Introduction: ‘What is Japanese Philosophy’?
Introduction: ‘What is Japanese Philosophy’?
复制标题
简介：“什么是日本哲学”？
DOI：
10.1163/9789004360112_016
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
R. Gassmann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Steineck;E. Lange;Ralph E. Weber;R. Gassmann
直到最近，对“日本哲学”的第一次探究可能会以仙境告终。根据人们向哪本书或专家寻求一般性指导，人们要么会了解到：a）“哲学”在日本从未存在过； 1 b) 从最早的书面资料来看，“哲学”在日本是显而易见的； 2或c）“日本哲学”始于西田几多郎的《善的研究》（1911）。 3 更令人难以置信的是，支持 b) 命题的专家和书籍——从最早的书面资料来看，日本的哲学思想是显而易见的——要么断言它 b') 与西方哲学本质上相同，要么 b'') 与西方哲学，甚至与印度和中国哲学本质上不同。一本包含从 8 世纪到 20 世纪材料的巨著《日本哲学》资料集的出版，4 以及在标准哲学百科全书（如《劳特利奇》和《斯坦福哲学百科全书》）中引入相关文章，在一定程度上改变了西方世界的情况，使立场 b）的变体占据了主导地位。但立场 a) 仍然被许多人坚持，1 经典的依据是 Nakae Chomin 的陈述：“自古至今，日本没有哲学”，最近引用，例如。克林顿，““哲学”还是“宗教”？”，第 14 页。 75. 戈达特补充道：“这种认为 1868 年之前的日本思想不存在可以贴上“哲学”标签的观点在日本已经很流行。换句话说，将本土思想追溯为“哲学”从未获得广泛接受。 “铁学”一词几乎专门用于西方哲学。这意味着在现代日语中，哲学（tetsugaku）和明治之前的本土知识生产之间存在区别，后者通常用“shisō”（思想）一词来表达。这不仅仅是一个命名问题：它表明，按照当前日本的标准，明治维新之前的“思想”在“世界哲学”的舞台上没有一席之地。”末木文彦在他最近关于“哲学的实际场所”的书中再次引用了中江长民的观点，并再次证实日本传统思想几乎不包含任何可以被称为“哲学”的东西——对他来说，这意味着使用这个术语往往会混淆日本可能对哲学的贡献。全球‘思想’。末木文彦，《铁学的玄场》，第 11 页。 11. 2 Blocker 和 Starling，日本哲学； Heisig 等人，日本哲学。
Until very recently, a first inquiry about ‘Japanese Philosophy’could end up right in wonderland. Depending on which book or expert one turned to for general orientation, one would either learn that a)‘Philosophy’has never existed in Japan; 1 b)‘Philosophy’was evident in Japan from the earliest written sources; 2 or c)‘Japanese Philosophy’started with Nishida Kitarō’s Study of the Good (1911). 3 To make things even more mind-boggling, experts and books upholding proposition b)–philosophical thought is evident in Japan from the earliest written sources–would either assert that it was b’) essentially the same as in the West, or b’’) essentially different from Western, and even from Indian and Chinese philosophy. The publication of a monumental sourcebook in Japanese Philosophy which contains materials from the 8th to the 20th century, 4 and the introduction of pertinent articles in standard philosophical encyclopaedias such as the Routledge and the Stanford Encyclopaedias of Philosophy have changed the situation somewhat in the Western world, giving pre-eminence to variants of position b). But position a) is still upheld by many, 1 The locus classicus is Nakae Chōmin’s statement:‘Since olden times to this day there has been no philosophy in Japan’, quoted recently eg. in Clinton,‘“Philosophy” or “Religion”?’, p. 75. Godart adds:‘This view, that there is no such thing as Japanese thought before 1868 which can be labeled “philosophy”, has become prevalent in Japan. In other words, retroactive designations of indigenous thought as “philosophy” have never gained wide acceptance. The term tetsugaku is used almost exclusively for Western-style philosophy. This means that in modern Japanese, there is a distinction between philosophy (tetsugaku) and pre-Meiji indigenous intellectual production, the latter usually expressed in the term shisō (thought). This is not merely a matter of nomenclature: it suggests that pre-Meiji “thought”, by current Japanese standards, has no place on the stage of “world philosophy”.’Sueki Fumihiko in his recent book on ‘the actual site of philosophy’(!) again quotes Nakae Chōmin and re-confirms that traditional Japanese thought contains little that might be termed ‘philosophy’–which, to him, means that using the term tends to obfuscate possible Japanese contributions to global ‘thought’. Fumihiko Sueki, Tetsugaku no genba, p. 11. 2 Blocker and Starling, Japanese Philosophy; Heisig et al., Japanese Philosophy.