Collection of Links: John Dewey’s philosophy as one of the roots of “A Process Model” (Gendlin, 1997/2018)
In “A Process Model (APM)” (Gendlin, 1997/2018), various philosophers who preceded Gendlin are mentioned, either directly or indirectly. In this blog post, I have chosen the philosophy of John Dewey (1859–1952).
One of Dewey’s students when he was a professor at Columbia University was Richard McKeon (1900–1985). McKeon later became a professor at the University of Chicago and taught Gendlin about philosophy (*1). In other words, Gendlin was a student of one of Dewey’s students.
It should be noted that the Swiss philosopher Donata Schoeller has previously studied the influence of Dewey on Gendlin (Schoeller & Dunaetz, 2018; Saller & Schoeller, 2018).
Dewey’s philosophy includes writings that thematically discuss “the interaction of organisms with their environment.” Two representative books of these writings are “Experience and Nature” (Dewey, 1925/1929) and “Logic: The Theory of Inquiry” (Dewey, 1938). I see these as strongly influencing Chapters I-IV of APM. I have also drawn on his complementary works “The Quest for Certainty” (Dewey, 1929) and “Knowing and the Known” (Dewey & Bentley, 1949).
Collection of links to my blog posts
Below, I will provide links to the chapters of APM that correspond to each of my previous blog posts.
“Chapter I: Body-Environment (B-En)”
History of chapters II and I use of the term “implying” in “A Process Model”: with reference to Mead and Dewey.
Abstract: In “A Process Model” (Gendlin, 1997/2018), the basic term “implying” is used frequently. This term was first used in his earlier published papers (Gendlin, 1973a; 1973b). It is my view at this stage that the various uses of “implying” developed along the following historical lines: First, in the early 1970s, Gendlin began the “bringing or generating time” use of implying corresponding to Chapter II of APM. Next, in the late 1980s, he started the “horizontal” use of implying corresponding to Chapter I of “A Process Model” (APM). Finally, the other uses of implying were formulated with the writing of APM.Pragmatistic origins of Gendlin’s en#0: with reference to Dewey and Mead.
Abstract: In “A process model,” en#0 is mentioned less often than en#2 and en#3. Nevertheless, it has been pointed out that “just because it gets rarely mentioned doesn’t mean it is not structurally important.” (Jaaniste, 2021, April). There are many possible backgrounds for Gendlin’s deliberate assumption of en#0. In my view, one of the anticipations of en#0 can be found in the concept of the “natural world” that appears in John Dewey’s later work, “Logic: The Theory of Inquiry.” Finally, I suggest that we can also see some points in the ideas and terminology of en#0 that are closer to G. H. Mead than to J. Dewey.
“Chapter IV-A: A Different Concept of the Body, Not a Machine”
Gendlin’s “interaction first” and Dewey’s “transaction”.
Abstract: While Gendlin used the term “interaction” in many of his writings, he used the term “interaction first” in “A Process Model” (Gendlin, 1997/2018). I outlined some historical background of why he felt that “interaction” alone did not sufficiently convey what he meant and that it was necessary to add “first.”
Gendlin’s position against the “idealized observer” and Dewey’s position against the “spectator”: based on their views of old and new physics.
Abstract: Gendlin called the characteristics of living processes common to plants, animals, and humans a “non-Laplacian sequence.” So what exactly is “Laplacian”? He critically examined an assumption implicit in classical physics from Newton to Laplace. This assumption implied determinism that scientists could perfectly predict the future. It also implied that when such scientists, called the “idealized observers,” observed natural phenomena, they pretended to be non-participants, even though they were participants.
Note
*1) For more information on the influence of McKeon’s philosophy on “Experiencing and the Creation of Meaning” (Gendlin, 1962/1997), please see the following blog post:
References
Dewey, J. (1925/1929). Experience and nature (2nd ed.). Open Court. Reprinted as Dewey, J. (1981). The later works, vol. 1 [Abbreviated as LW 1]. Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. Minton, Balch. Reprinted as Dewey, J. (1984). The later works, vol. 4 [Abbreviated as LW 4]. Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: the theory of inquiry. Henry Holt. Reprinted as Dewey, J. (1986). The later works, vol. 12 [Abbreviated as LW 12]. Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. & Bentley, A.F. (1949). Knowing and the known. Beacon Press. Reprinted as Dewey, J. (1989). The later works, vol. 16 [Abbreviated as LW 16]. Southern Illinois University Press.
Gendlin, E. T. (1997/2018). A process model. Northwestern University Press.
Saller, V. & Schoeller, D. (2018). Cognition as a Transformative Process, European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, 10(1), 12–1.
Schoeller, D. & Dunaetz, N. (2018). Thinking emergence as interaffecting: approaching and contextualizing Eugene Gendlin’s Process Model. Continental Philosophy Review, 51, 123–140.