COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY HANDOUT

Asp. Jessie Macapaz

Asp. French Ryan Mayake
Asp. Darryl Kim Velarde

Comparative Philosophy Without Borders

Arindam Chakrabarti and Ralph Weber

Main Problem
The challenges faced by (traditional) comparative philosophy, particularly in the
context of cross-cultural thinking and philosophical analysis. The discipline pointed
out the difficulties in breaking traditional boundaries between different philosophical
traditions, the issues related to translation, and the lack of genuine dialogue and
collegiality in comparative philosophy.
Main Solution
The article suggests several approaches to address the challenges faced by
comparative philosophy. One proposed solution is the concept of "comparative
philosophy without borders," which aims to transcend the limitations of traditional
comparative philosophy by promoting genuine dialogue, critical reflection, and a
deeper understanding of diverse philosophical traditions. It brings into light the idea
of shifting from comparative philosophy to fusion philosophy.
Key Terms in order to understand the article
1. Philosophy (Comparative Philosophy)
Involves examination and comparison of philosophical traditions, ideas, and
concepts across different cultures.

2. The idea of a Border

Literally, is a line, often conventional, seldom natural, that separates two
regions of space.

3. Comparanda (Elements to be compared)

4. Tertium Comparationis – (Third Element, which the two compared realities
are based; the neutral third place; Specifier of the two-compared reality.

Compare A and B with respect to F.

A ; B – Comparanda | F – Tertium Comparationis

Ex. Compare the Chinese and Greek ethics with

respect to their view on honor.
 5. Fusion Philosophy – Advocates a more integrated approach. It merges
insights and concepts from different traditions. Fusion Philosophy means
philosophically comparing than comparing philosophy.

In fusion philosophy, given the emphasis on the comparer, it is, furthermore,

more than evident that the interest in objective truth lies with the comparer
and his or her argument and not with what tradition or school. The comparer
appropriates the variety of philosophical standpoints—and eventually
transcends the borders between them.
Stages of CP

1st stage - The idea of universalism – Finding Similarities between the

comparanda.
2nd stage - The basic idea here is localism. Finding contrasts and context-
dependent culture-immanent peculiarities in non-Western philosophies, and to detect
specific lacks compared to the Western tradition.
3rd stage - Critical conjuncture between universalism and localism. The
imperative is to re-interpret non-Western philosophy (Indian, Chinese, or Japanese)
in terms of (oppositionally or positively) Western philosophical ideas.
4th stage – Dropping of “Comparative” – shifting to fusion philosophy

Reconstruction of the Argument

Chakrabarti and Weber found out the problem when it comes to comparing
two traditional philosophies. The problems of cross-cultural thinking and
philosophical analysis are evident. At the outset, the two philosophical traditions are
different, especially in their context. Western thinkers has their own views and
thinking, Eastern thinkers have their own perspectives too. Philosophy without
borders seeks a way in order to bridge the two philosophical traditions; it is through
the person (comparer- the borderless being) who is responsible for connecting the
two philosophies (the comparanda) using the tertium comparationis – The third
element. From this idea, fusion philosophy comes into being. Comparative
philosophy becomes only part of the process. Chakrabarti and Weber shifted from
comparative philosophy to Fusion philosophy.
Questions and Criticism
1. How can we know that the process of fusion philosophy is done without
bias?
The comparer might also be driven by his self-understanding of belonging to
one tradition (Sor-hoon Tan)
2. Will there be a possibility that the comparer’s perspective can also
distort the idea of the two fused comparanda?

3. What frictions and tensions have been ignored or leveled out for the
sake of fusion?
4. Does fusion philosophy ensures the elimination of the borders of the
two-compared comparanda? If not what then is the real purpose of
Fusion Philosophy?