Machine generated contents note: Dialectic of Praxis -- I. Philosophy of Subjectivity and -- Historical Materialism 7 -- A. What is the "Toposical Tachiba"? 7 -- B. The Present and Past of Umemoto's Theory of Subjectivity 17 -- C. The Basis and Structure of Degeneration 36 -- II. Confused 'Dialectic of the Subject of Cognition' 48 -- A. Destruction of the Logic of Origo 48 -- 1. Summary of Umemoto's Epistemology 49 -- 2. Umemoto's Defect in Epistemology 56 -- 3. (...) Reversed Hegelianism 60 -- B. Objective Cognition and the Logic of Self-Awareness 68 -- 1. Ontology and Epistemology 68 -- 2. Negation of "Two Circular Structures" 76 -- 3. Objective Cognition and Value Consciousness 82 -- C. Evaporation of Praxiology 89 -- 1. Alienation and Self-Awareness 89 -- 2. Objectivization of Praxis 96 -- 3. Strained Interpretation of Uno's Theory 99 -- 4. Political Economy, Materialist Outlook of History, -- and Praxiology 107 -- 5. A Domain Proper to the Theory of -- Revolutionizing Praxis 116 -- III. Defects in Criticism of Uno's Economics 131 -- A. Problem Awareness 132 -- B. Fall into a "View that the Principles are Lost -- in the Historical Process" 137 -- C. Historicistic Remedy for the Theory of the -- Circulation Form 155 -- 1. Beautification of a Distorting Tendency to -- Emphasize the Circulation Form 156 -- 2. Complementation of the 'Theory of Form -- without the Logic of Substance' 169 -- 3. On the Trans-Historicization of the -- 'Dual Character of Labour' 178 -- IV. Political Economy and -- Materialist Outlook of History 195 -- A. 'Anatomy of Bourgeois Society' and -- 'Anatomy of History' 195 -- B. Consolidation with Reversed Hegelianism 202 -- C. 'Logic of Circularity' and 'Logic of History' 218 -- V, Political Economy and the -- Logic of Revolutionization 231 -- A. Defects in the Understanding of Political Economy 232 -- B. Distortion of 'Labour-Power Commodity' 255 -- 1. On the Dialectic: Commodity Market and the -- Production Process 255 -- 2. Private Property and Capitalist Property 261 -- 3. Negation of the Negation: Sublation of the -- Commoditization of Labour-Power 268 -- C. Capitalist Thingivation and the -- Logic of its Revolutionization 282 -- Afterword 301 -- Supplementary Notes to the English Edition 303 -- Index 309. (shrink)

Japanese Hermeneutics provides a forum for the most current international debates on the role played by interpretative models in the articulation of cultural discourses on Japan. It presents the thinking of esteemed Western philosophers, aestheticians, and art and literary historians, and introduces to English-reading audiences some of Japan's most distinguished scholars, whose work has received limited or no exposure in the United States. In the first part, "Hermeneutics and Japan," contributors examine the difficulties inherent in articulating "otherness" without falling into (...) the trap of essentialization and while relying on Western epistemology for explanation and interpretation. In the second part, "Japan's Aesthetic Hermeneutics," they explore the role of aesthetics in shaping discourses on art and nature in Japan. The essays in the final section of the book, "Japan's Literary Hermeneutics," rethink the notion of "Japanese literature" in light of recent findings on the ideological implications of canon formations and transformations within Japan's prominent literary circles. Contributors: Amagasaki Akira, Haga Toru, Hamashita Masahiro, Inaga Shigemi, Kambayashi Tsunemichi, Thomas LaMarre, John C. Maraldo, Michael F. Marra, Mark Meli, Ohashi Ryosuke, Otabe Tanehisa, Graham Parkes, J. Thomas Rimer, Sasaki Ken'ichi, Haruo Shirane, Suzuki Sadami, Stefan Tanaka, Gianni Vattimo. (shrink)

いま、この危機と混迷の時代に、憲法学者・樋口陽一が、基本に立ち戻り、戦後日本を代表する英知・加藤周一と丸山眞男の「憲法論」と「思想」を再読し、その本質を語り尽くす。.

