Abstract

A new vocabulary has prominently entered the discourse of comparative philosophy. Such philosophy, and philosophy as such, is often supposed to be “global,” “cosmopolitan,” “fusion,” or “post-comparative.” The intention is to have a more global scope in what counts as philosophy and to be more inclusive of standpoints. A key term is “positionality.” In this article, I first translate a tension between globality and positionality into the problem of the possibility of a non-relativist perspectivism. Based on Borges’s Funes el memorioso and The Parable of the Blind Men and the Elephant, I explore hard-to-reconcile variants of perspectivism, particularly as to whether perspectives add up epistemically. I then turn to the example of sovereignty, questioning what the addition or juxtaposition of perspectives means for the practice of global post-comparative philosophy. In conclusion, I revisit my equating the issue of positionality with perspectivism and inquire into the possibility of meaningful fusion.