By Schubert Ogden
It seems clear enough that Whitehead is referring to one and the same thing when he speaks, in one place, of "the common world of activity" (17 \ [25\]) and, in another, of "a community of common activity involving mutual implication," which immediate experience is known to have community with (79 \ [123\]). _not_ _have reference, as "the actual world" is said always to have, to "some one concrescence" (226 \[345\]). Consider, for example, a statement such as the following: "Our datum is the actual world, including ourselves... " (4 \[6\]). Clearly, "the actual world, including ourselves" is one thing; "ourselves including the actual world," something else._ Wiki Markup
My guess is that, in many cases where he refers to "the actual world," what he really means is rather "the common world of activity." For, clearly, what he means to refer to does
.
My guess is that, in many cases where he refers to "the actual world," what he really means is rather "the common world of activity." For, clearly, what he means to refer to does not have reference, as "the actual world" is said always to have, to "some one concrescence" (226 [345]). Consider, for example, a statement such as the following: "Our datum is the actual world, including ourselves. . . . " (4 [6]). Clearly, "the actual world, including ourselves" is one thing; "ourselves including the actual world," something else.
Of course, Whitehead's metaphorical talk of "a democracy of fellow creatures" (49 f. [78 f.]) is simply another way of making the same reference to the community of common Of course, Whitehead's metaphorical talk of Ita democracy of fellow creatures" (49 f. \[78 f.\]) is simply another way of making the same reference to the community of common activity. Wiki Markup
11 October 2000