[Y-Indology] De-Essentializing the 'Eastern Wisdom'.

[Guest guest]

Dear Rajiv,

 

On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 04:05:39PM -0400, Rajiv Malhotra wrote:

 

> Please enlighten us on: what percent of faculty in philosophy

> departments are researching/teaching IP; what percent of courses

> in philosophy departments are on IP; what percent of papers in

> the mainstream philosophy journals (again not Indology journals)

> are on IP. Admittedly, my findings are based on the top US

> universities, but the results show less than 3% share, and in

> most cases practically ZERO.

 

I am a little confused by your assertion that the only valid

evidence that `Indian Philosophy' has been taken seriously in the

`West' is that `Indian philosophy' has been pigeon-holed within a

department which has traditionally taught `Western philosophy.'

Personally, I don't see why this should invariably be the

case. Evenso, you have requested evidence that Indian thought is

in the process of being taken seriously by `Western' philosophers

and academics. I will give you a brief list which can no doubt

be augmented by others far better informed than myself.

 

First, a couple of Journals (and by the way, you may like to note

where they are published and also who employs the contributors):

 

The Journal of Indian Philosophy

 

Philosophy East and West

 

You might also like to note that the University of Hawaii Press

has for some years been publishing a series (once again track

down the contributors):

 

Monographs of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy

 

And finally, you seem to neglect to take account of the _huge_

amount of scholarship which has grown up around the study of

Naagaarjuna and Maadhyamika thought. A glaring instance of your

oversight is the work of Jay Garfield. If you had been familiar

with the above journals you would have been aware of the valuable

work he is engaged in. Please refer to:

 

@Book{garfield:fundamental,

editor = "J. Garfield",

title = "The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way:

{N}\={a}g\={a}rjuna's {M}\={u}lamadhyamakak\={a}rik\={a}",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

stitle = "M\={u}lamadhyamakak\={a}rik\={a}",

year = "1995",

key = "garfield:1995",

address = "New York",

}

 

You might also like to note the work of Richard Robinson and his

ilk, especially:

 

@Article{robinson:some,

author = "R. H. Robinson",

title = "Some Logical Aspects of {N}\={a}g\={a}rjuna's System",

journal = "Philosophy East and West",

year = "1957",

key = "robinson:1957",

volume = "6\,:\,4",

pages = "291--308",

}

 

I can only join with others in strongly urging you to rethink

your position after a careful consideration of all available

evidence. This would provide your position with a solid

foundation without which further discussion will be profitless.

 

 

Many regards,

 

Richard Mahoney

 

 

Graduate Student

Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies

University of Canterbury

Christchurch

New Zealand

 

 

--

/"\ ------------------- Richard B Mahoney -----------------------

\ / ASCII 78 Jeffreys Rd +64-3-351-5831

X Ribbon Campaign Christchurch New Zealand

/ \ ----------- rbm49 ---------------