Cultural Heritage and Contemporary Change Series I. Culture and Values, Volume 44 General Editor George F. McLean What is Intercultural Philosophy? Edited by William Sweet Committee for Intercultural Philosophy Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy Copyright © 2014 by The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy Box 261 Cardinal Station Washington, D.C. 20064 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication What is intercultural philosophy? / edited by William Sweet. pages cm. -- (Cultural heritage and contemporary change. Series I, Culture and values ; Volume 44) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Philosophy, Comparative. 2. Philosophy and civilization. I. Sweet, William, editor. B799.W43 2014 2014036574 108--dc23 CIP ISBN 978-1-56518-291-2 (pbk.) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: The Project of Intercultural Philosophy 1 William Sweet Chapter I. What in the World is Intercultural Philosophy? 19 A Reflection Jānis (John) T. Ozoliņš Chapter II. Beyond the Cultural Turn: Intercultural Philosophy 39 in its Historical Context Wolfgang Kaltenbacher Chapter III. Interculturality: Some Philosophical Musings 51 Edwin George Chapter IV. What is Intercultural Philosophy? 67 Hsueh-i Chen Chapter V. Taking Diversity Seriously: On the Notion of 81 Intercultural Philosophy Flavia Monceri Chapter VI. Intercultural Philosophy and the Question of 95 African Identity: An ‘Afrocontructivist’ Perspective Joseph C.A. Agbakoba Chapter VII. Interculturality in the Context of Africa’s 107 Colonial and Decolonization Experience Dorothy Nwanyinma Ucheaga Olu-Jacob Chapter VIII. Global Economic Justice Defined Inter-Culturally: 121 Alternatives that Emerge from the Neo-Colonial Cusp Helen Lauer Chapter IX. Towards a Conception of Philosophy as Expression: 131 Approaching Intercultural Philosophy from a Zen Buddhist paradigm Gereon Kopf Chapter X. Four Dimensions of Intercultural Philosophy 151 Yao Jiehou Chapter XI. Comparative Philosophy or Intercultural Philosophy? 165 The Case of the Russian Buddhologist Theodor Stcherbatsky Viktoria Lysenko Afterword. The Prospect of Intercultural Philosophy 181 William Sweet Contributors 195 Index 197 INTRODUCTION THE PROJECT OF INTERCULTURAL PHILOSOPHY WILLIAM SWEET INTRODUCTION Though there has been contact or, at least, a mutual awareness among cultures – particularly those of Europe, Asia, and Africa – for millennia, this contact has increased significantly since the early modern period. With this contact have come encounters with a wide range of practices, cultures, religions, and, particularly, of wisdom or philosophical traditions. The extent of the differences among them have often, but not always, been obvious, and there have been varying responses to these encounters: sometimes incomprehension, sometimes rejection and denigration, but sometimes active engagement. One response to the contact of different cultures and traditions during the past century has been the proposal of a comparative or of an intercultural philosophy. Such a response is not without precedent; we see similar responses, for example, in literary, religious, and political studies. In intercultural philosophy, however, we find an attempt to have philosophers from different cultures or traditions actively engage one another – and to do so in a way that shows not only mutual respect, but also the recognition that one’s own philosophical views are not complete, that there are other, legitimate philosophical views, and that one’s own views may need a rearticulation or even revision. This volume proposes to present and describe some models of intercultural philosophy – to discuss different ways in which intercultural philosophy can be understood, its presuppositions, and its rationale, but also some of the powerful challenges to such a project. Drawing on the work of scholars from South and East Asia, Western and Eastern Europe, Australasia, Africa, and North America, the present volume reviews the project of intercultural philosophy, and indicates what such a project presupposes or might involve. Before turning to this discussion, it will be useful to examine what it means to raise the question of intercultural philosophy, to look at some models that have been proposed, and to see how it has been justified – but also to look at some of the challenges that such an enterprise needs to address. 2 William Sweet RAISING THE QUESTION OF INTERCULTURAL PHILOSOPHY Some might say that the question ‘What is intercultural philosophy?’ begs a number of questions – that the very question presupposes the truth of a number of claims that we have little or no reason to suppose to be true. While this is, perhaps, a peculiarly philosophical worry – philosophers frequently raise the question of the very possibility of the activities and questions that they are engaged in – it is one that must be addressed. To begin with, the question ‘What is intercultural philosophy?’ supposes that we have a clear idea of what the ‘intercultural’ is. Yet the term ‘intercultural’ admits of a range of meanings. For some, the term means simply “relating to, involving, or representing different cultures”1 – which is rather vague in the present context. A slightly more robust sense is “taking place between cultures [as in, “intercultural communication”], or derived from different cultures.”2 Some would argue that the preceding description still seems rather close to what is “multicultural” or “cross-cultural,” and prefer to go farther – to speak of that which “leads to a deeper understanding of the other’s global perception.”3 Finally, some would insist that genuine interculturality go farther still, and designate contact among cultures which exemplifies, or leads to, “comprehensive mutuality, reciprocity, and equality.”4 Arguably, it is this to latter sense of interculturality that many of those who see themselves as engaged in intercultural philosophy aspire. For some, intercultural philosophy is associated with ‘comparative philosophy’ – the bringing “together [of] philosophical traditions that have developed in relative isolation from one another and that are defined quite broadly along cultural and regional lines.”5 Yet a number of authors would contest identifying the two, though they may allow that intercultural philosophy requires the kind of knowledge of different philosophical traditions often found in comparative philosophy. Yet even if the notion of ‘intercultural’ is clarified, there remains the question of how intercultural philosophy is philosophy. Is it to be a field or subject area of philosophy, or is it more of an attitude, method, or approach – or plurality of approaches – to doing philosophy? Does it provide a positive direction or agenda, or does it focus more on avoiding certain problems in (traditional) philosophy? In other words, do we know what intercultural philosophy even looks like? For many, then, whatever intercultural philosophy is, they presuppose that it must be distinct from philosophy in general. Some would suggest, however, that again the presupposition may be problematic: that all philosophy is, by definition, ‘intercultural’ (and so the question ‘What is intercultural philosophy?’ is misleading), or (if The Project of Intercultural Philosophy 3 one believes that philosophies can be differentiated by their culture of origin) that it ignores that cultures are not natural or ‘real,’ but themselves ‘constructed’ based on underlying philosophies, or that it assumes that ‘the cultural,’ ‘the intercultural,’ and ‘the real’ are things that can be known, and that communication about them is possible. ‘Culture’ is a vague, contested, and unstable concept, and we only introduce confusion into the discussion by talking about ‘intercultural’ philosophy. These concerns are not easy to address. Yet, as the examples that follow and the discussion in this volume suggest, there is some reason to believe that intercultural philosophy is possible. Even though it may seem to be a somewhat vague notion, there have been many advocates of intercultural philosophy. Moreover, whatever else it does, intercultural philosophy insists that we take diversity of and in philosophical discourse seriously, and it recognizes that most cultures and traditions hold that they are home to ‘philosophy,’ even if it is understood in ways that are quite different from one another. SOME MODELS OF INTERCULTURAL PHILOSOPHY6 One approach to the question of intercultural philosophy is rooted in the phenomenological tradition in Europe, in the writings of Paul Masson- Oursel (1882–1956), who taught at Ecole pratique des Hautes Etudes in Paris, and who was a long-time editor of the Revue philosophique de la France et de l'étranger.7 Influenced in part by the Indian polymath Brajendranath Seal (1864–1938), who was the author of a number of comparative studies,8 Masson-Oursel proposed the development of a comparative philosophy – “the general examination of the ways in which human beings of all races and cultures reflect upon their actions and act upon their reflections.”9 While Masson-Oursel argued that philosophers should look at a wide range of phenomena, he did not himself provide any specific set of answers to philosophical questions. His emphasis was on method: “Le véritable problème de la philosophie comparée consiste, non pas dans la détermination de son concept, mais dans la poursuite d’une méthode rigoureuse.”10 What is this rigorous method?