Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective: an Anthology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vincent G. Furtado Intercultural Philosophy From Asian Perspective: An Anthology Digital Edition 2021 EIFI © Vincent G. Furtado 2021 EIFI Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective INTERCULTURAL PHILOSOPHY FROM ASIAN PERSPECTIVE Virtual Library of EIFI Vincent Gabriel Furtado, India. CONTENTS i) Introduction. 1. Asian Perspectives for the Development of Intercultural Thought – 1995 01 2. The Monastic Tradition in Inda and the Origin of Indian Christian Ashram – 1997 21 3. Intercultural Conflicts from Asian Perspective - 1998 36 4. Tradition and Modernity from Indian Perspective – 2001 51 5. Philosophy and Interculturality in India – 2003 62 6. South-South Intercultural Dialogue from Indian Perspective 2003 73 7. Text, Context and the Curricula: Intercultural Perspective – 2003 80 8. Intercultural Theology and Mystical Experience – 2004 109 9. A Critique of Dalit Tradition - 2008 118 10. Concept of “Ahimsa” in India Tradition and the Humanisation of the world. 2008 129 11. “Sarvodaya” and Good Life as Humanised Life from Indian Perspective. – 2010 148 12. Cosmotheandric Paradigm of Knowledge, Spirituality and Justice. – 2016 158 13. Prologue to Asian Christian Theology – 2016 172 14. The Concept of Power in Hinduism – 2017 192 15. University: A Domain of Spirituality? - 2017 208 16. “Karuņā ”: Compassion in Buddhist Tradition – 2020 218 Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective Introduction Intercultural Philosophy as a movement is still in its inchoate form in the West to which Asia is yet to produce an adequate response. Should we ask the question “what do we mean by Intercultural Philosophy?”, we can only say that it is a new movement in Philosophy which affirms that philosophy, though deals with only ultimate questions concerning reality and for that reason should be by its very nature universal and ideal, nevertheless, has a component which is particular and hence cultural. Even if we admit that human mind and its faculties are same in all humans and there could be only one formal way for its epistemological manifestations, there still remains scope for cultural influences as the explicit intentional relations of human beings to the world are pre-intentionally shaped by the culture in which they are born. All philosophy is expressed in language constituted of meanings and nuances conditioned by the cultural milieu and philosophy cannot but make use of this important instrument of communication to explicate the world- views it constructs in the process of its development. All this means, first of all, that every philosophical enterprise is culturally founded. Secondly, Intercultural Philosophy affirms that there is no culture which is totally bereft of a philosophy as there is no culture without its own ‘world-view’, although all the world-views may not be in possession of a ‘formal’ philosophy systematically delineated in a scientific manner. But no world-view and hence no culture is without a philosophical ‘perspective’. All philosophies are tribal in their inchoate form. As we know from history that some tribes become powerful, because of might and power and these either annihilate the others or at least suppress them. The hegemonization is an integral process of historical development. The big fish eating the smaller ones is not a phenomenon operative only at particular points of history but it is an integral aspect of historical growth pervading throughout the human history and in all spheres of human activities: social, political, religious and philosophical. The asymmetry in the growth and development of philosophical thought and maturation of conceptual structures in particular cultures is sheerly due to historical exigencies and lack of opportunities to Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective them as they were always victims of hegemony. Intercultural Philosophy takes upon itself to make good this lacuna, by encouraging research in subaltern cultures and to build up their philosophical world-views by means of universal conceptual schemes. Thirdly, the most important function of Intercultural Philosophy is to promote dialogue between cultures which claim to possess formal and developed systems of philosophy. The fundamental dynamic of all dialogue is to understand the other and to be understood by the other, which constitute the two faces of the same hermeneutical coin. If this is realized certainly there can emerge a viable hermeneutic through which the different world-views can meaningfully interact and fecundate one another. If the philosophers are open to enrich themselves through such dialogue, they can in turn responsibly and critically respond to the global situation in which humankind finds itself. A