Conceptual Eurocentrism: Pros and Cons

The article discusses the problems of philosophical geography, philosophical multipolarity, georationality. The debates on these issues are becoming interdisciplinary. Specialists in Eastern philosophies and cross-cultural communications as well as epistemologists, scientific methodologists,  cognitive scholars, synergists became participants of the discussion held at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The problem of Eurocentrism in academic philosophy has become the main topic of discussion. The opponents of the “regional” multipolarity argued that the Western European tradition of rationality was an example of the rationality per se. The proponents, who relied heavily on the ad professionem arguments, advocated multipolarity and demonstrated the irreducibility of the world-pictures, languages and ontologies of philosophical systems. A point of view was expressed that Eurocentrism had an ideological background. The disputants noted that there was need to redefine or clarify such fundamental concepts as logic, rationality, scientific rationality, universalism, processuality. The redefinition of the concept of rationality is for the studies of various types of rationality outside European cultures. Methodologists of science drew attention that the cognitive problems of intercultural communications turned out to be similar to the problems faced by theory of complexity. The analysis of philosophical, logical and other cases in various “zones of exchange” reveals a plurality of directions in the global and local socio-cultural spaces. The panelists raised the question of the role of philosophy in the global world and its responsibility in uniting nations. The authors of the article draw attention to many functions that the Western European conceptual system performs in the formation of philosophical language, mentality and communication. The dynamics of philosophical discussions, the dialogue of the West and the East lead to the clarification of philosophical positions, the emergence of new concepts and meanings as well as the formation of discourses of the future.

1. Arshinov V.I. & Budanov V.G. (2019) Processual Thinking in the Ontological and Epistemological Context of Quantum Mechanics. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 21–36 (in Russian).

2. Bakhtiyarov K.I. (2018) The Principles of Trinitarianism and Fractality of Genesis. Metaphysics. 2018. No. 2, pp. 87–98 (in Russian).

3. Belnap N.D. (1977) How a Computer Should Think. In: Ryle G. (Ed.) Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy (pp. 30–55). Stockseld: Oriel Press.

4. Grigoryeva T.P. (1992) Dao and Logos (Encounter of Cultures). Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura (in Russian).

5. Grigoryeva T.P. (2000) Synergetics and the East. In: Synergetic Paradigm. A Variety of Searches and Approaches (pp. 215–242). Moscow: Progress-Tradititsiya (in Russian).

6. Kanaeva N.A. (2019) Is the Conceptual Eurocentrism Terrible So Much? Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 70–87 (in Russian).

7. Karelova L.B. (2019) On the Problem of the Universality of Modern Western Philosophy Conceptual Framework: The Japanese Case. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 100–113.

8. Knyazeva E.V. (2012) Evolutionary Epistemology in Retrospect and Perspective In: Knyazeva E.V. (Ed. & Comp.) (2012) Evolutionary Epistemology: Anthology. Moscow: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ (in Russian).

9. Knyazeva E.V. (Ed. & Comp.) (2012) Evolutionary Epistemology: Anthology. Moscow: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ (in Russian).

10. Krushinskiy A.A. (1999) The Logic of I Ching: Deduction in Ancient China. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, Russian Academy of Sciences (in Russian).

11. Krushinskiy A.A. (2013) The Logic of Ancient China. Moscow: Institute of Far Eastern Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences (in Russian).

12. Krushinskiy A.A. (2019) The Dao through the Prism of the Logos: Eurocentrism at the Level of Concepts. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 33–53 (in Russian).

13. Lektorsky V.A. (2010) On the Historical Types of Rationality. In: Philosophy in the Dialogue of Cultures: Materials of the World Philosophy Day (pp. 267–272). Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russian).

14. Liu F., Seligman J., & van Benthem J. (2011) Models of Reasoning in Ancient China. Studies in Logic. Vol. 4, no 3, pp. 57–81.

15. Lyubimova T.B. (2019) Uniformity vs. Unity. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 54–72 (in Russian).

16. Mikhailov I.F. (2019) Perception, Logic and Plurality of Rational Representations of the World. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 7, 37–53 (in Russian).

17. Paribok A.V. & Pskhu R.V. (2019) Methodological and Substantial Arguments against “Conceptual Eurocentrism”. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 54–69 (in Russian).

18. Porus V.N. (2009) Rationality. In: Kasavin I.T. Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science (pp. 807–809). Moscow: Kanon+ (in Russian).

19. Pushkarskaya N.V. (2019) The Luoshu Magic Square as an Evidence of the Rational and Mathematical Orientation of the Chinese Style of Thinking. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 151–159 (in Russian).

20. Rozin V.M. (2019) Conditions for Discussing and Comprehending Georationality. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 7–20 (in Russian).

21. Rubets M.V. (2019) The Problem of the Harmonization of the Linguistic Pictures of the World (The Case of Western European and Chinese Medicine). Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114–125 (in Russian).

22. Shokhin V.K. (1994) Brahminist Philosophy. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura (in Russian).

23. Shokhin V.K. (2004) Stratification of Reality in the Ontology of Advaita- Vedanta. Moscow: RAS Institute of Philosophy (in Russian).

24. Stepanyants M.T. (Ed.) (2009) Indian Philosophy: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura; Akademicheskiy proyekt; Gaudeamus (in Russian).

25. Stepanyants M.T. (Ed.) (2011) Philosophy of Buddhism: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura (in Russian).

26. Titarenko M.L. (Ed.) (1994) Chinese Philosophy. Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow: Mysl’ (in Russian).

27. Zaitsev D.V. & Grigoryev O.M. (2011) Two Truths – One Logic. Logical Investigations. Vol. 17, pp. 121–139 (in Russian).