Whitehead and Evil

Whitehead seems to struggle to define 'Evil'. In some places, he proposes that it is 'Destruction', which would be logically entailed by his thesis that Creativity is the fundamental principle of the universe, except that that thesis also seems to preclude any actualization of its antithesis. For perhaps that reason, he clarifies that by 'destruction', he means 'disintegration', in its literal sense, namely, a process that undoes established harmony, and he seems to settle on that as a definition of Evil. However, perhaps recognizing that every novel occasion disrupts settled harmony, he acknowledges that any evil is ultimately redeemable in God's universal Concrescence, thereby implying that Evil is always localized and ephemeral. Nevertheless, he continues to under-appreciate the implication of his insight into the structure of Intensity, i. e. that Harmony is the achievement of a balance between Discrescence and Concrescence, not the correction of the former by the latter. He thereby misses that what is truly antithetical to Creativity, and, hence, what is truly 'Evil' in his system, is Stagnation, which is an imbalance between Concrescence and Discrescence, i. e. an excess of one, or of the other.