Comparative Philosophy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The comparative philosophy (from the Latin comparare - to compare) or sometimes also intercultural philosophy describes a development of modern philosophy . This compares the thinking of different cultural , linguistic and philosophical currents. The comparison arises from the fact that the differences are specifically contrasted in a dialogue .

Difference from conventional philosophy

Comparative philosophy differs from conventional approaches to philosophy, but is viewed as a subfield of philosophy. On the one hand, philosophers are often in the tradition of a school of thought, with which only their ideas are further developed. On the other hand, they examine different cultural traditions (such as Confucianism or Islamic philosophy ) or try to construct their own philosophical system through the abundance of different schools of thought. It is not the job of intercultural philosophy to create a synthesis of philosophical traditions. The aim of this transcultural thinking, however, is to create an idea of ​​the philosophies of all humanity in order to clarify what has been created by philosophy itself.

Historical development

In Asia there has been a dialogue between different schools of thought that has lasted two thousand years. To the spread of Buddhism in Central Asia in the first centuries AD, for example, Daoist and Confucianist intellectuals reacted to the “foreign” ideas, sometimes with strict rejection, sometimes with a grateful reception. Yet even when strictly rejected, the teachings of Buddhism were compared with their own. The fact that Buddhists are required to study non-Buddhist teachings (see Bodhisattva vows ), among other things , resulted in a dialogue between native and foreign traditions that continues to this day. The familiarity of the intercultural exchange made it possible to take foreign ideas seriously. Much of the work on the comparison of Eastern and Western thought came from the Asian area because of the lack of interest in the Western world. The most famous and influential people were Sri Aurobindo (1872-1950) and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888-1975). They presented Indian philosophy to the western public, compared, distinguished and even connected the western and eastern philosophies.

In the field of Western philosophy, comparative philosophy is a relatively new subject. In the early 18th century a new awareness of trans-European traditions developed, especially from the Asian area. Nevertheless, a large part of the works from this period can no longer be counted as part of comparative philosophy. The British sinologist Jonathan Spence emphasized that adaptations of Chinese thought, as can be found, for example, in Hegel, are not part of comparative philosophy due to the lack of commitment on the part of the Chinese. The University of Hawaii sponsored the first of a series of east-west conferences for philosophers in 1939 due to the emergence of comparative studies in the Anglo-European region of the 19th century . Since that time the conventional as well as the comparative philosophy continued to grow and complement each other. Nevertheless, comparative philosophy only began to become aware of its methodological and substantive role relatively late. She was only gradually accepting the main currents of Western philosophy. Faculties of philosophy rarely make room for comparative philosophy. Publications by their followers turn out to be difficult, usually only through specialist journals such as Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy , African Philosophy or Philosophy East and West . While the introductory philosophy courses have so far been limited to classical Anglo-European thinkers and currents, there is now a wider range for the introduction of students, which allows for comparative philosophical work.

Problem

chauvinism

When the descriptive chauvinism of error is called, in which the personal opinions will affect the appearance of the foreign tradition. If one suspects the same questions and answers with which one is familiar in writings of other traditions, then it is possible to make a mistake, since translations of texts in foreign writings do not present the same content as originally intended.

The normative chauvinism is the tendency that some philosophers are adopting their own tradition or view is the better and the other wrong. Belief in one's own superiority ( chauvinism ) enables false conclusions to be drawn through the influence of one's own tradition.

skepticism

It is customary in philosophy to take a critical stance when examining various philosophies. The normative skepticism is the judgment on the appropriateness of different views of philosophers and traditions. Some argue that some views are more tenable than others. Nevertheless, this position leads to a methodological fallacy, since the comparative philosophy is not about criticism, but about comparing different philosophies. A representative of comparative philosophy should take an uncritical stance towards other traditions.

Incommensurability

One type of incommensurability is the impossibility of translating scripts with precise reference from one language to another. It can happen that the content can only be reproduced in a slightly modified form. The other way is that philosophical models are so different in their fundamentals that it is not possible to understand each other. The third version of incommensurability explains that the traditions in their weighting of what is considered important and what is not can differ from one another in such a way that a decision between them cannot be concretized.

literature

Web links