Two Obscure Sanskrit Words Related to the C��rv��ka: pa?cagupta and ku??ak��?a

Two words, pañcagupta and ku??ak???a, are found in modern Sanskrit lexicons such as the ?abdakalpadruma, the V??caspatya, the Sanskrit-Wörterbuch, and A Sanskrit English Dictionary. They are said to signify the C??rv??ka philosophy and an expert in the C??rv??ka philosophy respectively. Both the words have been taken from some twelfth-century Sanskrit ko?as but no example of actual use is available. Nor do they occur in any earlier Sanskrit ko?a, such as the Amarako?a and the Hal??yudhako?a. The inference is that the words must have appeared in some late philosophical work that was critical of the materialist C??rv??ka system of philosophy and the ko?ak??ras found them in the same source.     

Levinas,Israel and the Call to Conscience

This article argues that Gillian Rose’s critique of Levinas’s marriage of political commentary to his thinking on ethics is misplaced in that it fails to identify the nature and essence of his project. I demonstrate that Rose’s complaint rests upon Levinas’s refusal to contextualise his ethics, which she perceives as a betrayal of modernist philosophy. I reject this analysis and demonstrate how clearly it misses the mark when she takes Levinas to task for his supposed ‚exoneration’ of Israel. Levinas’s position on Israel is, on an initial superficial reading, ambivalent but within that ambivalence he has clearly identified the gap that exists between Israel as a political entity and Israel as a spiritual community. It is precisely the very diremption, to which Rose takes such exception, that opens up the possibility of calling the state of Israel to moral accountability.     

The Question of Political Responsibility and the Foundation of the National Transitional Council for Libya

In March 2011 Jean-Luc Nancy published an article entitled ??What the Arab Peoples Signify to Us?? in the Libération newspaper. The article supported the NATO-led military intervention in Libya that followed the anti-government protests of 15?C16 February 2011. It is in the name of ??political responsibility?? that Nancy makes his intervention. I want to explore the question of ??political responsibility?? in light of Nancy??s work, and his Libération article in particular. I do this by first assessing one of the distinguishing features of the uprising in Libya: the emergence of the National Transitional Council (NTC). By setting Nancy??s response against Derrida??s work on spectrality and his critique of the founding declaration (in ??Declarations of Independence??) we can more clearly appreciate the scope that Nancy??s account of responsibility entails. I suggest that Derrida??s logics of spectrality help not only critique Nancy??s response but also understand the conditions that make his account of political responsibility possible.     

The Typology of Jāti-s Indicated by Di?nāga and Development of Di?nāga’s Thought

The exhaustive explications on j??ti-s (sophisticated ripostes) and their seemingly chaotic arrangement in early Indian philosophical texts arouses an expectation for a systematic taxonomy or typology. Such taxonomy would enormously increase the heuristic value of the list of j??ti-s. The present article aims to reveal some interpretational problems relevant to the understanding of the j??ti-s?? historical development, as well as the theoretical implications of their typology. Focusing historically on the early texts of debate manuals of Ny??ya and Buddhist circles, this article will excavate and explicate the vague and the obvious attempts to establish a typology of j??ti-s. Given that Di?n??ga was the philosopher who shifted the history of Indian philosophy into the era of macro theory by integrating ontology and epistemology into a general system, the minimal changes of the order of the j??ti-s in the list given in the Pram???asamuccaya, in contrast to the one found in the Ny??yamukha, will be interpreted as a paradigm shift. The rearrangement of the j??ti list in the Pram???asamuccaya represents the paradigm shift from the debate (v??da) manual to the epistemological (pram???a) treatise, confirming Frauwallner??s ideas regarding the development of Di?n??ga??s thought.     

