Sophia 41 (1):33-54 (2002)

Three writers who utilize a similar metaphysics to understand the relationship between Ultimate Reality and conventional reality are compared. The metaphysics of what I call an inclusive Infinity is the common thread employed in comparing the thought of Hegel, Hartshorne and Nishida. I contrast the concept of inclusive Infinity with that of radical particularity and argue that people are private centers of conscious awareness who cannot be encompassed within an infinity or totality. Because of the individuality and uniqueness of particulars, there can be no absolutely inclusive Infinite
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF02780401
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,577
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hegel’s Logic of Finitude.Rocío Zambrana - 2012 - Continental Philosophy Review 45 (2):213-233.
On Rosenthal's "Escape" From Hegel.Tony Smith - 2000 - Science and Society 64 (4):489 - 496.
Infinity: New Research Frontiers.Michał Heller & W. H. Woodin (eds.) - 2011 - Cambridge University Press.
Oppy, Infinity, and the Neoclassical Concept of God.Daniel A. Dombrowski - 2007 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 61 (1):25 - 37.


Added to PP index

Total views
15 ( #672,164 of 2,446,554 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #456,659 of 2,446,554 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes