oxford University Press, s. 72-87.
• Wojtysiak J. (2008): „Dlaczego istnieje raczej coś niż nic?” Analiza problemu w kontekście dyskusji we współczesnej filozofii analitycznej, Lublin: TN KUL.
• Wojtysiak J. (2012): Spór o istnienie Boga. Analityczno-intuicyjny argument na rzecz teizmu, Poznań–Kraków: W drodze – Kolegium Filozoficzno-Teologiczne OO. Dominikanów.
• Życiński J. (1983): Metafizyka o smaku przygody, [w:] J. Życiński, M. Heller, Drogi myślących, Kraków: Polskie Towarzystwo Teologiczne, s. 25-35.
• Życiński J. (1986): Teizm i filozofia analityczna, t. II, Kraków: Znak.
• Życiński J. (1992): Bóg Abrahama i Whiteheada, Tarnów: Biblos.
• Życiński J. (2002): Bóg i ewolucja. Podstawowe pytania ewolucjonizmu chrześcijańskiego, Lublin: TN KUL.
• Życiński J. (2009): Wszechświat emergentny. Bóg w ewolucji przyrody, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
• Życiński J. (2011): Świat matematyki i jej materialnych cieni. Elementy platonizmu w podstawach matematyki, Kraków: Copernicus Center Press.

Notes

EN

Volume Dedicated to the Late Archbishop Professor Józef Życiński

Tom dedykowany śp. Arcybiskupowi Profesorowi Józefowi Życińskiemu