Charles Hartshorne Definition

Charles Hartshorne, influential in the twentieth century as a philosopher of metaphysics and ground breaking on theology not only on God’s existence as creator of the universe but also the rationality of theism, believed that history provided essential though not adequate conditions for personal identity in the present that almost always leads to an uncertain future. He believed personal identity developed through irregular and disproportionate events in time externally related to those that ensue and internally related to former events, and therefore are positioned at once as partially deterministic and partially nondeterministic. Hartshorne believed there was no sense of evil in the omnipotent. He believed in the actuality of God not specifically
Excluding the extremities creates rational. On the horizontal dimension is harmony and discord, profound and superficial. Beauty is the norm otherwise there is order and disorder, profound and superficial, harmonies and discords. On mechanism and chaos, neither will evolve with beauty. He believed that all the aesthetic terms share values of enjoyment and that all are good experiences and what gives intrinsic value is a problem for the aesthetics not the morality. Beauty is in the center and outside the circle there is no value, inside the circle value is abundant. If every human experience were ideal then it would become monotonous and loose interest or value. Monism denies plurality in favor of unity and renders the plurality unintelligible and divides the world (Hartshorne p.7). Between matter and mind dualism, the properties of feeling, designing, deciding, and physical location, shape, and movement must remain in our experience otherwise only idealism will survive. Moderation or contrast is what makes the experience positive. The material verses the ideal thought, according to Hartshorne, the actual value always has the potential for
36). In his essay, The ages of beauty: revisiting Hartshorne’s diagram of aesthetic values, Lars Spuybroek explores Charles Hartshorne’s diagram of aesthetic values for classification of every single thing no matter the size, shape, condition of it, or it’s age. Spuybroek describes Hartshorne’s diagram as one that creates a continuum of an aesthetic realm containing distinctive disciplines based on structural-oriented things located at the top of the circle and event-oriented things or “events that contain structure” (Spuybroek, p. 36) found at the bottom of the circle. In this essay, the author tries to “show that we can use Hartshorne’s aesthetic diagram to start to rethink one-dimensional realm, and even to think about how we might add a third dimension”(Spuybroek, p. 36). What of the middle ground between beauty and sublime? Almost immediately my mind scrolled though it’s horror section in search for what I thought of that was sublime, and yet, beautiful and knowingly horrible? The entire process of charting values, because that is what beauty is: accurately applying value based on the sensory level of sublime or picturesque, produces a more precise means to the