Narrating Sāṃkhya Philosophy: Bhīṣma,Janaka and Pañcaśikha at <Emphasis Type="Italic">Mahābhārata</Emphasis> 12.211–12

The account of the conversation between King Janaka and the ??i Pañca?ikha on the fate of the individual after death is one of the philosophical texts that are included in the Mok?adharmaparvan of the Mahābhārata. There are different scholarly views on the history and composition of the text as well as the philosophical teachings propagated by Pañca?ikha. In contrast to earlier studies this paper not only analyzes the whole text, but also pays attention to the narrative framework in which the philosophical discourse is embedded. In the text Bhī?ma functions as an external narrator, who relates and interprets the conversation as well as characterizes the protagonists and thereby influences the ways in which text is received by the audience. It is argued that it is important to deal with the interplay between the narrative and the philosophical discourse that is narrated, when analysing the philosophical positions that are either refuted or accepted in the text. 12.211–12 is not only a philosophical text, but also a tale about philosophical discourse in general and about how Sā?khya philosophy is taught to a non-expert audience. Seen from this perspective the text is significant for the way in which philosophical terms and issues are dealt with in the epic and adjacent non-expert texts, such as the Purā?as.     

Theological-Political Ruins: Walter Benjamin, Sovereignty, and the Politics of Skeletal Eschatology

Drawing on the work of Walter Benjamin, this essay argues—largely against Carl Schmitt—that political theology as a critical analytic should examine the ‘afterlife’ of theological tropes with respect to the sense of time and history that they compel. Benjamin’s The Origin of German Tragic Drama argues that sovereignty as a political concept gains prominence as a response in the wake of the erosion of the concept of salvation history in the Baroque. The consequence of this rise of sovereignty as a political key concept is a philosophy of history based on the permanently impending catastrophic end of the world. This continuously urgent situation is not only one that leaves little room for political critique and action, but also a perplexing one in its perpetuation, since the end of the world never actually arrives. To answer why political urgency can be perpetuated seemingly infinitely and why sovereigns can fail without eroding the ongoing desire for sovereignty, Benjamin’s work suggests that we must broaden our view of political theology to consider the survival of further theological concepts to include original sin as a master trope of philosophical anthropology.     

Aleatory Materialism and Speculative Jurisprudence (I): From Anti-Humanism to Non-Humanism

This paper is the first part of an enquiry taking an initial, provisional step toward the construction of a theoretical matrix called speculative jurisprudence. Toward that end, it recruits the thought of Louis Althusser, whose work has taken on new significance thanks in part to the availability (in French and English) of many formerly unpublished texts, the contemporary critical scrutiny of numerous commentators, and the independent emergence of several philosophical currents sharing some of his work??s key concerns. The paper offers a unique characterization of Althusser??s aleatory materialism as at once a novel expression of Althusser??s ??jurisprudential problematic??, a problematic that I argue shapes his thought as a whole, and as a means of posing the core problem of dialectical materialism. The engagement with Althusser that I propose thus intervenes in current debates about aleatory materialism, but this is subsidiary with respect to the elaboration of speculative jurisprudence as a distinct approach in philosophy and law. That mode of thought begins to acquire a degree of reality by taking Althusser??s theoretical anti-humanism as a point of departure for the articulation of a non-humanist conception of legality, in a broad sense that conjoins the territories of both traditional philosophy and legal theory. The paper concludes with a reference to the open questions that Part Two, which will appear in Althusser and Law (2012), will take up.     

Philosophy in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Mahābhārata</Emphasis> and the History of Indian Philosophy

The study of philosophical terms and doctrines in the Mahābhārata touches not only on important aspects of the contents, composition and the historical contexts of the epic, but also on the historiography of Indian philosophy. General ideas about the textual history of the epic and the distinction between “didactic” and “narrative” parts have influenced the study of epic philosophy no less than academic discussions about what is philosophy in India and how it developed. This results in different evaluations of the place of philosophical texts in the epic and their relationship to the history of Indian philosophy. While some scholars have suggested that there is a “philosophy of the epic” its composers wished to propagate, others have argued that “philosophy” is included in the epic either in a “proto” form or in a variety of doctrines (often presented is “mixed” or “unsystematic” ways) they deemed relevant. The article discusses these views and some of the heuristic assumptions on which they are based. It proposes to widen the scope of analysis by paying more attention to the interplay of narrative and didactic passages, the various ways in which philosophy is presented in the epic, and its connection to a larger spectrum of the reception of philosophy in textual genres and by audiences outside the expert circles of the philosophical schools.     

