List of Articles اروپامحوری

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - A Critique of the Theory of the End of Comparative Philosophy Based on Steven Burik’s View
  Maryam Parvizi Ghasem Pourhasan
  Since the coinage of the term “comparative philosophy” several views have been propounded concerning its whatness, principles, and function. Some thinkers emphasize the end of comparative philosophy, and some others insist on its significance and necessity. There are st More

  Since the coinage of the term “comparative philosophy” several views have been propounded concerning its whatness, principles, and function. Some thinkers emphasize the end of comparative philosophy, and some others insist on its significance and necessity. There are still others who advocate the beginning of some basic changes in this school from Europe-centeredness to interaction and dialog with others. However, the word “end” has different meanings the investigation of which could lead to three main meanings and referents for it: 1) essential impossibility: the followers of this theory believe that comparative philosophy suffers from an important defect called “impossibility in essence” because of its internal problems and shortages and should not have been formed at all; 2) appearance of all possibilities and actualization of all potencies and abilities, which emphasizes the principle of progress and perfection; 3) end of the past and a new beginning. Following an analytic-descriptive method and relying on Steven Burik’s viewpoint, the present study investigates and evaluates the theory of the end of comparative philosophy based on these three meanings. Apparently, what opponents of comparative philosophy emphasize is end in the first sense because they believe that this kind of philosophy has become “Europe-centered” and cannot enter any dialog or interaction with other scientific traditions and systems. Accordingly, it conceptually enjoys a kind of essential impossibility. Nevertheless, unlike the opponents, Burik believes that comparative philosophy is necessary for stopping the East’s isolation and the growth of Europe-centeredness. Through adopting a critical approach to the “previous comparative philosophy” because of its Europe-centeredness, he pays attention to the “future comparative philosophy”, which bears two responsibilities: 1) maintaining various methods of thinking and 2) facilitating the relationship between these methods without reducing one to another. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - From "Essentialism" to "Historical Hybridity”: "The Contribution of the East in a Civilizational Analysis From the Perspective of Comparative Sociology
  Ebrahim Abbassi Adel Nemati
  In this paper, we attempt to demonstrate that the theoretical framework of "Historical Essentialism" (negation of the West and articulation of oneself as the Western other) used by some Iranian researchers as the basis for the conceptualization of the contrast between t More

  In this paper, we attempt to demonstrate that the theoretical framework of "Historical Essentialism" (negation of the West and articulation of oneself as the Western other) used by some Iranian researchers as the basis for the conceptualization of the contrast between the geography of the East against the geography of the West, results in no more than the reproduction of the evil cycle of the duality of "Orientalism" and "Eurocentrism" in civilizational analysis. The fundamental question is how, in the era of Western modernity's domination, can we, as non-Westerners, articulate our own civilization based on our historical and geographical characteristics? The hypothesis of this research is that a non-western subject as a solution cannot assume the role of being "other" of the western modernity's civilizational order in the form of "Historical Essentialism". The essentialist strategy has no solution other than reproducing the same vocabulary of Western academic Orientalism as the historical essence of the East. On the contrary, a non-western subject can form their civilizational order based on the historical and geographical vocabulary of their societies by using a common global heritage that connects them with the western subject, in the form of a "Historical Hybridity". The findings of this article show that the late works of Samuel Eisenstadt about "comparative sociology based on civilizational analysis" is the most applicable theory to investigate this claim. This theory, while acknowledging a shared heritage as "conditions of possibility for civilizational order" in world history, emphasizes pluralistic "articulations of civilizational order" and the absence of a hegemonic civilizational order in world history that could claim "legitimacy. " This paper presents the conceptual framework of "Historical Hybridity " as a replacement for "Historical Essentialism that is presented in Shayegan's "Asia versus the West". The meaning of "Historical Hybridity" is not to express a "unidirectional evolutionary" relationship between Western and non-Western societies, that non-Western societies must necessarily follow the same path as Western societies in the articulation of their social formations; Rather, on the contrary, it seeks a "global history without a center" in which Western and non-Western people could on the basis of a common and hybrid heritage, speak independently based on the historical and geographical singularities of their societies and produce different formations of civilizational order at the level their societies' history. In other words, "Historical Hybridity" is a "unity in diversity. " The method of this article involves the history of ideas or the history of thought based on the comparative sociology approach and data collection method is referring to the original sources of civilizational order theorists. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - A Study of Western Thinkers’ Approach to Eastern Philosophy
  Reza Gandomi Nasrabadi
  The discussion of the meaning and existence of philosophy in the East is considered to be an introduction to any exchange of thought and agreement between the East and the West. Ritchie, the Christian missionary, wrote a book entitled Confucius: The Chinese Philosopher More

  The discussion of the meaning and existence of philosophy in the East is considered to be an introduction to any exchange of thought and agreement between the East and the West. Ritchie, the Christian missionary, wrote a book entitled Confucius: The Chinese Philosopher and introduced his thoughts to the West for the first time. Later and under his influence, Leibniz and Christian Wolf not only acknowledged the certain existence of philosophy in the East, particularly in China, but also believed that it could be used to remove the existing problems in Western philosophy and theology. However, Kant initiated a racist approach in this regard that dealt with other philosophies from a higher position and questioned the very essence of philosophy in the East altogether. This Europe-centered view entered a new era in the West with Hegel, whose view of eastern philosophy was humiliating and hierarchical. Unlike him, Deussen, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Husserl, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, and many other Western thinkers benefitted from the vast philosophy of the East. Generally speaking, it can be said that denying or doubting the legitimacy of Eastern philosophy on the part of some Westerners lacks logical support and is mainly rooted in their nationalist feelings. The reaction of Eastern thinkers in this regard is also noteworthy. Some of them complain that Western philosophers do not appreciate Eastern philosophy as much as it truly deserves and do not use it in order to solve the crises that contemporary Man encounters. However, some others, in line with Westerners but with a different motive, refuse to apply the word philosophy to their ancient legacy in order to protect its originality and safeguard against its mixture with Western philosophy. Manuscript profile