The Philosophy of the Kyoto School

270 Pages·2018·5.155 MB·English

by  Masakatsu Fujita

Masakatsu Fujita
Editor
The Philosophy
of the Kyoto School
The Philosophy of the Kyoto School
Tetsugaku-no-michi(ThePhilosopher’sWalk),Kyoto,Japan
Masakatsu Fujita
Editor
The Philosophy of the
Kyoto School
Translated by Robert Chapeskie and revised by
John W. M. Krummel
123
Editor
Masakatsu Fujita
KyotoUniversity
Kyoto
Japan
Translated by:Robert Chapeskie, Kyoto, Japan;
TranslationSupervisor:JohnW.M.Krummel,Departmentof ReligiousStudies,Hobartand
William SmithColleges, Geneva, NY,USA
ISBN978-981-10-8982-4 ISBN978-981-10-8983-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8983-1
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018939131
©SpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.2018
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
orinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.
partofSpringerNature
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:152BeachRoad,#21-01/04GatewayEast,Singapore189721,
Singapore
Preface
ThefieldofacademicinquiryreferredtoasphilosophyfirstbecameknowninJapan
followingtheMeijiRestoration(1868).Whileattemptstocomprehendanddigestit
had been made earlier, it was only at the beginning of the twentieth century that
independentthinkingbeganonthebasisoftheseefforts,adevelopmentexemplified
by the publication of Zen no kenkyū [『善の研究』An Inquiry into the Good] by
NishidaKitarō(1870–1945)in1911.Afterauthoringthislandmarktext,alongwith
providing guidance to many students as a professor and chair of philosophy at
KyotoUniversity’sFacultyofLetters,Nishidawentontopublishmanyworksina
variety of domains and lay the foundation for philosophical inquiry in Japan.
The “Kyoto School” was a group of scholars that took shape around this
foundation. Nishida, Tanabe Hajime (1885–1962), who succeeded him as chair of
philosophy at Kyoto University, and their disciples such as Miki Kiyoshi (1897–
1945) and Nishitani Keiji (1900–1990) were central figures of this school.
PhilosophyinJapanhascometohaveasolidfoundationthankstotheirdiverseand
fruitfulscholarship.Theydevelopedtheirthoughtcreativelyandexpandedthisfield
of inquiry by both addressing the key issues of Western philosophy head-on and
drawing on the traditional thinking of the East. To this day, the appeal of the
intellectual products of the Kyoto school has not in the least been diluted. Instead,
they continue to offer us numerous suggestions of significance for thinking about
the root problems of modern philosophy.
Thisexpression,“KyotoSchool”,hascometobefrequentlyusedinrecentyears,
but it is not entirely clear what the Kyoto school is or who belongs to it. This
ambiguityisrelated tothefactthatthisschool,unlikemostschoolsofphilosophy,
isnotagroupthataroseoutofcriticismofaprecedingschool,or,toputitanother
way,agroupthatemergedfromthepostulationofaparticularthesis.Instead,itisa
schoolthatarose,sotospeak,“spontaneously”,atatimewhenphilosophyinJapan
that had started with the direct importation of Western thought was beginning to
take its first steps on its own, and its assertions and scope possessed no clear
boundaries.Theworkthesephilosophersengagedinspannedquiteawiderangeof
fields,includingnotonlymetaphysicsandpracticalphilosophybutalsophilosophy
v
vi Preface
of history, philosophy of religion, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of sci-
ence, aesthetics, pedagogy, and so on.
Indeed, it is not easy to identify any one characteristic feature applicable to
Nishida, Tanabe, and all of the disciples who studied under them. If I were to
venture a definition of the Kyoto School, it would perhaps be something like “the
intellectual network created by Nishida Kitarō, Tanabe Hajime, and all of those
who were strongly influenced by them academically and personally.”
When we consider the content of their thought, it can be said that they were a
group of philosophers who possessed profound knowledge of the Japanese and
Easternintellectualtraditions(inparticularBuddhism,and,withinBuddhism,Zen)
along with Western philosophy, and who spun their own original thought in the
space between theseapproaches.Inthisregard,wecanperhaps describe themasa
group of philosophers who engaged in speculation by taking the concept of the
“nothing” [無] as the axis of their philosophy. And yet among philosophers
belongingtothe“KyotoSchool”,therewerethosewhodidnotpositivelythematize
the“nothing”,andtherewerealsothosewhocriticizedthetheoriesofNishidaand
Tanabe. Miki Kiyoshi and Tosaka Jun (1900–1945), for example, critiqued the
perspectives of Nishida and Tanabe from the standpoint of Marxism. And Nishida
and Tanabe were in turn influenced to no small extent by their discussions with
them.Theytoocametodeepentheirthoughtconcerningtheissues,forexample,of
“action” or “history”.
IntheKyotoschool,therewerethuscasesofinfluencenotonlyfrommentorto
disciplebutalsofromdiscipletomentor.Therewerealsocasesofmutualcriticism.
A paradigmatic example of this is Tanabe Hajime’s critique of Nishida Kitarō.
TanabeseverelycriticizedNishida,whowashisownpredecessor,butatthetimehe
issaidtohaverepeatedthewordsofAristotle:“Platoisdeartome,butdearerstill
is truth” (Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas). Nishida, for his part, openly
accepted this criticism from Tanabe, and went on to expansively develop his own
thinking.Theirdisciples,aswell,employedtheircritiqueofNishidaandTanabeas
a driving force in the formation and development of their own thought. We may
takethiskindofrelationshipthatpermitsmutualcriticism,oroftakingcritiqueasa
springboard or the criticism received as energy for developing one’s own thought,
to be one characteristic feature of the Kyoto School.