Predestination and Hierarchy: Vallabh��c��rya��s Discourse on the Distinctions Between Blessed, Rule-Bound, Worldly, and Wayward Souls (the Pu??iprav��hamary��d��bheda)

The Pu??iprav??hamary??d??bheda (PPM) by Vallabh??c??rya (1479?C1531?) is a brief work (25 verses) written in Sanskrit in about the year 1500, which is accompanied by four Sanskrit commentaries and one Hindi (Brajbh????) commentary. The most important and authoritative commentary is by Puru?ottama, written about two centuries after the original text. The article contains a translation of the PPM with long extracts from the commentaries, particularly the one composed by Puru?ottama. After an introduction placing the PPM??s doctrine of the hierarchy of embodied souls (j??vas) and their eligibility to obtain states of devotion (bhakti) in a wider context of Vai??ava sectarian and philosophical schools, the text is presented along with the translation and notes to the text (including extracts from the commentaries). The article concludes with reflections on the PPM??s doctrine of predestination, comparing it with those of other Indian religious sects and within the wider context of predestination in Western religions, where these discussions have been ongoing for more than 1500 years. An extensive bibliography is included at the end.     

Rawls's Political Liberalism. A Reassessment

Since Rawls's Political Liberalism is by now the subject of a wide and deep philosophical literature, much of it excellent in quality, it would be foolhardy to attempt to say something about each of the major issues of the work, or to sort through debates that can easily be located elsewhere. I have therefore decided to focus on a small number of issues where there is at least some chance that a fresh approach may yield some new understanding of the text: Rawls's distinction between “reasonable” and “unreasonable” comprehensive doctrines; the psychological underpinnings of political liberalism; and the possibility that political liberalism might be extended beyond the small group of modern Western societies that Rawls's historical remarks suggest as its primary focus. I also include a discussion of the much‐debated issue of civility and public reason, which could hardly be avoided given its prominence in the book's reception. This paper should therefore be read not as a comprehensive account of the work but as one person's attempt to grapple, very incompletely and imperfectly, with a book that is as great as any philosophy has seen on this topic of great human urgency.     

Morality, Law and the Fair Distribution of Freedom

Hart’s criticism of Devlin’s stance on the legal enforcement of morality has been highly influential in shaping a new liberal sensibility and in paving the way to many important legal reforms in the UK. After 50 years it is perhaps time to go back to Law, Liberty and Morality to see it in the perspective of the general evolution of Hart’s thought since the early 50s. This is a period of extraordinary creativity for the Oxford philosopher, in which he writes many important contributions to legal, moral and political philosophy. Prominent among these is ‘Are There Any Natural Rights?’, an article that sets the agenda for Hart’s subsequent work on liberty, fairness and rights, and provides the philosophical background for the liberal understanding of the relations between law and morality defended in Law, Liberty and Morality.     