productive out come of this intercultural philosophical dialogue could be a consensus on how ‘history of philosophy’i has to be written and presented in the future. At present there is no unanimity among the philosophers, especially, of Europe, who claim that there is only one philosophy and it is of Greek origin. Any system of philosphy that can be traced to Greek tradition, can authoritatively be a legitimate candidate for explication under the “history of philosophy”. They affirm that Philosophy is the exclusive and absolute possession of the western culture. All other cultures may have ‘wisdom’, but never ‘philosophy’. Not only the term ‘philosophy’ is of Greek origin but also the science of philosophy with its own full-fledged methodologies and theories of epistemology, metaphysics and ethics is the exclusive heritage of this great western tradition. This point can be endlessly argued but the solution to change the situation is to develop an integral history of philosophy with adequate representation to philosophies of all continents. This is the most important goal of an enterprise like Intercultural Philosophy. Hence the Intercultural Philosophy basically propagates an attitude that ‘philosophy’ as a science is not the possession of any single culture, nor is it centered on any particular tradition, nor is there any philosophy which can make absolutistic claims. It holds that universally valid concepts and Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective arguments are found in all cultures, there is rationality in different human ways of thinking and hence it attempts to do justice to the regional philosophical traditions. The intercultural philosophical dialogue while denouncing the dynamics of big fish eating small fish, creates on the contrary proper atmosphere for the small fish to grow and realize its potentialities. Concretely it means no particular culture aims at metaphysical hypostatization, on the other hand, all unitedly seek moral grounds for common action. While respecting all perspectives, no dialogue partner attempts to reduce or absorb the other into his own perspective. Such a dialogue can promote pluralistic norm of live and let live, believe and let believe. It is a dialogue based on non-reductive, open, creative and tolerant hermeneuticsii that remains open to analogous structural patterns and overcomes all centrisms. When philosophers meet in the spirit of interculturality, they promote the cause of collaboration and communication among them. Finally we can summarise the concept of Intercultural philosophy in two ways: first according to Mall: “It is the name of a philosophical attitude, conviction; it is also a theory which revolutionizes our way of looking at the history of philosophy and lastly it leads us to a practice supplying us with a framework as the ground for the possibility of reciprocal communication among different cultures and philosophies”iii. Second: according to Raul Fornet-Betacourt, the task of Intercultural philosophy is : “to reflect on the culturality or regionality of every kind of thinking on every level; to search for universally valid arguments and concepts, and to do justice to the respective regional philosophic traditions.”iv The papers under my name in this “Virtual Library” represent only one dialogue partner of Intercultural Philosophy as they all deal with Asian/Indian perspective of Philosophy. They need to be complemented with other dialogue partners from Europe, Africa, Latin America and especially from China, Tibet and Japan. Indian Philosophy since the time of colonizers has given sufficient importance to Western Philosophy. The syllabus of Philosophy in Indian Universities show a well balanced emphasis on both the traditions. But India has not yet commenced any philosophical dialogue with Latin America and Africa, nor with China and Japan. To make philosophy truly intercultural, the syllabus needs to be complemented with the philosophical wealth found in these cultures. Besides, Intercultural philosophy in India has a tremendous Intercultural Philosophy from Asian Perspective task of developing dalit and tribal philosophies. Research in their folk-lore, symbols and myths should initiate a process of conceptualizing their thought through universal philosophical concepts. India will have made a great contribution to the future of philosophy if it earnestly pays attention to this dimension of its cultural heritage. Last but not the least, if I am privileged to enter into the Virtual Library of the EIFI it is sheerly due to Dr. Raul Fornet-Betancourt, who since 1995 consistently invited me to participate in all the Intercultural Congresses on Intercultural Philosophy organized by him. After the Eighth Congress in Seoul in 2009, I had to express my inability due to other preoccupations and responsibilities. But again in 2016