『精神現象掌』的全段階比扣、「感覺怯「契機反復芒才、「感性怯、「精神」仿現象口有仿道程的全体是構成心志「工夭。前者怯「推論」構造橙色運動的論理的拉機能守，後者怯、的運動力可考己、言古法拉形態是取毛主芒 的原本的放質料場所可怎。己的區別乙基于主芒『精神現象字』仿敘述分析寸毛主、「共通感賞」仿云統的拉理解力可大芒〈愛才月。非共通仿共通感貨主怯、絕灼的異他性老含甘共同体拉拉、仿共通感覺、己才倍、『精神現象 字』的宗教仿段階心惰熱主意志才包合非共通的共通又主深化才謊耳其弓之己。神仿死的感情，仿神色人色的、旬件又站、大秉弘教、多悲三哲竿的』乙深〈通匕言文本丐。 Dans toutes les étapes de la Phénoménologie de l' esprit, la sensibilité est répétée comme « moment », et le sensible est un « élément » qui constitue le cheminement total du processus du phénomène de I' « esprit ». La première est une fonction logique du mouvement ayant une structure « deductive ». Le second est la matière originale et le lieu lorsque ce mouvement prend ici de multiples formes. Cette distinction a pour effet de changer la compréhension (...) traditionnelle du sens commun. Le sens commun non commun, c'est le sens commun dans la communauté contenant l'Étrangeté absolue. Dans l'étape de la religion de la Phénoménologie de l' esprit, nous pouvons lire ce sens commun non commun comme s'approfondissent dans le pathos commun non commun qui comporte à la fois la passion et la volonté. On peut affirmer que le pathos entre Dieu comme sentiment de Sa mort et l'homme est philosophiquement lié à la compassion dont parle le bouddhisme du Grand Véhicule. In all the stages of the Phenomenology of the spirit, the sensibility is repeated as « moment », and the sensitive is an « element » which constitutes the total progress of the process of the phenomenon of the « spirit ». The first is a logical function of the movement having a « deductive » structure. The second is the original material and the place when this movement here takes multiple forms. If we analyze the description of the Phenomenology of the spirit by resting itself on this distinction, it is the traditional understanding of the « common sense » that will largely be changed. The non-common common sense is the common sense in the community containing the absolute Strangeness. In the stage of the religion of the Phenomenology of the spirit, we can read this common sense non-common as deepening in the common pathos not common which contains both passion and will. We can assert that the pathos between God as feeling of His death and man is philosophically connected to the condolence which the Buddhism of the Big Vehicle refers to. (shrink)

This essay is an overview of the intellectual itinerary of the Japanese philosopher Kuki Shūzō (1888-1941). Kuki first came to the attention of Western readers in Heidegger's A Dialogue on Language between a Japanese and an Inquirer. After correcting the record on Kuki with regards to this famous piece, the essay turns to the work that Heidegger and the Japanese Inquirer were discussing, namely, The Structure of Iki. The essay discusses both the background and basic arguments of this work. The (...) essay then expands on Kuki's Western reception, indicating that his thinking evolved beyond his early work with the phenomenon of iki. His later thinking concerns the problem of contingency and the essay concludes with a discussion of his late work, The Problem of Contingency. The essay reviews Kuki's thinking as a whole in order to develop a sense of his hermeneutics. (shrink)

This study presents and discusses the essential “nearness” and “farness” between Nishitani philosophy and Nishida philosophy, where such “nearness” and “farness” are not meant to be words that simply express the relative positions in which Nishida and Nishitani philosophy stand with respect to each other, but present the internal structure of the very problems at the core of both. Taking as a clue, Nishitani’s words, “nearer to me than I am to myself,” we examine these philosophies by situating their interpretations (...) of Eckhart as an axis for our considerations and then introducing their understandings of an expression from Daitō Kokushi 大燈国師. In conclusion, we consider the problems remaining for both. While it was Nishida philosophy that made it possible to take on the foundation of the history of philosophy as a problem, it would be left to Nishitani to actually carry this out. In turn, while Nishitani presents a criticism of the “intellect,” we must speak of the elucidation of logic as an undeveloped problem left within Nishitani philosophy. (shrink)

Nature and civilization are often regarded in opposition to each other. However, civilization employs technologies and is based on laws of nature. Also, the historical world is a result of the development of the natural world. An “anti-nature” must thus be contained somewhere within nature. The idea of “ anti-nature ” is neither alien to the Eastern nor to the Western traditional concepts of nature. The philosophy of Lao Zi never embraces mere naturalism. Lao Zi has observed that things in (...) the world are not always “ so on their own ” but rather in the mode of anti-nature. A nti-nature in nature itself does not become expressive until Christian theology, in which the origin of evil is reflected upon. The last part of the paper begins with one Buddhist thought expressed in the Diamond Sutra: “The world is not the world that is named the world.” Through naming of a thing, this thing is objectified or substantialized, and an objectified thing is not the thing itself. This self is “ śūnya ”, a non-world, which is what the world is. This non-world (as well nature) is first and foremost concealed by ego-consciousness that tends to objectify the things. E go-consciousness as this anti-nature tends to conceal this non-nature, and begins to act in the form of technology. The radical way of solving the problems caused by this “anti-nature” must begin with gaining an insight into the nature of ourselves as well as the nature of technology. (shrink)