The philosopher’s courtly love? Leo strauss, eros, and the law

This essay poses a critical response to Strauss’ political philosophy that takes as its primary object Strauss’ philosophy of Law. It does this by drawing on recent theoretical work in psychoanalytic theory, conceived after Jacques Lacan as another, avowedly non-historicist theory of Law and its relation to eros. The paper has four parts. Part I, ‘The Philosopher’s Desire: Making an Exception, or “The Thing Is...’’’, recounts Strauss’ central account of the complex relationship between philosophy and ‘the city’. Strauss’ Platonic conception of philosophy as the highest species of eros is stressed, which is that aspect of his work which brings it into striking proximity with the Lacanian-psychoanalytic account of the dialectic of desire and the Law. Part II, ‘Of Prophecy and Law’, examines Strauss’ analysis of Law as first presented in his 1935 book, Philosophy and Law, and central to his later ‘rebirth of classical political philosophy’. Part III, ‘Primordial Repression and Primitive Platonism’, is the central part of the paper. Lacan’s psychoanalytic understanding of Law is brought critically to bear upon Strauss’ philosophy of Law. The stake of the position is ultimately how, for Lacanian psychoanalysis, the Law is transcendental to subjectivity, and has a founding symbolic force, which mitigates against speaking of it solely or primarily in terms of more or less inequitable ‘rules of thumb’, as Plato did. Part IV, ‘Is the Law the Thing?’ then asks the question of what eros might underlie Strauss’ paradoxical defense of esoteric writing in the age of ‘permissive’ modern liberalism – that is, outside of the ‘closed’ social conditions which he, above all, alerts us to as the decisive justification for this ancient practice.     

Cassirer in Davos. An Intermezzo on Magic Mountain (1929)

The Davos-debate between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger at Davos in 1929 has proved a landmark in the history of twentieth century philosophy. The debate not only marked the end of the heyday of continental Neo-Kantian philosophy, but influenced, although in implicit ways, legal and political theory as well. At various levels of discourse, philosophical, moral philosophical, and that of legal and political philosophy, in the first half of the twentieth century Cassirer acted as the advocate of what remained of the old European humanist tradition. Heidegger, on the contrary, acted as the exponent of the emerging existentialist, anti-humanist movement that would soon supplant the old tradition in significance and force. This is an account of an imaginary encounter between two traditions, so that the clash of their opposing forces may shed sparks on a (still) dark era in Western philosophical history. The conclusion sums up the lessons or wisdom to be learned for political and legal theory.     

Does Ethical Theory Have a Future in Bioethics?

Although there has long been a successful and stable marriage between philosophical ethical theory and bioethics, the marriage has become shaky as bioethics has become a more interdisciplinary and practical field. A practical price is paid for theoretical generality in philosophy. It is often unclear whether and, if so, how theory is to be brought to bear on dilemmatic problems, public policy, moral controversies, and moral conflict. Three clearly philosophical problems are used to see how philosophers are doing in handling practical problems: Cultural Relativity, and Moral Universality, Moral Justification, and Conceptual Analysis. In each case it is argued that philosophers need to develop theories and methods more closely attuned to practice. The work of philosophers such as Ruth Macklin, Norman Daniels, and Gerald Dworkin is examined. In the writings of each there is major methological gap between philosophical theory (or method) and practical conclusions. The future of philosophical ethics in interdisciplinary bioethics may turn on whether such gaps can be closed. If not, bioethics may justifiably conclude that philosophy is of little value.     

(Close) the Door,the King (is Going): The Development of Elliptical Resolution in Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṃsā

This paper examines three commentaries on the ?abdapariccheda in Kumārila Bha??a’s ?lokavārttika, along with the the seventeenth century Bhā??a Mīmā?sā work, the Mānameyodaya. The focus is the Mīmā?sā principle that only sentences communicate qualified meanings and Kumārila’s discussion of a potential counter-example to this claim–single words which appear to communicate such content. I argue that there is some conflict among commentators over precisely what Kumārila describes with the phrase sāmarthyād anumeyetvād, although he is most likely describing ellipsis completion through arthāpatti. The paper attempts both a cogent exegesis and philosophical evaluation of the Bhā??a Mīmā?sā view of ellipsis completion, arguing that there remain internal tensions in the account of ellipsis preferred by the Bhā??a, tensions which are not entirely resolved even by the late date of the Mānameyodaya.     

