{"title":"Two Forms of Conditionality of Intercultural Understanding and Three Contemporary Responses","authors":"Timo Ennen","doi":"10.1163/24683949-12340121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nBuilding on a distinction between two kinds of skepticism recently worked out by the American philosopher James Conant, we can differentiate the question of how to overcome the gap between two cultural horizons in intercultural dialogue from the question of how there could even be such dialogue, irrespective of its method, success or failure. While the first question concerns practical conditionality, that is, something we as philosophers have to achieve, the second question concerns transcendental conditionality. After making this distinction clear, the paper presents three cases of recent scholarship on intercultural dialogue, each of which can be read as a response to those two forms of conditionality of intercultural understanding. Those cases are Jean-Yves Heurtebise’s notion of a “transcultural” philosophy, Eric S. Nelson’s work on “intercultural philosophy,” and Kwok-Ying Lau’s concept of a “cultural flesh.” However, while speaking to both forms of conditionality, they tend not to distinguish sufficiently their responses to the two problematics.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture and Dialogue","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-12340121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Building on a distinction between two kinds of skepticism recently worked out by the American philosopher James Conant, we can differentiate the question of how to overcome the gap between two cultural horizons in intercultural dialogue from the question of how there could even be such dialogue, irrespective of its method, success or failure. While the first question concerns practical conditionality, that is, something we as philosophers have to achieve, the second question concerns transcendental conditionality. After making this distinction clear, the paper presents three cases of recent scholarship on intercultural dialogue, each of which can be read as a response to those two forms of conditionality of intercultural understanding. Those cases are Jean-Yves Heurtebise’s notion of a “transcultural” philosophy, Eric S. Nelson’s work on “intercultural philosophy,” and Kwok-Ying Lau’s concept of a “cultural flesh.” However, while speaking to both forms of conditionality, they tend not to distinguish sufficiently their responses to the two problematics.
以美国哲学家詹姆斯·柯南特(James Conant)最近提出的两种怀疑论的区别为基础,我们可以区分如何在跨文化对话中克服两种文化视野之间的差距的问题,以及如何在不考虑其方法、成功或失败的情况下进行这种对话的问题。第一个问题是关于实践条件的,也就是我们作为哲学家必须达到的,第二个问题是关于先验条件的。在明确了这一区别之后,本文提出了最近关于文化间对话的三个学术案例,每个案例都可以被解读为对这两种形式的文化间理解条件的回应。这些例子是Jean-Yves Heurtebise关于“跨文化”哲学的概念,Eric S. Nelson关于“跨文化哲学”的工作,以及刘国英关于“文化肉体”的概念。然而,在谈到两种形式的条件性时,他们往往不能充分区分他们对这两个问题的反应。