Philosophy in the South Asian Subcontinent: A Unity in Maladjustment :: Philosophical Globalization Essays

philosophical system in the South Asiatic Subcontinent A Unity in Maladjustment cop Philosophy in the south Asian subcontinent differs from Western philosophy in the following three ways (1) it is found upon religion (2) love of tradition becomes an obstacle for philosophic development and (3) countenance is accepted as a source of knowledge. I argue that forthcoming philosophical development demands that the above three differences be removed. Furthermore, philosophers from the subcontinent must shrink on contemporary issues. If I ask myself about the extent of the philosophical inheritance, which I whitethorn deed to have inherited from the past tense, I shall realize myself in a obstruction in finding a very(prenominal) answer. If I look book binding for my inheritance, beyond fifty years towards the past, I shall find that the past heritage to which I belong, incidentally coincides with that of the South Asian subcontinent. In the context of philosophy, that heri tage is what we find mainly in the traditions of the Vedic philosophical schools (specially the Vedanta school), Buddhism and Jainism. These philosophical traditions be also considered as oriental philosophies. An orientalistic spotter in the context of these philosophical traditions may find it difficult to realize a line of production line between the past and the present placement of these traditions. It is my intention to draw worry to the fact that, in the context of philosophy, our past heritage is in a sense an obstacle to our future march on and to this extent, our heritage and our future ar in a unity in maladjustment.I shall draw tutelage to some historical situations, and some asserts of heritage based on these situations. It is claimed that, it is attainable to trace the rise of philosophy to a period earlier than the Greeks.... (1) This claim may lead to wonder whether Thales is the make of philosophy. In this context it is advertize claimed that The first Greek thinker whom we tolerate appropriately describe as a philosopher was Thales, and that When, however, we look at India of the ordinal century B.C., we see a completely different picture. ... It was not a case of the dawn of philosophy as in Greece but what may be described as the full glow of philosophical day. (2) What implications are meant to follow from such claims? tail assembly we say that W. T. Stace is wrong in claiming that Thales is the grow of philosophy? (3) Should one instead say that Thales is in fact the scram of western philosophy all?Philosophy in the South Asian Subcontinent A Unity in Maladjustment Philosophical Globalization EssaysPhilosophy in the South Asian Subcontinent A Unity in MaladjustmentABSTRACT Philosophy in the south Asian subcontinent differs from Western philosophy in the following three ways (1) it is based upon religion (2) love of tradition becomes an obstacle for philosophical development and (3) authority is accepted as a source of knowledge. I argue that future philosophical development demands that the above three differences be removed. Furthermore, philosophers from the subcontinent must concentrate on contemporary issues. If I ask myself about the extent of the philosophical heritage, which I may claim to have inherited from the past, I shall find myself in a difficulty in finding a precise answer. If I look back for my heritage, beyond fifty years towards the past, I shall find that the past heritage to which I belong, incidentally coincides with that of the South Asian subcontinent. In the context of philosophy, that heritage is what we find mainly in the traditions of the Vedic philosophical schools (specially the Vedanta school), Buddhism and Jainism. These philosophical traditions are also considered as oriental philosophies. An orientalistic outlook in the context of these philosophical traditions may find it difficult to draw a line of demarcation between the past and the present status of thes e traditions. It is my intention to draw attention to the fact that, in the context of philosophy, our past heritage is in a sense an obstacle to our future progress and to this extent, our heritage and our future are in a unity in maladjustment.I shall draw attention to some historical situations, and some claims of heritage based on these situations. It is claimed that, it is possible to trace the rise of philosophy to a period earlier than the Greeks.... (1) This claim may lead to wonder whether Thales is the father of philosophy. In this context it is further claimed that The first Greek thinker whom we can appropriately describe as a philosopher was Thales, and that When, however, we look at India of the sixth century B.C., we see a completely different picture. ... It was not a case of the dawn of philosophy as in Greece but what may be described as the full glow of philosophical day. (2) What implications are meant to follow from such claims? Can we say that W. T. Stace is wr ong in claiming that Thales is the father of philosophy? (3) Should one rather say that Thales is in fact the father of western philosophy only?