Substantial Motion and Process Philosophy: A Comparative Analysis between Mulla Sadra and Alfred North Whitehead

This study addresses the central question of how Mulla Sadra’s Transcendent Philosophy and Alfred North Whitehead’s Process Philosophy—despite their fundamentally different intellectual and historical origins—converge in criticizing static, substance-centered metaphysics, yet diverge significantly in their accounts of the nature of “becoming” and its metaphysical implications. Employing a descriptive–analytical method within a comparative framework, the research examines these two dynamic systems along three principal axes: the nature and mechanism of flux and change in reality; the explanation of identity and continuity amid transformation; and the status and function of God and teleology in each philosophical system.

The findings indicate that the fundamental point of convergence between the two thinkers lies in replacing “being” with “becoming” and in advancing a radical critique of static metaphysics. Nevertheless, profound divergences emerge in their respective conceptions of dynamism. Mulla Sadra conceives flux as a continuous, intrinsic, and intensive process—substantial motion—occurring within a single substance that preserves personal identity. By contrast, Whitehead defines becoming as discrete, quasi-quantum, and grounded in the succession of “actual entities” interconnected through objective inheritance. While the Sadrian model exhibits strong internal coherence, it encounters challenges when confronted with discontinuous interpretations of modern physics. Conversely, Whitehead’s model, though more consonant with contemporary science, faces theoretical difficulties in accounting for the persistence of unified personal identity. This divergence culminates most sharply in theology: the transcendent and simple Sadrian God, as the unified final cause of motion, stands in contrast to Whitehead’s dipolar and affected God, who is both co-creative with the world and dynamically transformed through its processes. Ultimately, this comparative analysis not only reveals the capacity of Transcendent Philosophy to engage contemporary philosophical discourse but also, by highlighting fundamental divergences, contributes to a more precise and nuanced understanding of both metaphysical systems.