[Buddha-l] Philosophy East & West

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 22:33 +0000, Stephen Hopkins wrote:

> In these times, although a little off Buddha-l's mainstream, listmembers
> might be interested in a piece in the current issue of the Brit mag
> 'Prospect' by Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad (Senior lecturer in the Department of
> Religious Studies at Lancaster University and author of "Eastern Philosophy"
> (Weidenfeld)) which pokes around the question of 'why cinema, literature and
> other aspects of western culture are increasingly open to Asian influence
> (but) not so western philosophy, which remains almost entirely sealed off
> from eastern traditions. Why?

Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad's book entitled Eastern Philosophy is one of the
best I've seen at giving Indian and Chinese thought truly philosophical
treatment. (I wrote a review of it for some publication called The
Financial Times, which I'd never heard of before they invited me to
review Ram-Prasad's book.) He has also written some books on religion
and politics, which I have not yet read but probably will some day. I
like the way he thinks, and I admire his clarity of presentation.

On this issue, however, I think he is overstating the case. I just don't
think it is true at all that western philosophy remains entirely sealed
off from easter traditions. That may have been true 50 years ago, but it
is not at all the case now, at least in the philosophical arena that I
am most familiar with.

> Institutionalised parochialism on the part of western philosophers

This is much less the case nowadays than it was a couple of generations
ago, back when Ryle could say "The only light ever to come out of the
East was the sun." Now it is common to see positions in Jobs for
Philosophers in which it is announced that universities are seeking
candidates with an AOC (area of competence) in Indian or Chinese
philosophy. I really don't think the reason why so few philosophy
programs have no opportunity to pursue Asian philosophy as primary
specializations is anything to do with parochialism. Rather, I think the
problems are largely practical.

The main factor, I think, is that few philosophy departments have the
means of teaching the languages that a student must have in order to do
serious work in Asian philosophy. Learning enough Sanskrit or Chinese or
Tibetan or Persian to be able to read Asian philosophical texts
intelligently requires 4-5 years of serious language study. So unless a
person comes along who already has that amount of linguistic training
and who wants to do a doctorate in philosophy, there is almost no chance
of specializing in Asian philosophy. Such students do exist, but not in
large enough numbers to make a dramatic impact on the field of
philosophy. One can be grateful that there have been people such as
Bimal Matilal, J.N. Mohanty, Thupten Jinpa and Chakravarthy Ram-Prasad,
but one can't count on the trickle of such people to turn into a flood
any time soon.

> and a loss of nerve among Asian thinkers'

On more than one occasion, I have encountered students from India who
have a good enough command of Sanskrit to pursue serious work in Indian
philosophy, but they are discouraged by their own families and religious
teachers from studying Indian philosophy in the West. One can see how
counterintuitive it must seem to them. Going to England or the USA or
Germany to study Indian philosophy must seem, superficially at least, as
odd as going to Spain or Japan to study Emerson or William James. 

But that is not the only issue. Another factor is that traditional Hindu
and Buddhist religious teachers fear (so I am told) that if young men
and women study Western philosophy, they will lose their faith. While I
hope it is true that anyone who studies anything will change his or her
thinking---otherwise, what's the point of education?---I'm not sure that
everyone realizes that a change of the way one is faithful is not
necessarily a loss of faith at all. Often it is a sophistication of
faith, and a deepening of faith that is involved; to the outside
observer this change may appear a loss, but to the person who undergoes
the change, it usually does not feel that way at all.

-- 
Richard Hayes
Department of Philosophy
University of New Mexico