Seeing Red: Entropy, Property, and Resistance in the Summer Riots 2011

This paper explores the thermodynamic property ??entropy?? as a metaphor for aesthetics and politics, law and resistance in the case of the Summer Riots 2011. The aim of the paper is to use the framework and structure of entropy to demonstrate a political aesthetics of property. This shall be done by firstly linking entropy with aesthetic concepts of order, disorder, symmetry and equilibrium. Works on complex adaptive systems to account for collective behaviour, combined with Benjaminian and Adornian accounts of the commodity, shall be used alongside the relevance of crowd theory in explaining not the riots themselves but the sentencing of collectivity in the case of R v Blackshaw & Others [2011] EWCA Crim 2312. Following Rancière and the arts and crafts movement, utility and beauty, the breaking down of the divisions of art, life, philosophy and science are summarised as the lesson of entropy for law. This re-visiting of the Summer Riots 2011 hopes to re-evaluate the sentencing procedures in light of ??Riot-Related Offending?? through an aesthetic politics of collectivity, property and commodity.     

Chaos: Our Own ‘Gun on The(ir) Table’

In October 2011, George Papandreou, the then Greek Prime Minister, announced he was planning to hold a referendum in order for the Greek people to decide whether to agree to the bailout plan prepared by the International Monetary Fund, the Central European Bank and the European Commission. This intention was aborted due to intense pressure by Papandreou??s European partners, especially Germany and France. This interference clearly shows the problematic relationship between the so-called ??markets?? and national-popular sovereignty. This article raises the question of why this interference happened in the first place, why the global markets felt such a big threat before the possibility of a vote taking place in a small country of 10 million inhabitants. And also, importantly, what this means in terms of potential for political agency by those who are usually considered to be lacking such agency, as having ??no other alternative?? than to follow the one-way course of neoliberalism.     

Śrīharṣa on Knowledge and Justification

In this paper I explore the extent to which the dialectical approach of ?rīhar?a can be identified as skeptical, and whether or how his approach resembles that of the first century Mādhyamika philosopher Nāgārjuna. In so doing, I will be primarily reading the first argument found in ?rīhar?a’s masterpiece, the Kha??anakha??a-khādya (KhKh). This argument grounds the position that the system of justification (pramā?a) that validates our cognition to be true is not outside of inquiry. Closely adopting ?rīhar?a’s polemical style, I am neither proposing a thesis in this paper that ?rīhar?a is a skeptic, nor am I denying such a possibility. I believe we can pursue our arguments on a neutral ground and let the facts speak for themselves. I will outline salient features that define skepticism in the mainstream philosophical discourse so that analyzing ?rīhar?a’s first argument becomes easier. In so doing, I will introduce some of the arguments of Nāgārjuna in light of ?rīhar?a’s position. This comparison, however, is restricted only to the salient features relevant to further the central argument of this paper and is therefore not aimed to encompass the overall positions of these two giants.     

哈耶克自由主义理论之研究:方法与立场

在政治哲学谱系中占有重要位置的哈耶克自由主义理论是与二十世纪国际政治格局、尤其是与极权主义和计划经济给人类带来的灾难性影响有关。正是对二十世纪“各种形式的集体主义”政治情势和意识形态的敏锐启动了哈耶克自由主义思想的开展,而对政治情势和意识形态的学理诊断则是哈耶克所担负的哲学使命和知识职责。研究哈耶克自由主义理论的方法应是哲学式的,而评判立场则不能以我们置身其间的政治情势和意识形态作为择取的标准。     

论人工智能法律主体的法哲学基础

当下人工智能主体学说面临诸多问题,需从法哲学视角予以审视。就人工智能本体而言,其行为具有自主性,不宜纯粹以客体相待;从他者期望视角观察,人工智能拥有道德责任能力,系道德主体。法律主体理论经历了由自然人有限人格到全面人格,再到自然人、法人综合人格的演化过程,呈现客观化趋势,不唯理性、意志等主观要素论,其为人工智能法律主体提供了栖居空间。在目的论意义上,人工智能能够推动积极向善,助力美好生活,实现显著的经济社会价值,作为法律主体具有合目的性。在当代,传统主体哲学转向,人的哲学危机引发新思考,尤其是人类中心主义的主体-客体范式发生变化,客体主体化的历史经验及当代实践显现一种哲学可能性,即主体不限于人,从而强化了人工智能法律主体的可能性。