This book was originally published by Shōwadō Publishing of Kyoto in 2001.
As I have just noted, in the pre-World War II period philosophers of the Kyoto
Schoolproducedalargequantityofcreativeoutputthroughmutualcritique,butthis
work has not necessarily been sufficiently carried on in the post-war period.
A variety of new ideas have been picked up from American and European phi-
losophyforimmediatediscussion.Butinsteadofanacquisitionofthought,perhaps
it is more accurate to say that it has been a case of the latest trends simply being
talked about. For this reason I strongly feel that philosophy, standing here at the
startingpointofanewcentury,hasfailedtoclearlydelineatethedirectioninwhich
ourcultureoughttoproceed.Inthiscontext,thepublicationofthisbookaroseout
ofadesiretolookbackatthethinkingofthephilosophersoftheKyotoschool,who
not only actively embraced Western philosophy and laid the foundation for
Preface vii
philosophical inquiry in Japan but also created their own distinct thought through
an earnest confrontation with Western philosophy, in order to discern from this
vantage point a new course of action.
The idea came to me of producing this translation of Kyoto Gakuha no
Tetsugaku[『京都学派の哲学』ThePhilosophyoftheKyotoSchool],theoriginal
ofwhichwaspublishedin2001,whenhearingthattherehasbeenalotofinterestin
recentyearsinJapanesephilosophyandthephilosophyoftheKyotoschoolinEast
AsiaaswellasinAmericaandEurope,andthatmanyresearchpapersandbookson
this topic, as well as journals such as the Journal of Japanese Philosophy, are
springing up one after another. I suspect this interest may have developed out of a
desiretoobtainfromthethoughtofNishidaandhisstudents,whostoodwithinthe
intersticebetweenEastandWestandopenedupanewperspectiveontheworldof
philosophy,acluetoreassessingtheissuesofphilosophyfromthegrounduporto
drawing new creative possibilities. But at present it seems the materials that have
been made available to further realize this kind of intellectual dialogue are far too
few. This book is intended to be of some help in this regard.
The themes taken up by the philosophers of the Kyoto school are diverse and
numerous. I have tried to select texts that would best illustrate the characteristics
ofthephilosophyoftheKyotoSchool,and,whiletheirquantitywillbeinsufficient,
works that together would outline its shape as a whole so that those who have an
interest in Japanese philosophy or the philosophy of the Kyoto School can survey
its overall picture. 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,ascholarwithdeepunderstandingofthephilosopherinquestionhas
providedanaccountofhislife,intellectualjourney,andthesignificanceofthetext
included in this book. It may be best to read the essay first before turning to the
original text it discusses.
Itismyhopethatthroughthisbookanewdialogueofideaswillemergethat,in
turn, will engender new developments in philosophy, and thereby further expand
the network of philosophical thinking.
Inpreparingthisbookforpublication,Ireceivedassistanceinavarietyofareas
from my colleague Prof. Uehara Mayuko. Mr. Robert Chapeskie translated the
original manuscript and Prof. John W. M. Krummel revised and edited the trans-
lated manuscript from the perspective of a scholar of Japanese philosophy. This
book could not have been completed without their considerable and dedicated
efforts, and I would like to take this opportunity to once again express my deepest
gratitudetothem.IwouldalsoliketothankthoseinvolvedatSpringerPublishing,
who assisted in this book’s publication.
Kyoto, Japan Fujita Masakatsu
February 2018
Contents
Part I Nishida Kitarō
1 Place (1) [場所 (1)] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Nishida Kitarō
2 The Scope of Nishida Kitarō’s Theory of Place
[西田幾多郎の場所論の射程] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Fujita Masakatsu
Part II Tanabe Hajime
3 Clarifying the Meaning of the Logic of Species (1, 4)
[種の論理の意味を明らかにす(一、四)] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Tanabe Hajime
4 What Does Absolute Negation Differentiate?
[絶対否定は何を差異化するか] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Nakaoka Narifumi
Part III Miki Kiyoshi
5 The Logic of Imagination (Preface, Chapter 1 “Myth” 1)
『[ 構想力の論理』(序、第一章「神話」一)] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Miki Kiyoshi
6 The Philosophy of Miki Kiyoshi [三木清の哲学]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Akamatsu Tsunehiro
Part IV Tosaka Jun
7 What Is the Technological Spirit? [技術的精神とは何か]. . . . . . . . 81
Tosaka Jun
ix
x Contents
8 On Tosaka Jun’s Scientific-Technological Spirit
[戸坂潤の科学的・ 技術的精神をめぐって]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Nishikawa Tomio
Part V Kimura Motomori
9 Body and Spirit [Mind] [身体と精神]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Kimura Motomori
10 Reading According to the Context: Kimura Motomori
and “Body and Spirit” [コンテクストから読み解く――木村素
衛と「身体と精神」] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Ōnishi Masamichi
Part VI Hisamatsu Shinichi
11 The Metaphysical Element of the East
[東洋的に形而上的なるもの] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Hisamatsu Shinichi
12 The Thought and Practice of Hisamatsu Shinichi
[久松真一の思想と実践]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Imaizumi Motoji
Part VII Shimomura Toratarō
13 The Position of Mathematics in Intellectual History
[精神史; Geistesgeschichte] [精神史における数学の位置]. . . . . . . . 163
Shimomura Toratarō
14 Shimomura Toratarō: Tracking “Intellectual History”
[下村寅太郎――「精神史」への軌跡] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Takeda Atsushi
Part VIII Nishitani Keiji
15 Nihility and Emptiness [虚無と空 (1–5)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Nishitani Keiji
16 Philosophy of Overcoming Nihilism [ニヒリズム超克の哲学]. . . . . 217
Keta Masako