Contractualist work in business ethics as well as in economic organization theory views opportunistic behaviors as problematic since they create economic harm and are often considered to violate ethical norms. Yet, much of the empirical literature on opportunism has adopted a rather simplistic definition of opportunistic behaviors as behaviors that violate formal and/or relational contracts and assumed that instances of opportunism can be unequivocally defined by simply referring to the content of contracts. The consequence of this assumption has been a (...) disregard for factors other than the content of contracts that may influence whether exchange partners judge an unexpected behavior they face during exchange relationships as opportunistic or not. The present investigation explores the factors that shape exchange partners’ subjective opportunism judgments through two vignette-based laboratory experiments. Results from the first experiment, where subjects were asked to take the perspective of a harmed party, show that opportunism judgments are influenced by the type of the behavior, type of the causal account provided for the behavior, perceived type of the exchange, and personality traits of the actor making the judgment. The second experiment, in which subjects were asked to take the perspective of the transgressor, demonstrates the influence of perspective. In particular, victims are more likely to assess a given unexpected behavior as opportunistic than transgressors, and their judgments do not relate to the underlying factors in the same way as the victims’ judgments. I discuss implications in terms of the governance of interfirm exchange relationships. (shrink)

Die Ausgangsthese des Beitrags lautet: Die Phänomenologie ist wesentlich pragmatisch und der Pragmatismus ist im Grunde phänomenologisch, so dass man vom,phänomenologischen Pragmatismus‘ reden kann. Durch diese Idee könnte man auch über das Wesentliche der phänomenologischen sowie auch der pragmatisch bzw. pragmatistischen Denkungsart erneut nachdenken. In der ersten Hälfte wird versucht, diese Idee anhand einiger aristotelischen Gedanken zu belegen. In der zweiten Hälfte handelt es sich um die Eröffnung der Perspektive dieser Idee für das philosophische Denken. Als ein konkreter Ansatzpunkt gilt (...) das Thema,Geschichtsdenken‘. Dieser Ansatzpunkt ist kein bloßer Einfall. Denn er trägt dazu bei, wenn er sachgemäß bearbeitet wird, das Wesentliche der Phänomenologie und des Pragmatismus zum beleuchten. Dazu sei zu bemerken, dass in der Phänomenologie und im Pragmatismus das Geschichtsdenken überhaupt eher zurückgeblieben als entwickelt war. Dies war kein Zufall, da das, worum es im Geschichtsdenken geht, in der gewöhnlichen Vorstellung das ist,,was geschehen ist‘, während das,phainomenon‘ in der Phänomenologie durchaus Gegenwartserlebnis sein soll. Wie man das Geschichtsphänomen als,phainomenon‘ der Gegenwart auffassen kann, ist eine phänomenologisch-pragmatisch provokative Frage. Der Schlüssel dieser Frage wird im vorliegenden Beitrag in der,reinen Erfahrung‘ gesehen, die von W. James vorgeschlagen und vom japanischen Philosophen K. Nishida weiter bearbeitet wurde. (shrink)

In Nos. 105 and 121 of the Kuang-ming Daily "Philosophical Supplement," there were two articles by Ch'ieh Ta-yu: "Some Opinions on the Problem of Determining the Object of Dialectical Logic" and "The Marxist Dialectical Method and Dialectical Logic." The first is quite general, while the second "elucidates the connections and differences" between dialectics and dialectical logic discussed in the first article. Almost all the basic points in both articles are erroneous. Actually, the author waves the banner of antidogmatism and expounds (...) a revisionist point of view. We will now refute his contentions. (shrink)

In this article, the author begins by noticing a statistical fact: from the seven Japanese translations of Being and Time, in five cases the German word Sein has been translated as sonzai, and in two cases as u. This fact invites the author to a discussion about the Japanese understanding of “Being”, which is developed on three levels: the question of language, the question of historical-cultural world, and the question of the “European”, understood as a Western principle, depictingthis “Abend-land” as (...) a region threatened by night. (shrink)