The main purpose of this book is to offer to philosophers and students abroad who show a great interest in Japanese philosophy and the philosophy of the Kyoto school major texts of the leading philosophers. This interest has surely developed out of a desire to obtain from the thought of these philosophers, who stood within the interstice between East and West, a clue to reassessing the issues of philosophy from the ground up or to drawing new creative possibilities.The present condition (...) seems to be, however, that the material made available to further realize this kind of intellectual dialogue is far too scarce. This book is intended to be of some help in this regard.The book presents selected texts of representative philosophers of the Kyoto school such as Nishida Kitaro, Tanabe Hajime, Miki Kiyoshi, Nishitani Keiji, and others who best illustrate the characteristics of this school, and works that together portray its image as a whole. Those who are interested in Japanese philosophy or specifically the philosophy of the Kyoto School can survey a comprehensive representation from this book.These texts are, of course, quite difficult and cannot be well understood without sufficient preliminary knowledge. Expository essays have therefore been included after each text to provide guidance. In each of these commentaries a scholar of our time with deep understanding of the philosopher in question has provided an account of his life, intellectual journey, and the significance of the text included here.From this book will emerge a new dialogue of ideas that in turn will engender new developments in philosophy, thereby further expanding the network of philosophical thought worldwide. (shrink)

When I deliver an introductory lecture on Japanese Philosophy, I always raise the following question: Is it appropriate to modify the word philosophy with an adjective such as Japanese? Philosophy is, after all, a discipline that addresses universal problems, and so transcends the restrictions implied in geographical descriptors. However, as Kuki Shūzō argues in his essay “Tokyo and Kyoto,” I think that this is only part, and not the whole truth of the matter.One’s thinking takes place within the framework of (...) one’s cultural heritage, and the different nuances of each of the words one uses can influence how one thinks. It is for this reason that every philoso­phy has its own unique character. As Otto Pöggeler suggests, there is something about the thought of Japanese philosophers such as Nishida Kitarō and Nishitani Keiji that does not fit easily into the framework of “philosophy” in the Western tradition. This is a conse­quence of the fact that they did not simply passively adopt, but rather attempted to critically challenge Western philosophy. I suppose that their grounding in Japanese and other Eastern traditions contributed to their critical challenge of Western philosophy. And I submit that there is a strong tendency in traditional East Asian thought to not simply grasp things within a presupposed framework of “knowledge,” but rather, since “knowledge” itself is understood to be a certain kind of restriction, to return to its roots.Needless to say, neither Nishida’s nor Nishitani’s thought is merely a philosophical reiteration of such traditional East Asian teachings. Nevertheless, we can say that the East Asian idea that knowledge is at root something restrictive lives on in their thinking. The radical­ity of Nishida’s and Nishitani’s thought can be understood to lie in the manner in which they cast light on the limits of the “knowledge” pursued by Western philosophy, problematizing the basis on which this knowledge is established as well as the framework it sets up.I think that the “character” of this or that philosophy arises from such different ways of seeing things and different attitudes toward “knowledge.” It is crucial to point out, however, that the gaps resulting from these differences need not become hindrances for philosophical thinking. Indeed, I think that the existence of such gaps, rather than hindering “dialogues” between different philosophies, is precisely what enables them to be meaningful. This is also what I have in mind when I stress the importance of dialogue in my lectures on Japanese philoso­phy. It is, after all, the creative dialogue engendered in this manner that enables philosophy to progress along its path of radical inquiry. (shrink)

東洋の思想的な伝統を踏まえ、広い視野で哲学の新しい眺望を切り開いた『善の研究』。難解で知られるこの名著を丁寧に、深く掘り下げて読み解く西田哲学入門。 『善の研究』は西田の最初の著作ながら、晩年に至るまでの思索全体を貫く考え方が示されている主著。その魅力は、西洋の哲学と格闘しながら、その不十分性を乗り越えて物事の真相に迫ろうとする西田の思いがそのまま 表現されている点にある。仏教や儒教など、東洋の思想的な伝統をも踏まえた広い視野で哲学の世界に新しい眺望を切り開いた本書の面白さや意義を分かりやすく解説。西田の思考を丁寧に読み解き、西田が何を語ろうとし たのかを深く掘り下げて明らかにする、格好の西田哲学入門。.

膨大な資料をもとに魅力あふれる西田の素顔を描きだし、彼の言葉に豊かな広がりを与える決定的評伝。.

日本、中国、韓国はそれぞれの伝統に依拠しつつ西洋哲学を受容することで近代哲学を形成してきた。哲学や思想における特徴や制限は、他の思想を鏡として、そこに映し出すことで明らかになる。なぜ違いが生まれたのか 。互いの違いをどう克服するのか。西田幾多郎、吉田松陰、九鬼周造、西周、和辻哲郎、土田杏村、大西克礼、戸坂潤...。受容から対話へと続く道から、いま、東アジアにおける哲学的創造の新たな意義と可能性が拓か れる。.