Anyone here actually read this?

Anyone here actually read this?

Attached: 71OsS+ePZFL.jpg (1400x2132, 238K)

I have, it's ok.

Was Whitehead a surrealist?

Attached: 45233.jpg (507x537, 162K)

What book is this?

Speculative Research: The Lure of Possible Futures

Whoah this guy looks a lot like Stefan molyneux

fuck off

Bump

fuck off

You are never going to meme this board into reading him if you don't give your own account about how his thought or his persona is interesting. Merely spamming "what am i in for" and similar threads are a waste of time, like that other "The Man Without Qualities" poster who failed miserably. I'm NOT going to open an 900 literal who doostopper if you don't give me at least a sinopsis or a funny post about why i should read it.
I'm NOT going to read this bald retard.

It's up on libgen.

Attached: aztec philosophy.jpg (333x500, 68K)

i dont read i just come here to post

No, I just listen to Matthew T. Segall give lectures on it.

He has such a gentle voice desu

Process is ontologically real.
Substance is not.
Therefore read Whitehead.

This is why I come here, good leads for related reading. Thanks user.

Whitehead was retroactively debunked by Parmenides. He couldn't contend with the Eleatic doctrine; the simultaneity of thought of Being.

Yea he's great at communicating these ideas in such a calm and well paced manner.

Bumping

Read Deleuze instead.

shame he's pozzed

Retard

Where do I start with him?

judging by the replies in this thread, probably not
I haven't, I do plan to, but it's low priority
what exactly does Whitehead set out to do in the book?
any thinkers I should be familiar with beforehand?

That's literally just Heraclitus.

Heraclitus doesn't have a 900 page tome to read.

Process and Reality is 350 pages

My bad, was thinking of Hegel. Anyways, Whitehead has more than 900 pages worth of process ontology to read across his philosophical works. Heraclitus only has a few fragments left of his On Nature.