tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781646534201708629.post7458372126683817527..comments2024-01-08T00:08:53.008+00:00Comments on ombhurbhuva: The True Rasa of Indian Thoughtombhurbhuvahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07789523088428270027noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781646534201708629.post-38005925067824811132014-10-10T09:40:23.254+01:002014-10-10T09:40:23.254+01:00Skholiast:
Having brought it up I should have a go...Skholiast:<br />Having brought it up I should have a go at parsing that quote:<br />(a) True: With Aristotle as ancestor you are off to a flying start and a tradition has been established which is consistently built on against which other traditions may seem trifling.<br />(b) False: Indian Logic is a different beast altogether and not to be assessed by Western forms or explained by them. It is inductive, empirical craftsman’s reasoning that stays close to facts.<br />(c) Neither True nor False simply Orientalist projection which assumes that having a propositional logical system guarantees rigorous reasoning. In red ink - requires more meta theory. Santayana boasted that he had never taken a logic class.<br /><br />Ganeri’s <i>Indian Logic</i> is on Scribd.com - good intro. by him.ombhurbhuvahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07789523088428270027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781646534201708629.post-48272893593678845042014-10-09T16:51:46.514+01:002014-10-09T16:51:46.514+01:00I don't doubt that when you sift through the m...I don't doubt that when you sift through the millennia of Indian thinking with the sieve of "Does-it-look-Greek," you can wind up with a fw shiny examples that get you a gold star as "promising" from Aristotle, with little knowing looks exchanged among the faculty. I suspect more than one generation of Indian scholars interiorized this under the impact of colonialism. Then of course, the Hindutva reaction gears up in the other direction. How to do philosophy under such conditions? Same as it ever was. Ganeri's project does get a gold star from me for asking after the institutional conditions for cosmopolitanism in philosophy, which has too often been treated as a no-brainer: we've got the universities. So far this has not worked very well.<br /><br />PS. That quotation from the Britannica article is -- I don't even know what to say. skholiasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05410057905377189336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781646534201708629.post-57841065136722201752014-10-09T09:46:03.398+01:002014-10-09T09:46:03.398+01:00I agree with that. It's also true that powerf...I agree with that. It's also true that powerful and ambitious people can take the study of Indian Philosophy in a certain direction, not that this affects me as a general reader of course nor you as a scholar. Our taste has been formed. It's not an either/or situation. I got an exposure to both 'Continental' and 'Analytic' thought before opposed camps became a thing. <br /><br />That it (Ind.Phil) is even being talked about is a good thing.ombhurbhuvahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07789523088428270027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781646534201708629.post-29750681828331938672014-10-09T08:59:52.777+01:002014-10-09T08:59:52.777+01:00Michael, I see your point, but could not we leave ...Michael, I see your point, but could not we leave Ganeri with his logical skills investigate into Navya Nyaya while others keep on enjoying reading Ramanuja (my case) or Sankara? Do we really need to argue about what is truly Indian philosophy, instead of doing both (given that both have been so badly neglected?)?elisa freschihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17068583874519657894noreply@blogger.com