Advertisement

Thought and Context: Philosophy on the Eve of Colonialism

Chapter
Part of the Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures book series (SCPT, volume 11)

Abstract

Unlike other disciplines in humanities and social sciences, philosophy has been hesitant in taking its colonial and post-colonial contexts seriously. Colonialism belongs to the external history of philosophy. Hence, it is often seen as a temporary disruption in a living tradition of thought or as a harbinger of philosophy proper. Such an external perspective does not help us in understanding the work of Indian philosophers who while living under colonialism actively engaged with both Eastern and Western thought but felt that philosophy of their time had lost its vitality and soul. This essay argues that to study philosophy under colonialism, we need to clarify the relationship between philosophy and its historical context . We discuss Sheldon Pollock’s idea of the death of Sanskrit to formulate the temporality of a tradition that can live through multiple deaths. We defend Quentin Skinner’s use of speech act theory to study philosophy and deepen Jonardon Ganeri’s idea of intellectual context of intellectual traditions in India. Using the insights of historians such as Sanjay Subramanian et al. and philosophers such as Roland Barthes , we argue that the bearer of the marks of context is neither the proposition nor the text, but the texture of discourse for which the photograph is an exemplary instance.

Keywords

Pollock Ganeri Skinner Speech act Swaraj Context Time 

References

  1. Barthes, R. (2000). Camera Lucida: Reflections of photography (Richard Howard, Trans.). London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  2. Bhattacharyya, K. C. (1984). Swaraj in ideas. Indian Philosophical Quarterly, XI(4), 383−393.Google Scholar
  3. Coomaraswamy, A. K. (1981). The deeper meaning of struggle. In Essays in national idealism. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd.Google Scholar
  4. De Santillana, G., & von Dechend, H. (1977). Hamlet’s Mill. New Hampshire: David R. Godine Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Daya Krishna, Rege, M. P., Dwivedi, R. C., & Lath, M. (Eds.). (1991). Saṁvād: A dialogue between two philosophical traditions. New Delhi: ICPR.Google Scholar
  6. Derrida, J. (1988). The deaths of Roland Barthes. In H.J. Silverman (Ed.), Philosophy and non-philosophy since Merleau-Ponty. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Ganeri, J. (2008). Contextualism in the study of Indian intellectual cultures. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 36, 551−562.Google Scholar
  8. Mukherji, N. (2002). Academic philosophy in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 37(10), 931−936.Google Scholar
  9. Pollock, S. (2001). The death of Sanskrit. Society for Comparative Study of Society and History, 43(02), 364−381.Google Scholar
  10. Pollock, S. (2007). Pretextures of time. History and Theory, 46, 364–381.Google Scholar
  11. Raju, P. T. (1949). The state of philosophical studies in India. Philosophy, 24(91), 335−341.Google Scholar
  12. Rao, V. N., Shulman, D., & Subramanian, S. (2001). Textures of time: Writing history in South India 1600–1800. Delhi: Permanent Black.Google Scholar
  13. Schrader, O. (1937). Contemporary Indian philosophy. Philosophy, 12(47), 342−347.Google Scholar
  14. Skinner, Q. (2002). Visions of politics, volume 1: Regarding method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Strawson, P. F. (1964). Intention and convention in speech acts. The Philosophical Review, 73(4), 439−460.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Institute of Advanced Study 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Humanities and Social SciencesIndian Institute of Technology DelhiDelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations