„Pasaulinės filosofijos“ projektai honolulu komparatyvizmo sąjūdyje: kritinis pjūvis
Projects of “a world philosophy” in the comparative movement of honolulu: a critical perspective

Summary/Abstract: The article analyzes ideas of “a world philosophy” formulated by the members of the Honolulu movement of comparative philosophy. This intellectual movement came about through the close cooperation of three institutions: the Department of Philosophy of Hawaii University, the scholarly journal Philosophy East and West, and the East-West Philosophers’ Conferences. The Movement achieved significant scientific results and attracted the attention of humanistic scholars all around the world. The accomplishments of the Honolulu movement of comparative philosophy are placed at the forefront of contemporary humanities. The movement constitutes the exact historical context, the center of intellectual activity, where the ideas of “a world philosophy” were generated and discussed in a most thorough fashion and from many different perspectives. The following conclusions were drawn: The idea of “a world philosophy” can be discussed logically, semantically, and phenomenologically only if it is treated as a cluster concept that has to be analyzed in its basic units of meaning. There are six distinguishable meanings of “a world philosophy” that are used by the Honolulu movement of comparative philosophy: (a) a world philosophy as philosophical syntheticism; (b) a world philosophy as philosophical universalism; (c) a world philosophy as a pathos of mutual meeting and reconciliation; (d) a world philosophy as a pathos of mutual complementation and enrichment; (e) a world philosophy as a comparative historiography of ideas; (f) a world philosophy as philosophical cosmopolitanism. The idea of “a world philosophy” in its search for different models of philosophical dialog between the cultures of the East and the West most often stumbles, but in doing so it guards against many philosophical pitfalls. Thus, this seemingly negative outcome of a world philosophy becomes a positive theoretical achievement and it can properly be understood only as such. The failure of philosophical syntheticism teaches us not to generalize, not to project unity where it is absent, and especially to avoid creating it artificially. The East and the West are rather confusing, vague cultural categories. So much so that it is far better to speak about individual geographical locations than about abstract cultural clusters. Philosophical syntheticism as a conception is ungrounded and as a project is impossible to implement. The failure of philosophical universalism teaches us not to confuse empirical findings from the common foundations of all cultures with the aprioristic concept of such a common foundation, which perhaps could be justified and applied in the political context of “building a common future”, but hardly has any philosophical support. Philosophical universalism – under the name of “a world philosophy” – as it is stated by the Honolulu movement of comparative philosophy is unfounded.

• Details
• Contents