Talk:Philosophy of Organism

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Metaphysics

Disputed

That etymology of concrescence is completely "off the wall." It is a good English word and can be looked up in the dictionary. The organism Whitehead is talking about is only the growth of the merely real into the actual by concrescence (see Heraclitus#Influence#Whitehead). Even as a stub unfortunately the article is uninformative and misleading. If the editor intended merely to hold a place I would say it is better to do so in a only a few words - a single sentence - that are accurate rather than a complete fantasy. Otherwise, it seems better to me to cover less ground but do it with higher quality. I notice the large number of philosophy articles springing up like grass and we could use those all right but with the conditions I just mentioned. Thanks.Dave (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]